CanWaCH delegation at ICFP 2025: Five questions with Melisa Eraslan

Hosted in Bogotá, Colombia, the 2025 International Conference on Family Planning (ICFP) saw the global community gather from November 3 to 6 to share knowledge, strengthen partnerships, and drive global progress to sexual and reproductive health and rights and gender equality. CanWaCH was pleased to join the conference and support the attendance of youth and delegates from organizations across our membership. The following Q&A is part of a series of interviews with members of the CanWaCH delegation. Read all of the delegation’s insights on Write to Thrive.

Why did you want to attend ICFP 2025?  What drew you to being part of the CanWaCH delegation?

Entering medicine, I knew I wanted to develop skills and perspectives beyond the traditional biomedical model of health and disease. While clinical knowledge is essential, it is insufficient on its own to address the structural forces that shape health outcomes. ICFP 2025 represented an opportunity to engage with the broader systems of policy, culture and advocacy that profoundly influence health. Being part of the CanWaCH delegation was particularly meaningful, as it aligned with my commitment to equity-driven, globally engaged health advocacy as a medical student.

As a future physician, I feel a responsibility to advocate for equitable SRHR, challenge policies that place vulnerable populations at risk, and address both biomedical and structural determinants of health. As I reflect on global crises and international emergencies, it becomes clear to me that lasting change does not often depend on international law and legal frameworks alone. Instead, it is driven by shifts in political will, cultural attitudes and collective moral imagination. This reality makes advocacy essential, especially in a field where stigma and political resistance remain deeply entrenched. It also reinforces the power of young people and grassroots movements – and their leadership across and beyond communities, national networks and institutions. 

ICFP serves as a space where advocates, researchers, and practitioners come together to dismantle stigma, influence culture, and build collective momentum. I was drawn to the opportunity to learn how ideas translate into programs, how policies are debated and contested, and how advocacy reshapes norms. Through ICFP and my involvement with the CanWaCH delegation, I hoped to strengthen my ability to advocate effectively, amplify marginalized voices, and carry these lessons into my future clinical practice, research and everyday spheres of influence.

What was a moment at ICFP 2025 that made you stop and think differently about an issue? Did you hear a perspective that challenged your assumptions or changed your mind?

I had the opportunity to engage in several discussions on sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in humanitarian and climate-affected settings, which deepened and complicated my existing understanding of these issues. 

Despite being essential to survival, SRHR is frequently sidelined in responses to climate disasters, forced displacement, armed conflict and widening social inequities. Emergencies, collapsing infrastructure, closed health facilities, and disrupted supply chains disproportionately affect women and girls. Education is interrupted, access to contraception and maternal care disappears, and risks of gender-based violence increase. 

Women’s health risks are intensified in ways that single-issue responses fail to capture because of the cumulative nature of these crises. Individuals rarely experience a single emergency in isolation. Rather, repeated climate shocks, displacement, and insecurity compound over time. 

The question becomes about how to integrate support for women and SRHR issues in crisis response strategies, and not as an afterthought. 

A crucial aspect of these discussions was the emphasis on intersectoral collaboration. SRHR interventions cannot be largely health-system driven. There are critical roles played by grassroots organizations, advocates, male peer educators, faith leaders, and community actors in shaping access and trust. This reframes SRHR not as a standalone health issue, but as one deeply embedded in social, cultural, and political systems.

If you had to describe ICFP 2025 in three words, what would they be?

Innovation. Resilience. Youth-led.

Events like ICFP bring together people from around the world. When did you get a chance to network and what did that look like on such a large scale? 

One of the aspects of ICFP 2025 I most appreciated was how organically connections unfolded across formal and informal spaces.

A particularly meaningful experience for me was participating in the WHO Guidelines workshop, From Guideline to Action: Implementing the WHO Guideline on Preventing Early Pregnancy and Poor Reproductive Outcomes Among Adolescents in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Working within a small, participatory group alongside youth advocates, physicians, researchers, implementers, civil society actors and global leaders transformed what could have been an abstract policy discussion into a collaborative, grounded and tangible process. The workshop emphasized that guidelines are not static technical documents, but living tools that must be adapted to local realities through dialogue, accountability and community ownership.

The intimate space of the workshop encouraged openness and collective problem-solving rather than hierarchy. Everyone contributed and ideas were challenged and refined. By the end, we had co-produced a concrete document rooted in diverse perspectives. 

This experience reinforced that global health challenges demand coordinated collaboration across sectors and geographies. Being in that space allowed me to learn extensively from colleagues and contribute to discussions shaping WHO guideline recommendations.

What key takeaway(s) have you been able to apply to your work since returning?

A key takeaway from ICFP 2025 that continues to shape my thinking is the necessity of an intersectional approach to health. Across sessions, speakers repeatedly emphasized that we cannot homogenize experiences or advocacy efforts. 

Gender does not exist in isolation. It intersects with disability, race, migration status, socioeconomic position, and geography. Equity-driven change cannot occur without centering the voices of those most affected.

Since returning, this has pushed me to critically examine how even advocacy spaces, including those I am part of, may unintentionally exclude certain perspectives. It has reinforced the importance of advocating not only for representation, but for meaningful participation and shared decision-making, particularly for people with disabilities and other historically marginalized groups.

Another important reflection was the reframing of “global health” itself. Too often, global health is imagined as something that exists elsewhere, detached from our own communities. It is crucial to challenge this notion as inequities begin within our own backyards and networks of connection. Structural injustices are not confined to distant settings. They manifest locally, shaped by policy, culture and power dynamics. In this perspective, global health should be seen as a responsibility that begins at home and extends outward through solidarity and systems-level change.

Connect with Melisa on LinkedIn!