Valerie Huber
Role: Contributor
Position: Founder and President at The Institute for Women’s Health
Background:
Valerie Huber is the founder and president of The Institute for Women’s Health, an organization that promotes women’s health with a focus on life-affirming and family-strengthening initiatives. Huber previously served as the Special Representative for Global Women’s Health at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the Trump administration. During her tenure at HHS, she also held positions as Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Population Affairs, Senior Policy Advisor, and Chief of Staff to the Assistant Secretary of Health. Huber has been a vocal advocate for pro-life policies and abstinence education, shaping U.S. and global health policies that reflect these priorities.
Relation to Trump:
Valerie Huber was appointed by President Trump to serve in key roles within HHS, where she was instrumental in promoting policies aligned with the administration’s pro-life agenda. Her work was particularly influential in international health policy, where she championed initiatives such as the Geneva Consensus Declaration. This declaration, which was co-signed by multiple nations, opposes the recognition of abortion as a human right and emphasizes the importance of family in society.
Scandals or Controversies:
Huber’s tenure at HHS and her advocacy work have sparked controversy, primarily due to her strong pro-life stance and promotion of abstinence education. Critics argue that her policies neglect comprehensive reproductive health services, including access to abortion, which has been a contentious issue both domestically and internationally. Her work on the Geneva Consensus Declaration has been particularly divisive, as it challenges widely accepted international norms on women’s reproductive rights.
Potential Concerns:
Huber’s advocacy for excluding abortion from women’s health initiatives has been met with significant opposition from reproductive rights advocates. Her policies are seen by critics as limiting the scope of women’s health by focusing primarily on pro-life and abstinence-based approaches, which may not address the broader needs of women and girls globally.