An opportunity to show high-level commitment to Aids has been missed, say Mary Crew and James McIntyre
TWO rumours circulated in the week preceding World Aids Day. The first was that President Mandela and Deputy President Mbeki would be joining Minister Zuma at the National Health World Aids Day rally in Bloemfontein. It was believed that, for the first time, the government would be showing a high-level commitment and solidarity to the HIV and Aids campaign. It was hoped that their presence would show that HIV and Aids really is the priority which the government claims it to be. For people with HIV and Aids it was seen as public support and the creation of a climate of support and non- discrimination.
Then the second rumour surfaced, that they had cancelled attending the rally, preferring to attend other functions. This unleashed an outburst of rage from NGOs, CBOs, from Aids programmes and particularly from people with HIV and Aids, who felt betrayed.
As it turned out, both rumours were false – but their effects are not. It seems incredible that post-Sarafina and all its damage, neither saw the need to attend. It also seems incredible that post-Sarafina, the build up to this rally, and the media coverage of it, were so desultory and poor.
What was clear throughout the media reports was that most people with HIV and Aids do not wish to be identified. This is a harsh indictment on society and on the government’s lack of action. But their fear of identification should make the director general of health, Dr Olive Shisana, take another look at the statements she made to the SAMI concerning confidentiality, as well as the comparisons she made between HIV and Ebola.
Shisana implied that it is the commitment to confidentiality that is causing HIV to spread, and that were we simply to reveal the status of people with HIV, then we would be both halting the epidemic and “normalising” the disease.
The considerable consultation countrywide which preceded the Nacosa National Aids strategy, in which Dr Zuma was key participant, is reflected in the emphasis in this plan on the rights of people with HIV. The reasons why HIV and Aids workers are so determined to protect confidentiality are simple. It respects privacy, and it protects people from the social and political stigma, prejudice and discrimination.
It is cynical to claim, as Shisana has done, that confidentiality is a “superficial constraint” or a “waste of time”.
People with HIV and Aids would be delighted if confidentiality ceased to be an issue and they were treated like anybody else with a life-threatening illness. This will only happen when people are respected rather than punished when they reveal their status. Placing the blame for the spread of virus on confidentiality returns us to the position where people with HIV and Aids are again blamed, rather than looking at ways in which they and the wider society together can halt the epidemic.
— Mary Crewe works for the Esselen Street Aids Programme, TMC, and James McIntyre for Nacosa, Gauteng