Tag Archives: Constitution of Kenya

What will define Kenya’s Health Care System in Devolved County Governments?

 

 

President Kibaki in a past event. He presided over the handing of ambulances to District Hospitals

With the impending devolution of healthcare management functions to the counties anxiety looms over the levels of preparedness for such an undertaking in all the counties. In an earlier post a number of challenges were identified, including uneven inter-county levels of development- unequal distribution of resources for health especially the distribution of health facilities, human resources, and poorly developed communication infrastructure. Also unevenly distributed across the country are poverty levels, the effect of which is to make health services largely inaccessible to a large chunk of the population that cannot afford the high out-of-pocket expenditures, which prevail in Kenya. This post reviews the extent to which the decentralisation policy of the Ministry of Health (MOH) has been implemented and how this may impact on assumption of fully devolved management of health services by county governments.

The term “decentralisation” has been used to signify a variety of reforms characterized by the transfer of fiscal, administrative, and/or political authority for planning, management, or service delivery from the central MOH to alternate institutions. “Devolution” is a category of decentralisation; it implies the ceding of sectoral functions and resources to autonomous local governments, which in some measure take responsibility for service delivery, administration, and finance.

Despite decades of intention to decentralise, Kenya’s health care system has remained largely centralised with decisions taken at MOH headquarters from where they are conveyed top-down through the provincial medical officers to the district level. Centralised functions at the headquarters include policy formulation, coordinating activities of all health players (government and non-governmental organizations), initiating and managing implementation of policy changes on various issues including charging of user fees, and undertaking monitoring and evaluation of impact of policy changes at the district level.

Centralised decision making may have contributed to, among others, regional disparities in the distribution of health services, inequities in resource allocations, and unequal access to quality health services, resulting in the wide regional differentials in health indicators which successive demographic and health surveys (KDHS) have highlighted[i].

On paper, the MOH through the various health sector strategic plans has expressed commitment to decentralisation intended to provide increased authority for decision making, resource allocation, and management of health care to the district and facility levels. For example, in 1992 the MOH established the District Health Management Teams (DHMTs) and the District Health Management Boards (DHMBs), which were charged with managing public health services at the district level. Together, the DHMT and DHMB are supposed to provide management and supervisory support to lower level health facilities (sub-district hospitals, health centres, and dispensaries).However, despite the fact that these bodies coordinate health activities in the district and may develop plans for spending cost sharing funds, the final decisions on budgets and resource allocation is retained at the central level. Lack of funds and transport are the most commonly cited reasons for failure by DHMTs to meet their supervision targets despite the near universal existence of documented supervision plans[ii]. Budgetary remittances to the districts have neither been regular nor timely.

Health care under devolved system of governance:

The Constitution of Kenya (2010) has assigned the larger portion of delivery of health services to Counties, the exception being the National Referral Services. This implies that Counties should bear overall responsibilities for planning, financing, coordinating delivery and monitoring of health services toward the fulfilment of right to ‘the highest attainable standard of health’.

For many Kenyans, devolution is looked upon as the answer to the persistent regional disparities in the distribution of health services and inequities in resource allocations. However, much as that is an ideal goal; its realisation may not be immediate, especially because of the current varied levels of preparedness within the counties. Some counties starting at a relative disadvantage will take time to build up their capacity and ability to use devolved resources well, which may lead to even wider disparities. Such counties will require particular assistance to catch-up. In the long run, success of devolution will depend on availability of resources (both financial and human) for counties to carry out their assigned functions, and their empowerment to use resources effectively.

The draft Kenya Health Sector Strategic & Investment Plan[iii](KHSSP)July 2012 – June 2018 proposes a three-pronged framework for overall health sector leadership, i.e: Partnership, Governance and Stewardship– which taken together should address the health agenda towards the fulfillment of the right to health.

The strategic plan proposes that within the counties, the stewardship responsibilities for health services will be exercised at three levels: the National Directorates for Health, the County health management teams, and County Health facility management teams. However, scrutiny of the prescribed responsibilities, functions and roles[iv] of these bodies portrays a continuation of dominance by MOH headquarters in matters to do with policy formulation, planning and priority setting, which leaves the county management teams to be purely concerned with programme implementation (under close supervision from above). This is unfortunate since it perpetuates central planning which has not always taken into consideration the peculiarities of our country’s diversity, with consequent wide disparities in health status.

Planning at the county level should enable better definition of local priorities and design of innovative models of service delivery that adapt to local conditions, e.g. serving pastoralist communities in arid and semi-arid areas. It also can improve quality and legitimacy owing to user participation in decision making; and greater equity through distribution of resources toward traditionally marginal regions and groups. Local hiring of service providers can improve staffing levels and appropriate deployment, especially in rural health facilities.

One major challenge facing proposed county health services is the serious shortage of resources, human and material, especially due to financial limitations. Currently the public health sector is seriously under-funded and is generally operating on shoe-string budgets, inadequate infrastructure and lack of essential supplies. Although better distribution and deployment of health personnel may somewhat alleviate current acute shortages in some counties, still more will be needed. Many counties will especially require strengthening in health planning and monitoring.

[i] Ministry of Health (MOH) 2006 Reversing the trends, The Second National Health Sector Strategic Plan of Kenya: Annual Operational Plan 2 2006/07. Nairobi, Kenya.

[ii] Ndavi, P.M., S. Ogola, P.M. Kizito, and K. Johnson. 2009. Decentralizing Kenya’s Health Management System: An Evaluation. Kenya Working Papers No. 1. Calverton, Maryland, USA: Macro International Inc.

[iii] Ministry of Medical Services and Ministry of Public Health & Sanitation KENYA HEALTH SECTOR STRATEGIC & INVESTMENT PLAN (KHSSP) July 2012 – June 2018: Transforming Health: Accelerating attainment of Health Goals

[iv] National Directorates for Health: provide overall direction- policy formulation, national strategic planning, priority setting, budgeting and resource mobilization, regulating, setting standards, formulating guidelines, monitoring and evaluation, and provision of technical backup to the county level. County Health Management Teams: Provide Strategic and operational leadership and stewardship for overall health management in the County, including resource mobilization, creation of linkages with national level referral health services, monitoring and evaluation, coordination and collaboration with State and Non state Stakeholders at the County level health services. County Health Facility Management Teams: Develop and implement facility health plans for levels 1–3 health care services; coordinate and collaborate with stakeholders through County Health Stakeholder Forums; undertake in-service training and capacity building; and supervision, monitoring and evaluation.

 

Barriers to enjoyment of health as a human right in Africa

The full enjoyment of the ‘Right to Health’ in most African countries is constrained by several pervasive barriers that are the subject of the current review, which urges that governments urgently adopt human rights based approaches to all health interventions in order to ensure equitable distribution of health resources throughout all sections of communities.

The Concept of Health as a Human Right: Health is a basic need for human existence and survival and as such, it is a right that must be respected, promoted and protected by government and society. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for health and well-being of himself and his family”. The concept of health as human right is stated in the Preamble of the World Health Organization’s Charter (1946), and also in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966). Art. 12 states of health as a human right: “the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health”. The Declaration of Alma Ata (WHO, 1978) stated: “Health, which is the state of complete physical and social well-being, and not merely the absence of infirmity, is a fundamental human right…. the attainment of the highest possible level of health is a most important worldwide social goal.” The right to health is fundamental to the physical and mental well-being of all individuals and is a necessary condition for the exercise of other human rights including the pursuit of an adequate standard of living. Indeed health is fundamental to enjoyment of the right to life, and the right to a healthy life is fundamental to all other constitutional guarantees.

Right to Health is a Constitutional Issue Besides the South African Constitution[i], the Constitution of Kenya (2010), which was promulgated in August 2010, is among the most progressive constitutions in Africa. It provides for the right to health care services. Article 43(1)(a) in the chapter on Bill of Rights states that every person has the right to the highest attainable standard of health, which includes the right to health care services, including reproductive health care, and in Article 43(2), that a person shall not be denied emergency medical treatment. Further, Article 27(2) guarantees equality and freedom from discrimination, and the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and fundamental freedoms. The Constitution obligates the government to take legislative, policy and other measures to achieve the progressive realization of the rights as guaranteed in the Constitution, including the right to health. The Right to Equality encompasses within itself the right of a poor patient to quality health care, regardless of their ability to pay.

Right to reproductive health care services: The concept of reproductive rights as a fundamental human right was endorsed at the 1994 International Conference of Population and Development in Cairo, Egypt. The constellation of rights, embracing fundamental human rights established by earlier treaties, was reaffirmed at the 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China, and in various international and regional agreements since, as well as in many national laws. They include the right to decide the number, timing and spacing of children, the right to voluntarily marry and establish a family, and the right to the highest attainable standard of health, among others.

That reproductive rights are central to meeting international development goals was recognized by the UN World Summit of September 2005, which also endorsed the goal of universal access to reproductive health. Reproductive rights are recognized as valuable ends in themselves, and essential to the enjoyment of other fundamental rights. Attaining the goals of sustainable, equitable development requires that individuals are able to exercise control over their sexual and reproductive lives.

Right to reproductive health care services is explicitly recognised in the Constitution of Kenya (2010), just as it is recognized or implied in several international and regional instruments (see above), including the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (2000); the Maputo Plan of Action on Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (2006); and the Campaign on Accelerated Reduction of Maternal Mortality in Africa (CARMMA) (2009).

Barriers to enjoyment of Right to Health

1. General issues

Enjoyment of right to health in Africa, besides the inadequate financing of the health sector (see below), is indirectly constrained by several factors that operate at the regional and national levels, and mostly outside the mandate of the health sector. These include poverty, food insecurity and hunger, persistent violent conflicts and displacement of persons, heavy disease burden especially due to HIV and AIDS, and the pervasive gender-based negative traditions such as early marriage, female circumcision and lack of women’s empowerment all of which have profound effects on reproductive health outcomes.

2. Inadequate Funding to Health sector

Many governments in Africa have yet to recognise the importance of health in the overall national development, and expenditure on health is not adequately perceived as a critical economic investment alongside spending on education, agriculture or industries. Health is a critical resource for development, without which investment in all other sectors would go to waste. Poor health impacts negatively on economic productivity, through loss of labour, and under-performance due to illness. Poor health creates critical barriers to any measures intended to uplift the social wellbeing of poor and disadvantaged communities.

The levels of health budgets in most African countries do not demonstrate that health is rated as a high priority among other national needs. Despite the fact that in 2001 African countries pledged in Abuja, to increase health sector budgetary allocation to 15% of government expenditure, and although they repeated this pledge in Kampala in July 2010, in most countries national budgetary allocations for health remain far below this target. A 2007 report of the Regional Network for Equity in Health in East and Southern Africa (EQUINET)[ii] which looked into the progress made in various Southern and East African countries towards achieving the Abuja target, showed that with few exceptions most of the countries were still lagging far behind this target seven years since the declaration.

In Kenya, for the fiscal year 2010-11 just about 5.5 percent of the total Government expenditure was allocated to the ministries of Medical Services and Public Health and Sanitation. This translates to less than $1 per capita expenditure, against the recommended figure of $34 which WHO recommends for effective implementation of health interventions.

Figure 1: Real gross expenditure to the health sector, compared to overall gross Kenya Government expenditure (2007/08 – 2011/12)[iii]

A concern of particular relevance to achieving MDG5 is the disproportionate allocation within the health budget to reproductive health care services. Africa Union’s Maputo Plan of Action for Universal Access to Comprehensive Sexual and Reproductive Health Services in Africa (2007-2010) recommended an increase in per capita expenditures to about 18-24% of the $34 per capita recognized by the WHO. However, in many countries the allocation remains much below these figures.

At the international level, global assistance for reproductive health including family planning, financing has fallen in all recipient countries. Figure 2 shows that whereas there has been a steady increase in overall assistance for health, the amount focused on reproductive health and family planning has remained more or less unchanged since the year 2000.

Figure 2: Total international assistance to health and allocation to reproductive health care programmes (2000-2009)

Source: The Millennium Development Goals Report 2011

 

3. Lack of Equity in Planning for health and distribution of resources resulting in inequitable Access to Health Care services:

Physical access to services (distance to nearest Health Facility): Health care utilization is known to be greatly negatively impacted by distance to health care facilities and access to means of transportation. A study[iv] in western Kenya which explored the impact of distance on utilisation of sick child services in rural health facilities established that for every 1 km increase in distance of residence from a clinic, the rate of clinic visits decreased by 34% from the previous kilometer. According to the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics[v], on average only 6.4 percent of people in Kenya can reach a health facility within one kilometre of their residence; nearly a half (47.7%) of the people have to travel 5km or further to reach the nearest health facility, with marked regional variations (Table 1).

 

Figure 3: Proportion of community that has to travel 5km or more to the nearest health facility in Kenya

(Source: The Kenya Integrated Household Budget Survey (KIHBS) 2005/06).

For example, the proportion of people who live 5km or further from the nearest health facility ranges from 20% and 29% respectively in Nairobi and Central regions to 60%, 64% and 86% respectively in Coast, Eastern and North Eastern regions. The geographical dimension must be taken into consideration when planning health care interventions, especially when targeting socio-economically disadvantaged groups.

Affordability of services: Big disparities exist between the poor and the better off with respect to access to health care services which explains the wide gaps in health outcomes not only between rich and poor countries, but also between the wealthy and the poor in most countries. Generally, the poor lack access to health care in terms of: availability, affordability, and acceptability. Poor people are denied access to health care: (a) where public health facilities lack essential drugs, supplies and commodities; (b) where people have to travel long distances to reach health facilities, especially where public transport is scarce; (c) when fees charged for services (cost-sharing) are unaffordable, and even if there is official exemption (e.g. for pregnant women and children under five) or waiver of fees, people still end up paying on top, for drugs and transport (out-of-pocket expenditure); and (d) where people lack confidence in the services provided at local public health facilities and decide not to utilise them (e.g. poor quality services or negative provider attitudes).

The poor bear the heaviest burden of out-of-pocket health expenditures, irrespective of where they seek health care. In Kenya, data from the National Health Accounts (NHA) for fiscal year 2001/2002 showed that Kenyan households were financing over half of all health expenditures[vi], clearly justifying a conclusion that ill-health contributes to, and perpetuates, poverty because health costs deplete people’s meagre resources. In addition, there is considerable evidence to suggest that by and large public spending on health tends to benefit the better off more than the poor. Quite often it is the better off who get the most from public health services, especially hospital care. In other words, government’s investment in health services, far from promoting equity, works against it[vii].

FY 2001/2002 National Health Accounts (NHA) estimation in Kenya

Inadequate financing of the health sector and inequitable distribution of resources explain the major gaps and disparities in health indicators in most African countries, which have featured repeatedly in successive surveys such as the Demographic and Health Survey (DHS). It is important to realise that because of the size of the poorest population, countries cannot hope to achieve health-related MDGs without urgent implementation of inclusive policies in the planning of health interventions.

Addressing barriers to enjoyment of right to health

Governments must strive to address the pervasive barriers to enjoyment of right to health (including sexual and reproductive health) by all citizens by implementing human rights based approach to all interventions aimed at improving the health of the community. This will empower people to participate in decision making and health policy development, as well as strengthening their capacity to hold the health managers and providers accountable. Ministries of Health should work out clear strategies that seek to make health services inclusively available and accessible, of good quality, affordable and culturally acceptable. It is particularly important to adopt evidence-based planning which should ensure equitable distribution of health resources throughout all sections of communities.

Governments in Africa urgently need to recognise the importance of health in the overall national development, and support it by making appropriate budgetary allocation to the health sector along other critical economic investments. In addition, the international community also needs to examine their funding policies over the last decade or so, which have resulted in stagnation of financing of reproductive health especially family planning programmes.


[ii] Equinet (2007). Reclaiming the Resources for Health: A regional analysis of equity in health in East and Southern Africa. Fountain Publishers Kampala, Uganda.

[iii] Figures based on gross approved expenditure (2007/8 – 2010/11) and gross estimates (2011/12). Figures indexed to inflation at 2007 CPI.

[iv] Feikin DR, Nguyen LM, Adazu K, et al., The impact of distance of residence from a peripheral health facility on pediatric health utilisation in rural western Kenya. Trop Med Int Health. 2009 Jan;14(1):54-61. Epub 2008 Nov 14. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19021892

[v] Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KIHBS) BASIC REPORT – www.knbs.or.ke/pdf/Basic%20Report%20(Revised%20Edition).pdf

[vi] www.who.int/entity/nha/country/Kenya_NHA%202002.pdf; Adam Leive, Ke Xu. Coping with out-of-pocket health payments: empirical evidence from 15 African countries. Bulletin of the World Health Organization Volume 86, Number 11, November 2008, 849-856

[vii] Davidson R. Gwatkin (2003) Free Government Health Services: Are They the Best Way to Reach the Poor?

Lack of concurrence between policy and practice is a serious blow to achievement of MDG5 in Kenya

What holds Kenya back in its efforts to achieve MDG 5 is staring us in the face. We just need to look and see the many areas of non-concurrence between policy and practice, for example, while on the one hand the policy is that of equitable access to RH services, in practice on the other hand, many Kenyans, especially those living in marginalized far-flung areas, have nothing close to equitable access to such RH services. This also applies to the poor irrespective of where they reside.

Among the earlier posts by Africa Health Dialogue there was one entitled “What’s in the way of achieving improved maternal health in Kenya?” in which three key barriers to attainment of improved maternal health in Kenya were discussed: the lack of equity in health planning and implementation; inadequacy of funding to the health sector; and inequitable distribution of resources for health especially financial and human resources.

Since the publication of that post, a lot has changed: first, the urgency of the matter in consideration is much greater now- there is much less time left to 2015; secondly, Kenya now has a Constitution that is specific in its provision of health as a basic right. Article 43 (1) (a) states:  “Every person has the right to the highest attainable standard of health, which includes the right to health care services, including reproductive health care”. The constitution is not saying that only the urban rich and those living in the more accessible counties have the right to the “highest attainable standard of health”. No, it is all Kenyans, wherever they may be!

In addition, we also have a National Reproductive Health Policy (2007) with its stated goal of enhancing the RH status of all Kenyans by (among others) increasing equitable access to RH services and improving responsiveness to client needs. According to the Policy all pregnant women should have access to skilled care throughout the continuum of pregnancy, childbirth and postnatal periods. Skilled attendance implies access to appropriately trained health providers whether in a health facility or through domiciliary care. It also implies access to a rapid means of referral to a higher level of care in case of an emergency. In consideration of the above, at least three questions immediately arise: (a) to what extent are maternal health services equitable; (b) are the current health interventions responsive to client needs and (c) how accessible is skilled attendance by all pregnant women in Kenya?

Review of maternal health indicators as published in successive national surveys, such as the Kenya Demographic and Health Survey (KDHS) and the Kenya Service Provision Assessment Survey (KSPA), shows that health services are far from being equitably distributed in Kenya. Women from the more marginal areas which are lacking in communication infrastructure, especially roads, and those who are in the lower socio-economic strata, are all grossly disadvantaged. In fact, these are the women who register the worst maternal health indicators (whether it be maternal mortality ratio, contraceptive prevalence rate, total fertility rate, attendance by a skilled health professional; or availability and quality of antenatal and delivery services in local health facilities, etc. etc. Unfortunately, forgetting them is not an option; Kenya will never achieve MDG5 without their contribution! That’s the way it is.

In many parts of Kenya it’s nightmarish ferrying a woman in labour to a health facility.

CASE STUDY: The following narrative is based on a true event which took place in eastern part of Mwingi in the Kitui County:

Kavata was a married mother of three, all normal deliveries at home assisted by a TBA from the neighbourhood. During her fourth pregnancy she had attended an antenatal clinic at a dispensary, beginning from the sixth month. She made a total of three antenatal clinic visits before she went into labour. At the clinic she had been advised that even though her pregnancy was progressing satisfactorily, she needed to ensure that this time round she delivered at a health centre because of her history of heavy bleeding during her last delivery. The health centre, located about 15km from her home, had only one qualified midwife, who also had other duties apart from midwifery.

Kavata went in labour at night but could not get to the health centre at that hour; the only matatu in the area made the trip twice a day, early in the morning and early in the afternoon. Walking at that time was out of the question for fear of marauding wild animals and muggers in the area. So, at 6am next day she was in the matatus heading for the health centre where she arrived at 9am. However, she could not be admitted immediately to the maternity ward because the midwife had not reported to work until 10am.

By 2pm the midwife observing that labour was not progressing normally radioed the District Hospital located about 80km away, requesting for an ambulance to transfer the patient for more specialized care. This was not possible – the only functional land rover at the hospital had travelled to Nairobi to fetch supplies. Now the only transport option available at that time for Kavata was a ride at the back of a lorry, perched on top of cowpea bags. The lorry made several stops collecting more bags on the way. By the time Kavata arrived at the District Hospital her uterus had already ruptured and she had bled profusely. Her baby had already died; she too died before anything could be done to save her life.

The big question is “Was Kavata and the many other women who are continually going her way, also expected to enjoy the “right to the highest attainable standard of health, which includes the right to health care services, including reproductive health care”? Is there concurrence between policy and practice: on the one hand the policy is that of equitable access to RH services, but on the other hand, in practice people like the late Kavata and many others have nothing close to equitable access to such services?

Is it time for a comprehensive Reproductive Health Act for Kenya?

A Presentation made at the Kenya Medical Association State of Maternal Mortality in Kenya Conference held at the Kenyatta International Conference Centre, Thursday 15th September, 2011

Kenya’s new county governments likely to be hard put in fulfilling their health care mandate

Health care provision within the devolved system of government as provided for in the Constitution of Kenya (2010) will come up against several obstacles, key among these being the challenge posed by uneven inter-county levels of development- unequal distribution of resources for health especially the distribution of health facilities, human resources, and poorly developed communication infrastructure. Also unevenly distributed across the country are poverty levels, the effect of which is to make health services largely inaccessible to a large chunk of the population that cannot afford the high out-of-pocket expenditures, which are known to be common in Kenya.

According to the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution, county governments are entrusted with all functions related to health care except for health policy and national referral health facilities which remain the responsibility of the national government. Specifically, County Health Services will be responsible for health facilities and pharmacies at Levels 1 to 4; ambulance services; and promotion of primary health care. However, within the situation highlighted above it is obvious that some of the counties will be hard pressed fulfilling this mandate. Such counties may benefit from experiences derived from elsewhere, where health services have been provided with some measure of success at low cost.

In Kenya, as in most sub-Saharan African countries, nearly three quarters of the population lives in rural areas. According to the World Bank Indicators in 2008, about 79 percent of Kenya’s population lived in rural areas[i], where the infrastructure for communication and health services is poorly developed. Under such circumstances, there is no short-cut to it that, unless the population is extraordinarily motivated, services have to be brought closer to people rather than expecting them to travel long distances for the services. This is true for all promotive health services such as family planning, antenatal and postnatal care and child health services (growth monitoring and immunization). This has recently been confirmed by a study based in western Kenya[ii], which explored the impact of distance to health facility on utilisation of child health services. The study showed that for every 1 km increase in distance of residence from a health clinic, the rate of clinic attendance decreased by 34% from the previous kilometer. This means that creative strategies will be needed to ensure rural populations can have access to health services, which are a reasonable distances from them.

Making health services accessible to all rural communities

Over the years a number of approaches have been utilized in Kenya to provide health services to populations that do not live close to static health facilities. Three such approaches include the use of mobile clinics, community-based distribution (CBD), and social marketing of health commodities. Mobile clinics on periodic basis have been used to take services to remote places, where the distribution of health facilities network is inadequate; they are particularly useful for the provision of services such as immunization, or family planning methods; especially for the latter, mobile services can be used to avail methods such as surgical contraception where there are no resident doctors. However, mobile clinics suffer two serious drawbacks, first, the costs involved in transport to these sites, and secondly, the usual monthly or quarterly visits do not permit continuity of care in case something happened in between visits.

Kenya has had extensive experience in community-based distribution (CBD) of health services, particularly the distribution of family planning commodities. This approach has several advantages over clinic-based services:  it makes services available and accessible at the home setting, and this can increase acceptance and particularly continuation rates of contraception. The involvement of locally known individuals in the service removes the fear of strangers discussing sensitive matters. The CBD workers can also be trained to elicit health problems in the community and to refer them to clinics; this can include identification of malnourished children, as well as provision of de-worming tablets. They can also be trained to convey health education on various health conditions, including STIs, reproductive organ cancers, and to encourage early reporting of symptoms at health facilities.

Social marketing, on the other hand, involves empowering retailers to market commodities off-the-counter, normally the non-prescription types, and usually at subsidised prices. Besides contraceptives (e.g. condoms and pill), social marketing has been utilized to promote use of mosquito nets and oral rehydration therapy, among others. Social marketing is an important approach to making these services more easily available at places which are accessible to the people, i.e. the local duka. However, social marketing approach must be backed up by accessible health facilities where clients can get clinical evaluation and treatment, as necessary.

Bringing the static clinic closer to the people

In the 1980s, University of Nairobi’s Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology pioneered a community-based health care system[iii] that provided clinical services on an outreach basis, with an assured continuation of care through clinic-based community health workers (CHWs). The system is based on the appreciation that a major constraint to bringing services closer to people is the cost of construction of clinic buildings. Hence, if locally available buildings can be utilized this can permit the expansion of health clinic networks at minimal cost. Such buildings are to be found practically everywhere in rural Kenya, in small market places, which are sited within convenient reach of the population. Quite often a large number of these shop buildings are either not in use or are under-utilized, and they can be rented at very low cost to be used as health care facilities. Facilities such as these can be maintained hygienic and can provide reasonable privacy for the clients. Being in the market place the clinics enable clients to benefit from health services within reach of their business transactions, so that clinic attendance need not clash with income generating activities. Thus, these clinics offload rural communities not only the cost of transport to a distant clinic, but also opportunity cost of prolonged absence from their business.

A wide range of outpatient services can be provided through these affordable clinics, including preventive services- health education, family planning, antenatal and postnatal care, child growth monitoring and immunization; limited screening for cervical cancer, HIV testing and diagnosis and treatment of common sexually transmitted diseases. Through a similar set up the Machakos Project was able to introduce and sustain high levels of modern contraceptive methods in a rural population, which included methods that are generally confined to hospital settings such as surgical contraception and the sub-cutaneous implant, Norplant, as well as high levels of antenatal care and child immunization coverage. This was found to be a particularly useful approach for introduction of cervical cancer screening at the community level.

This approach fits well within the national Community Strategy[iv] in which Levels 2 and 3 provide backup support to level 1, with Community Health Workers (CHWs) being supervised by Community Health Extension Workers (CHEWs), usually stationed at Level 2. In this setting one or two CHWs will be posted at the clinic, although they can also be employed in extension roles outside the clinic. Community Nurses from the nearest dispensary (Level 2) will provide professional services through two or three visits every week to the market-based facility, and since a CHW will be based at each facility, these can operate on a daily basis. The widespread availability of the mobile phone and the boda-boda transport should facilitate an efficient referral system between Levels 1 to 4, permitting nurses, clinical officers and doctors stationed at Levels 2,3 and 4 to communicate and provide advice to Level 1 on the mobile phone.

The CHWs should be given instructions on clinic operations, how to handle clients in the clinic, including history-taking, and provision of information on available services. Additionally, they can be taught how to weigh children and adults, and even the measuring of blood pressures. A spot random check on the CHW’s measurements can provide a quality assurance on their performance. The involvement of CHWs in these processes releases the nurses to concentrate on more professional tasks such as counseling, clinical examination and prescription of appropriate measures.


[ii] Feikin DR, Nguyen LM, Adazu K, Ombok M, et al., The impact of distance of residence from a peripheral health facility on pediatric health utilisation in rural western Kenya. [ii] Trop Med Int Health. 2009 Jan; 14(1):54-61. Epub 2008 Nov 14. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19021892

[iii] The Machakos Project (1981-1994) was supported by the Special Progranune of Research in Human Reproduction, WHO/HRP, WHO, Geneva, the Population Council, New York, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Ministry of Health, Kenya.

[iv] The objective of Community Strategy is to enhance access to and use of health services at community level The Strategy is described in “A Strategy for the Delivery of Level One Services” (MOH, June 2006).

stats for wordpress

Women have the right to safe abortion services within the law

Kenya’s constitution confers to all citizens the right to the highest attainable standard of health, which includes the right to health care services, including reproductive health care (Article 43 (1a)). Further, Article 26(4) specifies grounds upon which abortion may be legally provided; specifically, “if in the opinion of a trained health professional there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger, or if permitted by any other written law”. Safe abortion services, as provided by law, therefore need to be available, provided by well-trained health personnel supported by policies, regulations and a health systems infrastructure, including equipment and supplies, so that women can have rapid access to these services (WHO).

It is more efficient to provide legal safe abortion services within the context of Comprehensive Abortion Care (CAC) system that aims to reduce the risk of unwanted (unplanned) pregnancy. Morbidity and mortality related to abortion can be prevented at the following three levels: (a) Primary level- Prevent unwanted pregnancy by providing contraceptive information and counselling, and increasing access to contraceptive services. (b) Secondary level- Prevent unsafe abortion through provision of counselling in early pregnancy, respecting women’s informed choice, and ensuring access to safe medical termination of pregnancy for those who so choose. (c) Tertiary level- Provide post-abortion care (PAC) services: clinical management of complications of unsafe abortion, and prevention of future unsafe abortion through contraceptive counselling and services.
wordpress stats

Implications of Kenya’s New Constitution to programming of health services

Implications of Kenya’s New Constitution to Health Care Programming
wordpress stats plugin

Focus on providing safe abortion services, not post-abortion care.

In order to minimize the problem of unsafe abortion and its impacts there is an urgent need for a paradigm shift in strategic planning, from the present focus on ‘post-abortion care’ to provision of ‘safe abortion services’. The present challenge for Kenya under the new constitutional dispensation ought to be ensuring all women who are legally entitled to legal termination of pregnancy do access the services without unnecessary impediments.

Addressing the problem of unsafe abortion in Kenya should significantly contribute to the achievement of Millennium Development Goal 5 on Improving Maternal Health, considering that unsafe abortion is one of the major factors behind the high maternal mortality rates in the country. In addition, complications resulting from unsafe abortion contribute to serious sequelae for women’s reproductive health such as chronic pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and infertility. The incidence of unsafe abortion generally reflects the magnitude of unwanted (unplanned) pregnancies in a particular community. Hence, the only sure way of effectively minimizing unsafe abortion is to ensure women have easy access to safe, effective and acceptable contraceptive information and services, backed up by policies that promote social justice and equality, enhanced status of women, as well as legislation that decriminalizes abortion.

The single, greatest challenge to addressing unsafe abortion in Africa is the lukewarm commitment on the part of governments to promote, protect and respect women’s reproductive rights, including the right to access safe and legal abortion services. This lack of political will affects the availability, accessibility, and quality of abortion-related care.

For several years there has been a mistaken notion that post-abortion care (PAC) services provide the solution to morbidity and mortality associated with unsafe abortion[i]. Consequently considerable resources have been expended on expansion of these services. Unfortunately, although PAC services can (and do) save lives, in many respects the intervention comes late, at the tail-end of the train of events that precipitated the tragedy in the first place, and as such they cannot be considered an efficient public health strategy for the prevention of abortion-related morbidity and mortality.

Prevention of unsafe abortion requires a paradigm shift in strategic planning, to a focus on provision of ‘safe abortion, not post-abortion care, services’.

‘Safe abortion’ services are those provided by trained health workers, supported by policies, regulations and a functional health infrastructure, including equipment and supplies[ii]. Performance of abortion outside these conditions constitutes ‘unsafe abortion’.

The new Constitution of Kenya, while maintaining the longstanding restrictive stance towards abortion, it nevertheless, does provide opportunities for enhancing the reproductive health and rights of Kenyan women. The Constitution is explicit in the chapter on Bill of Rights regarding circumstances when abortion may be legal. Article 26 (4) states: Abortion is not permitted unless, in the opinion of a trained health professional, there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger, or if permitted by any other written law. Although several questions arise from this statement, for example: Who is a trained health professional? Is there any emergency that does not threaten life or health of the mother? What definition of ‘health’ is implied here? etc., whatever the answers may be the Constitution has entrenched the right for a woman to have a legal abortion, though under certain conditions.  The present challenge for Kenya then is to ensure women who are legally entitled to legal termination of pregnancy can access the services without hindrance or delay.

Experience in other countries where abortion has been legalized shows that women are often denied safe abortion services to which they are legally entitled[iii]. The reasons for this include the following:

  • Provider related factors: lack of knowledge of the law, or failure to apply the law, by providers, negative provider attitudes, biases and conscientious objection, and lack of awareness (or neglect) among providers of their ethical/legal obligations to provide women in need with appropriate information on where safe abortion services can be obtained.
  • Medical policies and bureaucracy: insistence on unnecessary/outdated medical abortion techniques e.g. requirement for hospitalization, use of general anaesthesia, etc.; opposition to task-shifting, and other regulatory bottlenecks.
  • Other factors: lack of public information about the law; lack of awareness about facilities providing safe abortion services; lack of awareness (among women) of need to report early in pregnancy.

[i] Mati JKG J. Adolescent reproductive health in the era of HIV/AIDS: Challenges and Opportunities. Obstet. Gynecol. East Cent. Afr. (2005); 18: 1-18

[ii] World Health Organisation. (2003) Safe Abortion: Technical and Policy Guidance for Health Systems. Geneva, World Health Organisation

[iii] World Health Organisation. (2003) Safe Abortion: Technical and Policy Guidance for Health Systems. Geneva, World Health Organisation

How Kenya’s New Constitution is likely to impact on access to safe abortion services

Background:

The aim of this presentation is to contribute to the understanding of the provisions in the New Constitution as they relate to access to safe abortion services in Kenya, and to analyse areas of particular concern in the implementation of the Constitution. In order for Kenya to achieve Millennium Development Goal 5 on Improving Maternal Health, it is imperative that the issue of unsafe abortions is addressed, since this is a major contributor to the high maternal mortality rates in the country. In addition, complications resulting from unsafe abortion contribute to serious sequelae for women’s reproductive health such as chronic pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and infertility.

 

The incidence of unsafe abortion generally reflects the magnitude of unwanted pregnancies in a particular community. Hence, the only sure way of effectively minimizing unsafe abortion is to ensure women have easy access to contraceptive information and services, backed up by positive legislation that decriminalizes abortion. According to UN data[ii], in most so-called developing countries like Kenya, there was a trend towards enactment of more restrictive abortion laws in the period between 1999 and 2007 (Figure 1). Whereas in nearly all countries abortion is permitted to save a mother’s life, only 60 percent and 57 percent respectively of the countries permit abortion to preserve a mother’s physical and mental health. Rape or incest, and fetal abnormalities are respectively considered in 37 percent and 32 percent of the countries; and in only 19 percent are economic or social considerations entertained. Abortion is available on demand in some 15 percent of developing countries.

 

Figure 1: Grounds on which abortion is permitted – percentage of countries

Source: (World Abortion Policies 2007 )

Constitutional provisions that are relevant to abortion services in Kenya

The new Constitution of Kenya, while maintaining the longstanding restrictive stance towards abortion[i], it nevertheless, does provide opportunities for enhancing the reproductive health and rights of Kenyan women, which if adequately implemented can significantly contribute to the reduction of the high maternal mortality rates prevailing in Kenya today, and the achievement of MDG 5. In particular, the Constitution of Kenya:

  • Is committed to nurture and protect the well-being of the individual, the family, communities and the nation[ii].
  • Guarantees reproductive health care as a right for all Kenyans[iii]
  • Commits the government to implement international conventions, and regional commitments that Kenya has pledged to support such as CEDAW[iv] and the Maputo[v] Plan of Action[vi],
  • Guarantees that every person has inherent dignity and the right to have that dignity respected and protected[vii], and
  • Guarantees equality and freedom from discrimination for every Kenyan[viii]

 

The Constitution of Kenya is explicit in the chapter on Bill of Rights regarding circumstances when abortion may be legal. Article 26 (4) states: Abortion is not permitted unless, in the opinion of a trained health professional, there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger, or if permitted by any other written law. In other words, abortion can be permissible if in the opinion of a trained health professional there is need for emergency treatment (as in cases of severe pre-eclampsia and eclampsia), or the life or health of the mother is in danger (as in the case of severe cardiac disease, or complicated diabetes mellitus that is not adequately responding to treatment).

 

To a certain degree Article 26 (4) has widened access to safe abortion in Kenya through the inclusion of danger to ‘health’ as a ground for abortion in addition to danger to ‘life’, of the mother previously provided in Section 240 of the Penal Code[ix]. As it stands today, the Code of Professional Conduct and Discipline published by the Medical Practitioners and Dentists Board mentions, in addition, the health of the baby: “There is room, however, for carrying out termination when in the opinion of the attending doctors it is necessary in the interest of the health of the mother or baby”.

 

Restrictive medical practices

The Code of Professional Conduct and Discipline (see above) goes on to provide guidance on how medical practitioners should proceed in cases where there is ground for termination of pregnancy (TOP): “In these circumstances, it is strongly advised that the practitioner consults with at least two senior and experienced colleagues, obtains their opinion in writing and performs the operation openly in hospital if he considers himself competent to do so in the absence of a Gynecologist”. This guideline can present a serious access barrier, for example for the solitary medical worker in rural areas, where a second opinion may be a considerable distance away. Similarly restricting performance of abortion procedures to hospitals is not only restrictive but may also be unnecessary, considering that modern techniques for TOP can safely be carried out on an outpatient basis.

 

In addition, quite often in order to establish the risk to the life of the woman, a psychiatric assessment is required. This is not only discriminative to those living far from urban centres where psychiatrists are to be found. In addition, it is a process that gives the woman a label of psychiatric illness, besides being expensive, time consuming, and in many respects completely unnecessary. It is an invasion of the inherent dignity of the woman (see above). In many respects these practices serves to discourage rather than facilitate access to safe abortion services.

 

Provision of Safe abortion services[x]

The World Health Organization defines ‘unsafe abortion’ as “a procedure for terminating an unwanted pregnancy either by persons lacking the necessary skills or in an environment lacking the minimal medical standards, or both”[xi]. ‘Safe abortion’ services, on the other hand, imply the services are provided by well-trained health personnel and supported by policies, regulations and a health systems infrastructure, including equipment and supplies.

 

Almost all the deaths and complications from unsafe abortion are preventable through application of safe abortion practices. Termination of pregnancy (TOP) is a safe medical procedure when performed by trained health care providers using proper equipment, correct technique and ensuring infection prevention standards.

 

Regrettably, in many circumstances where women are legally entitled to have an abortion, safe services are not available to them due to a range of reasons, which include the following:

  • Provider associated problems and biases: a lack of trained providers (recruitment constraints; poor deployment and distribution); negative provider attitudes; stigmatization and other sanctions; conscientious objection among health workers.
  • Medical policies and practices: insistence on hospitalization; insistence on use of unnecessary or outdated techniques including use of general anaesthesia; opposition to task-shifting, and other regulatory bottlenecks.
  • Lack of knowledge of the law or lack of application of the law by providers; lack of public information about the law and women’s rights under the law.
  • Lack of awareness about facilities providing abortion or the need to obtain abortion services early in pregnancy.
  • Lack of awareness among health workers of their ethical and legal obligations to respect women’s rights, and to provide women in need with adequate information on where and how safe abortion services can be obtained.

 

Prevention of unsafe abortion and its complications

The Africa Union’s Maputo Plan of Action for the Operationalisation of the Continental Policy Framework for Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (2007-2010) aimed to reduce the incidence of unsafe abortion, through the following strategies:

  • Enacting policies and legal frameworks to reduce incidence of unsafe abortion;
  • Preparing and implementing national plans of action to reduce incidence of unwanted pregnancies and unsafe abortion;
  • Training service providers in the provision of comprehensive safe abortion care services where national law allows;
  • Providing safe abortion services to the fullest extent of the law;
  • Educating communities on available safe abortion services as allowed by national laws;
  • Training health providers in prevention and management of unsafe abortion

 

On the whole, there is consensus that to effectively reduce the incidence of unsafe abortion women must have easy access to contraceptive information and services, backed up by positive legislation that decriminalizes abortion. Table 1 shows a suggested three-tier scheme for the prevention of unsafe abortion and the related morbidity and mortality.

 

Table 1: A three-tier scheme for the prevention of abortion related morbidity and mortality[xii]

Conclusion 

 

This review has shown that the new Constitution of Kenya, despite the restrictive stance on abortion, does at the same time provide opportunities for enhancing the reproductive health and rights of Kenyan women. Hence, to be effective in the provision of safe abortion services, it is imperative that health care providers do familiarise themselves with these provisions in the Constitution. This will avoid the introduction or continuation of unwarranted access barriers to what should be legally availed to women in need.

Unsafe abortion remains an important contributor to the unacceptably high levels of maternal morbidity and mortality that prevail in Kenya; it is a key challenge to the achievement of MDG 5, as well as attaining the health targets set out in Kenya’s Vision 2030. In addressing the issue of unsafe abortion particular focus should be on ensuring equity in access to health care, especially for the poor and marginalised communities. Despite the paucity of supportive data, it is highly possible that considerably more induced abortions occur among the wealthier and more mature women than among the poor young single women that are often reported from public institutions. However, it is the latter that protract Kenya’s high maternal mortality rates, and who create the stiffest challenge to the attainment of national and international goals, if they are left ‘out of the loop’. In any case, the Constitution guarantees equality and freedom from discrimination for everyone.

 

Related Links


[i] Japheth Mati, New abortion law is still bad for women. STAR Thursday 29 April 2010

[ii] Preamble to the Constitution of Kenya

[iii] Article 43 (1) (a) Every person has the right to the highest attainable standard of health, which includes the right to health care services, including reproductive health care

[iv] CEDAW, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, is an international agreement that affirms principles of fundamental human rights and equality for women around the world. It was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1979 through Resolution 34/180.

[v] Maputo Plan of Action for the Operationalisation of the Continental Policy Framework for Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights 2007-2010

[vi] Art. 2 (6) Any treaty or convention ratified by Kenya shall form part of the law of Kenya

[vii] Article 28 Every person has inherent dignity and the right to have that dignity respected and protected

[viii] Article 27 on Equality and freedom from discrimination

[ix] “A person is not criminally responsible for performing in good faith and with reasonable care and skill a surgical operation upon an unborn child for the preservation of the mother’s life if the performance of the operation is reasonable having regard to the patient’s state at the time, and to all the circumstances of the case” Section 240 of the Penal Code, Laws of Kenya.

[x] World Health Organisation. (2003) Safe Abortion: Technical and Policy Guidance for Health Systems. Geneva, World Health Organisation

[xi] World Health Organization. (1992) The prevention and management of unsafe abortion. Report of a Technical Working Group. Geneva, World Health Organization. (WHO/MSM/92.5)

[xii] Source: Mati JKG J. Adolescent reproductive health in the era of HIV/AIDS: Challenges and Opportunities. Obstet. Gynecol. East Cent. Afr. (2005); 18: 1-18


%d bloggers like this: