Are Some Individuals Deliberately Spreading HIV/AIDS in the Liberian-Minnesota Society? (Guest Editorial) -Paul Jackson

hey paul. this is interesting! it brings up a lot of questions even with the recognition that MN and Liberia have different contexts. first, what is the level of response to voluntary counseling and testing? practically this means that at least 50% or higher of the population know their seropositive status. this info is important because it confirms who is infecting who, and the 'criminalization' of another person is not based on rumours, perceptions or assumptions.

second, the onus of protecting oneself from HIV infection is on the 'pleasure seeker (s)'. in the case of two consenting adults, each person has the obligation to protect her/himself. even an HIV positive person can become re-infected and they should avoid that if they want to live positively and longer. so both people are at risk. for someone who has done his or her test which shows a negative status, that person must ask abt the other person's status before going between the sheets.

third, much onward transmission takes place soon after a person has acquired the virus, when her/his infectiousness is high and before the person knows or suspects s/he is HIV positive or that s/he may be passing the virus onto others (UNAIDS Criminalization Paper). this therefore rules out willful transmission.

third,the use of condoms, abstinence and other prevention methods are good. however, more info needs to be given on HIV without framing it as a 'death sentence'. more programs need to be developed to address the root causes of sexual and gender based violence (which may not necessarily be the case in MN) and other socio-economic issues that place people in compromising conditions and positions and expose them to HIV. additionally, in the case of condoms and abstinence, most women lack of negotiating rights in the private sphere limits the use of these methodologies as protection from HIV. how many women can insist that their husbands, partners use condoms without an argument, fight or some form of abuse? how many women (esp on our end in LIB) can rely on abstinence when even the armed robbers go for the 'good looking' women and girls when targeted families have no money or other material stuff to be stolen?

last, the high levels of stigma and discrimination does not allow for disclosure of one's HIV status. most employers worry about insurance and may have to pay a higher premium for an HIV positive employee. some hospitals provide color-coded cards to HIV positive people so that they are known even before they say their status. some landlords (and ladies) evict them from their properties. The media see them as promiscuous people who have only one wish-to see everyone infected. so much discrimination and sometimes violence silence them, making it a mandate for everyone who is going to have sex to ask questions, ensure that you are satisfied with the answer; then protect yourself or don't do it unless you are 100% sure that the person is telling the truth. criminalization of hiv will only reinforce silence and increase HIV prevalence in our communities.

AIDS means Americans Intension to Destroy Sex....

ha ha ...who say so...HIV negative people? whtz up?

Hey Korto, You here nah?
Your approach and response is quite the solution-focused one......And I really like it.
The reponse to voulntary testing and counseling is fairly marginal...Even with that said, some of these folks get transported into a state of denial after being diagnosed. Of course, the fear of criminalization and other factors you mentioned are responsible for informing such such fears...
The issue of stigmatization and other disenfranchisements HIV positive people experience makes the reality of early intervention even more cumbersome.
And I can see the different contexts (Minnesota, Liberia etc) you drew your analysis from.....

i here nah, professor

i lost the number mehn......7632288978.............

chay..da calling bisness in this discussion? will call you on sat night.