Excerpt via Research Paper:
Interpersonal Context of HIV and AIDS in The african continent
The government of Africa has been moving toward criminalization of HIV indication in its attempts to respond for the rising numbers of HIV infections however , people who advocate to get human legal rights are concerned these laws cause a violation from the rights of individuals living with HIV and ultimately resulting in the marginalization of such individuals. As well, it has been contended that laws criminalizing transmission of AIDS are detrimental to the basis for their creation, which is those of slowing the rate of transmission and disease of HIV. There are quarrels both to get and against criminalization of HIV tranny that are valid and worthy of consideration.
Exploration Question
Problem addressed through this research study is definitely one asking if criminalization of HIV transmission can be described as valid choice to slowing the rate of illness among the inhabitants.
Significance in the Study
The importance of this analyze is the additional knowledge that will probably be added to the already existing know-how base in this field of inquiry.
Methodology
The methodology on this study can be one of a qualitative characteristics involving a substantial review of literature in this subject area. Qualitative research is interpretive and descriptive in nature.
Materials Review
The effort of the UNFPA, Worldaids Campaign, IPPF, and GYCA permitted “The Criminalization of HIV” reports that transmission of HIV around the globe is a offense and in some countries exposing someone to HIV may be an offense that can be prosecuted. Charges may be brought underneath various laws and may include such as murder, assault, and grievous bodily harm. Some of the arguments will be stated as follows:
(1) Encourages public health effects, but could deter people from VCT: While some persons believe that criminalization can encourage public health effects and HIV prevention, it may also deter persons from accessing voluntary counselling and screening services, and discourage all of them from knowing their HIV status and seeking suitable care and support.
(2) Holds persons living with HIV responsible for reduction, rather than advertising individual responsibility irrespective of HIV status: Some proponents of criminalization contend that it will motivate people managing HIV for taking responsibility for protecting their particular sexual lovers, but this kind of undermines the fact that lovemaking health may be the responsibility of every individual and both companions in a sex relationship.
(3) Punishes people that knowingly reveal and/or contaminate someone with HIV, but undermines your rights of people living with HIV: Many regulations seek to “punish” people because of not disclosing their status to sexual companions, but this kind of undermines a persons rights of men and women living with HIV by ‘forcing’ them to divulge their position. These laws and regulations do not consider the lack of a supportive environment to promote disclosure nor the effects of HIV related stigma and discrimination.
(4) Controls dangerous behaviors: Some argue that criminalization will prevent people from behaviors usually negatively associated with the transmission of HIV just like injecting medication use and sex operate. However , it can possibly contribute to the stigma surrounding groups engaging in such behaviors, and drive these kinds of behaviors even more underground for fear of felony persecution. (5) Protects prone groups yet could also lead to increased stigma Others argue that criminalization can help ‘protect’ certain groups at risk of HIV infection, such as girls and fresh women, migrant workers, and prisoners. However , this may also contribute to the stigma encircling these same groupings, by labels them because “victims, ” sensationalizing the epidemic. (UNFPA, Worldaids Campaign, IPPF, and GYCA, nd, p. 1)
Stated because alternatives to criminalization would be the following alternatives:
(1) guard public health by focusing on the UN goal of obtaining ‘Universal Entry to prevention, treatment care and support rather than punitive procedures. This will demanding improvement of existing reduction, care and support applications.
(2) Promote prevention when it comes to living with HIV or confident prevention purchasing a new that this technique feature moer prominently inside the HIV answers of nationwide governments including in their complete HIV elimination streatgies.
(3) Tackle stigma and enable persons living with HIV to be open about their status and to practice safer sexual.
(4) Addresses the actual cuases of vulnerability that relate to elevating HIV frequency rates over the world and women. Included are issues just like gender-based physical violence, economic personal strength and early marriage. This sort of measures could enable women and girsl in controlling their futures and therby decrease the vulnerability to HIV. (UNFPA, Worldaids Plan, IPPF, and GYCA, nd, p. 1)
The work of Cameron, Burris and Clayton (2008) entitled “HIV can be described as Virus, Not only a Crime: Five Reasons Against Criminal Loi and Criminal Prosecutions” reports that the criminalization of the tranny of HIV “has get a pressing issue in the managing of the crisis. ” (p. 1) It is explained that in May 2008, a destitute man in Texas was sent to prison and was subsequently convicted of the commission rate of a critical offense whilst being busted for inebriated and disorderly conduct or specifically for bothering a public servant which has a deadly weapon. The man was ultimately sentenced for more than 30 years and will have to serve half the sentence ahead of applying for parole. The deadly weapon applied against the open public servant was his drool since this individual spat with the officers putting him underneath arrest. The man has HIV. It is the belief of Cameron j., Burris and Clayton (2008) that charging this man in this way is absolutely a travesty of justice since empirical scientific understanding is that the HIV virus cannot be transmitted through saliva. The man did not basically harm any person and no house was destroyed. The pistol he brandished during the detain was a gadget pistol, that was not even crammed. In another circumstance a 26-year-old woman in Zimbabwe was placed under arrest in 2007 for having unprotected sex with her lover. She was living with HIV and was convicted of “deliberately slowing down another person” even though her lover examined HIV unfavorable. (Cameron, Burris and Clayton, 2008, l. 1) The girl was found guilty under the arrêté s79 in the Zimbabwe Legal Law (Codifictaion and Reform) Act 3 of 2004 which is reported as a great “extraordinary piece of legislation. ” (Cameron, Burris and Clayton, 2008, s. 2) This statute is such that does not set a crime for a person who has HIV and to knowingly assail another person although makes it a crime for “anyone who realizes that there is a genuine risk or possibility that she may have HIV to complete ‘anything’ that she understands involves an actual risk or possibility of infecting another person with HIV. ‘ (Cameron, Burris and Clayton, 2008, p. 2) Although this criminal offenses is known as ‘deliberate transmitting of HIV’ this criminal offense can be fully commited even if the individual does not understand that they sent the HIV infection to a new person and if they just do not have HIV. Stranger nonetheless due to the manner in which the statute is drawn up “this security can not apply where the offender does not in reality have HIV, or does not know that she gets HIV – by classification, in that case the lady cannot employ the up to date consent protection by informing her spouse she has HIV! IN short, this law creates a crime not really of impact and consequence but of fear and possibility. inch (Cameron, Burris and Clayton, 2008, g. 2) Furthermore, the way the Zimbabwe regulation is authored “stretches extensive enough to cover a expecting mothers who understands she has, or fears she may have HIV. For if the girl does ‘anything’ that involves a possibility of slowing down another person – like giving birth, or breast-feeding her baby – the law could make her guilty of ‘deliberate transmission’ – even if the baby is certainly not infected. In every cases, what the law states prescribes treatment of up to twenty years in penitentiary. ” (Cameron, Burris and Clayton, 2008, p. 2) The congress in Macizo Leon are reported to obtain gone even more and enacted a statut that removes all uncertainty through creating an offense of HIV transmitting and it also criminalizes the contact with HIV without even HIV getting transmitted. The Sierra Leone law the requirement of a person with HIV that is aware that they may have HIV to “take almost all reasonable actions and precautions to prevent the transmission of HIV in front of large audiences – a it specifically covers a pregnant woman” requiring the lady who is pregnant to “take reasonable measures to prevent sending HIV with her foetus. inches (of Cameron, Burris and Clayton, 08, p. 3) While there is no doubt that the mother will do all your woman can to consider reasonable procedure for protect her baby the law makes it more difficult for the mother to do so. (Cameron, Burris and Clayton, 2008, paraphrased) The person that has HIV and who is aware about this simple fact “must certainly not knowingly or recklessly place another in danger of becoming infected with HIV, unless that individual knew with the fact and voluntarily recognized the risk. This, too, relates to pregnant moms. ” (Cameron, Burris and Clayton, 2008, p. 3) Reported are definitely the following current examples of the criminalization of HIV:
(1) In Egypt, Human Rights Watch
