DEVELOPMENTS

Just when it appeared that the international spotlight on Haiti following the deadly January 12, 2010 earthquake could not shine any brighter – or be focused on anything other than recovery and relief efforts – the world became aware of ten U.S. missionaries arrested by Haitian authorities for attempting to remove children from the country illegally.  The Americans insisted they were bringing orphaned Haitian children to neighboring Dominican Republic for health, wellness and educational reasons; Haitian authorities believed something more nefarious was at hand, especially when it was discovered that some of the children’s parents were still alive.

Eight of the missionaries were released from prison in March after it was understood that, in fact, some parents willingly gave up custody of their children, so that they could leave Haiti and be given a better life; the other two, including the group's leader, were released by May.

The aftermath left child advocates, lawmakers, and average Haitians asking themselves about relocation and adoption policies and practices, and what ‘the best interest of the child’ really means.

The future of a country is presently at stake, and as is often the case, children remain the population most vulnerable to a lack of progress on recovery and redevelopment. As diplomats, academics and experts prepare to meet at the United Nations in September to discuss progress at the ten-year mark of the fifteen-year Millennium Development Goals, it is worth noting that five of the eight goals – ending hunger and poverty; child health; maternal health; universal education; and gender equality – directly deal with the well-being of children around the globe, and in Haiti.

DEVELOPMENTS

Since the end of the military dictatorship in 1985, the Brazilian government has struggled to establish a government that reflects the consensus of its citizens.  In the context of reproductive and fetal rights, the will of the people is far from clear.  In recent history, however, the pro-life movement has picked up speed.  Aside from its focus on fetal rights, its platform also incorporates concerns about women’s health, advocating for the allocation of government resources to, what it contends, are more pressing women’s health issues than abortion.   Their most recent accomplishment is the obtainment of a favorable vote by the Brazilian House of Representatives’ Family and Social Security Commission on a bill that would criminalize any act or omission that harms a fertilized ovum.  The bill explicitly grants an “absolute priority” to the fertilized ovum over the woman carrying it, even in the case of rape.

 Advocates of the law wish to change the common experience of abortion in Brazil, where one in five women has an abortion.  Critics of the bill claim that the protection of the fetus is at the expense of the health and welfare of the woman, and that women may be afraid to seek medical care, fearing criminal prosecution.  With the rate of sexual abuse high, the provision protecting an ova fertilized by rape will likely boost the number of illegal, unsafe abortions. An estimated 500,000 to 1,000,000 illegal abortions take place annually, resulting in the hospitalization of about 200,000 Brazilian women every year.

In a recent address to the United States Congress, Mexican President Felipe Calderon said he regretted the flight of Mexicans north of the border, citing a lack of economic opportunities and the rising violence as a result of gangs and drugs.

Mexican drug cartels and their violent assaults have contributed to a bloody four years throughout the country. According to a recent report by the Brookings Institute, measuring progress in the war on drugs continues to be difficult. Murder rates are high, and public confidence in Mexican judicial and political institutions is low. Mexican authorities are unable to contain the violence, and all aspects of Mexican society are suffering as a result. Over the past two years, increasing numbers of Mexican nationals have arrived at U.S. borders and requested political asylum.

The domestic dialogue on the United States’ immigration policy often focuses on ways to curb the thousands of illegal entries to the U.S. each year, citing their collective social and economic impact on domestic resources. Immigration to the U.S. is by no means a new headline, but the recent, violent developments in Mexico present an interesting twist on this longstanding policy debate.

For the foreseeable future, the surge in claims for political asylum will most likely continue. A heated climate surrounding Mexican nationals in some U.S. border states is predicted to lead to arrests, detentions, prolonged immigration proceedings and deportation. It is already evident that both countries lack sufficient resources and legal clarity to deal with these groups of drug war refugees.

DEVELOPMENTS
 
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton recently told a gathering of Western Hemispheric leaders at the fortieth Washington Conference on the Americas that partnerships between the private and public sectors are important for the region and need to be stronger, and among other things spoke of an important aspect of development: using public sector funds to procure private sector investments.

In the aftermath of the global financial crisis, the development sector has witnessed an increasing—and to many, a troubling—divergence in approach. On one side are those who champion market-based solutions to poverty-alleviation. These organizations tend to work mainly with economic actors such as microfinance institutions/associations, small and growing businesses (SGBs) and philanthrocapitalists. On the other side of the debate, we find entities advocating institutional reform, social policies and further government intervention to create an environment favorable for economic growth. It’s the classic “chicken or egg” debate.
 
While a substantial body of opinion recognizes that effective sustainable development requires components of both approaches, the current disharmony is beginning to affect the coordination of efforts to tackle development challenges that are, by their very nature, multifaceted. More than half of humanity continues to live on less than $2 per day, and Latin America and the Caribbean experience one of the highest income equality gaps in the world.

Historically, the region is known for the close relationship of government and the economy. In this regard, Latin America and the Caribbean provide a strong example of the partnership that can, and increasingly does, exist between the public and private sectors, though more must be done to take advantage of it. The former has an advantage and an incentive to create a friendly economic climate for the latter. Increasingly, as the effects of the global recession begin to subside and Latin America emerges wounded but not broken comparative to other regions, these partnerships will increase economic opportunity and end poverty for millions of people.