Barbaric treatment for Afghanistan's women leads to death

1,005 soldiers have died in Afghanistan. Does anyone know how many civilians? Does anyone know how many woman have died like this?

A death sentence for women
Ending the barbaric treatment of Afghanistan's pregnant women (and girls) is a colossal challenge that we cannot shy away from
Carol Mann guardian.co.uk, Friday November 7 2008 21.00 GMT
Roughly 75% of Afghan newborns that die do so because of lack of food, warmth, and care. Unloved little girls fare the worst. In Afghanistan as a whole, a woman dies of pregnancy-related causes every 27 minutes – and perhaps even more frequently, because many such deaths go unrecorded. Many, perhaps most, are under 16 years of age. The Taliban – blamed nowadays for just about all of Afghanistan's ills – have officially been gone from power for nearly seven years, so why are conditions still so abysmal?

Kabul and Herat boast all the trappings of globalised modernity: mobile phones abound, a tooth-eroding concoction called "Afghan Cola" is sold, the internet works (sometimes), there are ATM machines, sophisticated heroin laboratories, four-wheel drive vehicles, five-star hotels and ads for private banks. Yet so many women die like flies, in pools of blood and deep-rooted indifference.

While billions of dollars in aid have led to improvements in urban areas, where health facilities have been built and midwives trained, the overall maternal death figures have hardly changed. As one doctor told me: "A competent midwife or nurse would rather be out of work in Kabul than stuck in a remote village." But most Afghans live in remote villages, those in Badakhshan can be reached only after a day's bumpy ride on a donkey.

This miserable situation has been attributed to various causes, mainly lack of infrastructure and local economic conditions. But cultural questions must also be addressed, because gender discrimination is the most important cause of maternal mortality. In Afghan society, discrimination begins at birth. One obvious reason is that a boy is destined to support his parents and much of his family all his life, and therefore represents a long-term investment, whereas a girl will be given over to her husband's family as soon as possible. Feeding a girl is seen as effectively looking after someone else's property.

I heard a dreadful story of a breech birth which a traditional midwife did not know how to handle. In the end, she wrenched the baby's body out, severing it from its head, which remained inside the mother's womb. It took six days to get the woman to a hospital in Jalalabad though it was not very far from where she lived. She somehow survived, with major health complications, including permanent fistula, which will condemn her to a life of exclusion from her family and unrelieved misery.
go here for more
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/07/afghanistan-gender

linked from
http://icasualties.org/oef/