Finding opportunity in the COVID-19 crisis: prioritizing gender in the design of social protection policies

Abstract

Summary The COVID-19 pandemic is highlighting the harm perpetuated by gender-blind programs for marginalized citizens, including sexual and gender minorities (SGMs) and cisgender women. Gender-blind programs are known to augment harms associated with violence and structural stigmatization by reinforcing rather than challenging unequal systems of power. The intersecting marginalization of these populations with systems of class, race, and settler-colonialism is exacerbating the impact that policies such as physical distancing, school closures, and a realignment of healthcare priorities are having on the wellbeing of these populations. The overarching reasons why women and SGM are marginalized are well known and stem from a hegemonic, patriarchal system that fails to fully integrate these groups into planning and decision making regarding public health programming—including the response to COVID-19. In this perspective, we aim to highlight how the exclusion of cisgender women and SGM, and failure to use a gender redistributive/transformative approach, has (i) hampered the recovery from the pandemic and (ii) further entrenched the existing power structures that lead to the marginalization of these groups. We also argue that COVID-19 represents a once-in-a-century opportunity to realign priorities regarding health promotion for cisgender women and SGM by using gender redistributive/transformative approaches to the recovery from the pandemic. We apply this framework, which aims to challenge the existing power structures and distribution of resources, to exemplars from programs in health, housing, employment, and incarceration to envision how a gender redistributive/transformative approach could harness the COVID-19 recovery to advance health equity for cisgender women and SGM.

What innovations can address inequalities experienced by women and girls due to the COVID-19 pandemic across the different areas of life/domains: work, health, living standards, personal security, participation and education?

“…Several action steps were suggested: Targeting investments for black students, educators, healthcare providers, and researchers Putting the voices, strategies, and interventions of black birthing people at the centre of decisions about maternal health Establish authentic partnership with black women and female-led organisations to reduce maternal morbidity and mortality (Bray & McLemore, 2021). A literature review from the USA (Perri et al, 2021) described the implications of a lack of gender redistributive/transformative approaches in sectors, such as housing and employment, that impact living standards. In the employment sector, for example, sexual and gender minorities (SGM) were more likely to lose employment (17%) during the pandemic compared with the general population (13%).…”

“…Living standards: Six (n = 6) included papers were in the domain of living standards (Andermann et al, 2021; Bray & McLemore, 2021; Goodsmith, Ijadi-Maghsoodi, Melendez, & Dossett, 2021; Grammatikopoulou et al, 2021; Perri, Metheny, Matheson, Potvin, & O’Campo, 2021; Zhang, Limaye, & Means, 2021)…”

“…Reviews: Seven (n = 7) included papers were reviews (Andermann et al, 2021; Banati & Idele, 2021; Bray & McLemore, 2021; Perri et al, 2021; Saad et al, 2021; Steinert et al, 2021) (see Table 3).…”

“…Health: Six (n = 6) included papers were within the domain of health (Banati & Idele, 2021;Das et al, 2021;Davic et al, 2021;Figueroa, Luo, Aguilera, & Lyles, 2021;Ray et al, 2021;Saad et al, 2021;Steinert, Alacevich, Steele, Hennegan, & Yakubovich, 2021) Living standards: Six (n = 6) included papers were in the domain of living standards (Andermann et al, 2021;Bray & McLemore, 2021;Goodsmith, Ijadi-Maghsoodi, Melendez, & Dossett, 2021;Grammatikopoulou et al, 2021;Perri, Metheny, Matheson, Potvin, & O'Campo, 2021;Zhang, Limaye, & Means, 2021) Personal security: Two (n = 2) included papers were within the domain of personal security (i.e., violence against women) (Chatzifotiou & Andreadou, 2021;Hinton et al, 2021).…”

“…A literature review from the USA (Perri et al, 2021) described the implications of a lack of gender redistributive/transformative approaches in sectors, such as housing and employment, that impact living standards. In the employment sector, for example, sexual and gender minorities (SGM) were more likely to lose employment (17%) during the pandemic compared with the general population (13%).…”