Despite growing public and academic attention, menstruation remains underrepresented and inconsistently framed in global health policy. The article “Where is menstruation in global health policy? The need for a collective understanding” explores this policy gap, offering a critical lens on how global institutions approach this essential aspect of human health.
The authors argue that although various international bodies such as WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, and the World Bank have recently started to reference menstruation in their publications and strategies, there is no unified or consistent approach. Instead, menstruation is most often treated as a hygiene issue, primarily affecting adolescent girls in school settings, with little consideration for broader health, rights, or justice dimensions.
The paper uses Carol Bacchi’s “What’s the problem?” framework to analyze how menstruation is constructed in global policy discourse. It finds that menstrual health is largely defined by the 2012 WHO/UNICEF concept of Menstrual Hygiene Management (MHM), focusing on access to sanitary products, clean water, and disposal facilities. This WASH-oriented framing, while helpful in mobilizing initial support and funding, has led to a narrow policy scope that neglects pain management, stigma, environmental impacts, and the experiences of transgender and nonbinary individuals.
Alternative framings such as “menstrual health,” “menstrual rights,” and “menstrual justice” are emerging, aiming to broaden the discourse. The concept of menstrual health aligns with WHO’s holistic view of well-being, while menstrual rights emphasize dignity, autonomy, and access to education. Menstrual justice, a more radical framing, incorporates intersectionality and structural discrimination.
Yet, the article underscores several silences in global health discourse: the lack of life-course perspectives (e.g., menopause), limited integration with sexual and reproductive health rights (SRHR), and minimal consideration of environmental sustainability. The authors warn that without a shared conceptual foundation, policy responses will remain fragmented and fail to address the real needs of diverse menstruating populations.
Encouragingly, the article notes that cross-sectoral initiatives and broader language are slowly being adopted by institutions like the WHO and World Bank. However, a more coordinated and inclusive approach is urgently needed to transform menstruation into a fully recognized policy priority.
This piece is a compelling reminder that how we frame a problem shapes what solutions we pursue. By building a collective understanding of menstruation, global health policy can move toward equity, dignity, and comprehensive care for all who menstruate.
Reference
McAllister, J., Amery, F., Channon, M., & Thomson, J. (2025). Where is menstruation in global health policy? The need for a collective understanding. Global Public Health, 20(1), 2448272. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2024.2448272
