Advocating for Adolescent Reproductive Health in Sub-Saharan Africa[PDF]

Also available in French in [PDF] format.

Every program has critics. Advocates for adolescent reproductive health programs must be prepared to address objections from people who do not share their views. This may not be easy, but it provides an opportunity to educate and communicate with the public. Some critics will not be not confrontational about their beliefs, but it is important to anticipate what they may say and respond accurately. Open discussion allows everyone to be heard and different ideas to be considered. Open communication may lead to a compromise that is acceptable to all sides.

Since almost all advocacy depends on convincing people to support a cause, advocates must successfully argue their position. Many people who support programs to keep youth safe from HIV/AIDS will not say so publicly unless they think it's important to speak out. Even some opponents of reproductive health programs for youth can be made supporters if they receive information, have their questions answered, and are invited to contribute to the debate. Providing information, listening to others, answering questions, and responding to concerns provide the best chance of building support in a community.

Sources of Opposition

It is very important to know who opposes the program or proposal under consideration, why they do so, and what arguments and strategies these critics will use. Opposition can arise from many sources.

• Some people object because they feel they have been left out of the process. Advocates should make every effort to involve representatives of all areas of the community from the earliest discussions about a desired policy. It is particularly important not to leave out traditional leaders, religious leaders, or parents. Spending the time to win support from these important people ensures that the community is involved in the campaign.
• Some people may oppose a policy because they have questions about its necessity, what is being proposed, or how the plan will be implemented. Listening to their concerns, providing more information, and working to incorporate their thoughts into the plan can transform these critics into supporters.
• Some people oppose reproductive health programs because they believe the programs undermine their culture. They may see these programs as a sign of outside influence. Taking the time to hear these individuals' concerns and to show them how the program reflects the values of the community and culture may help convince them to support it. Earning support from a respected traditional leader may show others that the program is needed and appropriate.
• Some people believe that teaching young people about reproductive health is religiously and morally wrong. As in the above example, listening to these critics' concerns, showing how the program reflects the morals of the community, and finding common ground may win their support. The endorsement of a respected religious leader may help convince these people that the program is consistent with their religious beliefs.
• Other critics may think adolescent reproductive health programs are unnecessary. A focused public education campaign is an effective way to build public awareness about teen health issues. By sharing some local adolescent health indicators with the public and by describing how young people's health will be improved by the proposed program, advocates can persuade many people to support it. The needs assessment is a good way to gather this kind of information.
• Some people may be nonsupportive for personal reasons. They may not wish to support a program or policy that a particular person is backing. One of the benefits of working in a network is that others can step forward to show that the idea is not the property of any one person or group.

How to Deal with Opposition and Criticism

The first step in dealing with uncertain or unsupportive people is to listen to their concerns. Listening to the other side of the issue and understanding what causes another person to disagree demonstrates respect for his or her beliefs and permits an effective and appropriate response.

The most important tool in convincing critics is clear and accurate information. People form opinions based on the information they have; giving them more information may help them reevaluate their opinions. Others may want to talk about morality, or whether a reproductive health activity is supported by cultural values or religious beliefs. A reproductive health advocate must learn to listen for the underlying reasons for criticism and be prepared to respond to those underlying reasons as well.

Strategies

Form networks with other youth-serving organizations. Working as a group makes each member stronger. See Chapter 3, Building Networks for more information.

Think strategically. One influential leader can help persuade other people. Before seeking to convince people who may disagree, concentrate on an opinion leader who is likely to be supportive. Use his or her support to convince others.

Be prepared. Look ahead at who might object to the advocacy agenda and what he or she may say. Consider whether past statements give a sense of what kind of information he or she may listen to. Prepare the message before meeting with the person.

Pick a persuasive message. Different kinds of information convince different people. For example, a parent may be concerned that a new education program will provide too much information about sexuality, but will agree that youth need more help understanding and preventing AIDS. In this case, emphasizing that the program will prevent AIDS is more effective than giving general information. Focusing on the areas where people agree with the goals will help build common ground.

Speak in terms the audience understands. Reproductive health professionals sometimes speak to the public using technical terms. Remember to use language that will be understandable to the audience.

Know when (and when NOT) to be defensive. Sometimes, ignoring the statements of critics makes their opinions sound valid. When opponents use inaccurate information, prepare to answer them with statistics, anecdotes, and other information. Providing this information can give people a better basis for making up their own minds. It is equally important, however, to know when to back down. When advocates seem to be attacking a popular person or institution, the perception can seriously damage an advocacy agenda. Having a public "war of words" with a policy maker or a religious or traditional leader might attract attention to the cause, or it might ruin the effort. Think carefully about possible reactions before responding.

Encourage open and civilized debate. Communication is essential to addressing the concerns of the public and the objections of the opposition. Participate in programs at which schools and other public organizations raise and discuss questions about the program or policy. Ensure that all public meetings adhere to rules that encourage order.

Look for other ways of reaching goals. Sometimes, despite everyone's best efforts, advocates are unable to convince a policy maker whose support is critical to the success of the advocacy campaign. One influential opponent may be able to block a plan for a long time. For example, if a school headmaster refuses to allow a peer education program to run on school grounds, advocates for the program might ask another institution, like the local youth center, to permit the peer education program to be based there instead.

Compromise

When an opinion leader or policy maker will not be completely persuaded, advocates may be faced with the decision of whether or not to compromise. Compromise is often difficult and may cause disagreement among members of an organization or network. The questions below may help groups come to agreement regarding compromise.

Is the compromise acceptable?

There are probably some points at which no one will agree to compromise, and these should be clearly recognized and stated. Advocates must sometimes set priorities and decide what they can give up to achieve the greatest good.

The possibility of compromise may lead to difficult discussions, especially if some members feel their priorities are being ignored. Compromise can breed disagreement among allies. Strong leadership is key to reaching consensus.

What are the guiding principles for compromise?

Once compromise has been agreed on, advocates must determine the shape and extent of the compromise they can accept. Advocates should consider both the best possible and other acceptable outcomes. If the goal is to ensure a policy that makes contraceptive methods available to adolescents in a particular town, advocates will need to consider what to do if there is resistance from local service providers. Possible outcomes may include their making a few methods of contraception available to youth; setting up separate services for youth in a new clinic with possible financial problems; supporting a full spectrum of services for youth in a nearby city; or several other possible variations in services for young people.

Advancing in small steps is not compromising when it is clear that this is the best strategy to advance the issue. For example, if the goal is to introduce reproductive health education into the schools for all students over ten years old, a network may help by promoting reproductive health education for students ages 15 to 19. In several years, parents may be more comfortable with the reproductive health education, and the network can then discuss teaching younger students.

What about failure?

Advocates must know how to proceed when it becomes clear that their efforts may fail. They must consider when to quit, learning from the failure, and what to do next. For example, perhaps a policy to make the full range of contraceptive methods available to youth is unpopular. The network should try to determine whether a different strategy might achieve the original objective.