According to Uganda's HIV-prevention law 'flawed', the Ugandan government forced their citizen to get tested to prove their blood test to prevent Aids from spreading. But patients' medical information were disclosed for proving, it was claimed by Human's right.
In my opinion, the serious campaign the government have launched is a white aim, but it is too strong and mean that does not respect to human's right. To inform medical solution and persuade patients that they would have better lives, or they will get treatment, in my point of view, that is logical enough for their people's decision. Moreover, I really think Aids treatment does not suffer patient as much as cancer's which suffers got hurt continuously and dramatically from chemical remediation or something's like that. So i believe that some of them have many other reasons to reject to go to see doctors.
One of another reasons is they are afraid that their friends or colleagues will keep a long distance and abhor them if their medical information were disclosed. However, in the fact, this disease does not be harmful even if their blood does not transfused to patient's. Another idea is discouraging the truth in advance. Someone decide to avoid the medical treatment because they don't trust them and think they will got long period therapies. Some don't expect their symptom and tend to be pessimistic respectively.
As my previous reasons above, I think that if the government resolve this problem more softy with promoting how to protect them from Aids is quite better, such as offerring to have safe sex, hygienic infection control. According to patients problem, i believe they need more encouragment from everyone around them to live in the society. The government should give them more opportunities to let them participate with others in the environment.
Reference
Poom's post reminds me of when AIDS first came to public notice in Australia about thirty years ago. Many people did react very negatively to those who were infected and proposed some awful policies in response. I think this reaction was based on fear and ignorance.
ReplyDeleteAs this awful disease became better understood by the public, the responses became not only more caring, but more sensible and practical, including such things as Poom suggests - teaching safer sex practices in schools, providing condoms where people, especially young people, are likely to have sex, and so on.
Laws that force people to hide their behaviour and situation generally seem to me to cause far more problems than they ever solve. For example, most countries' drug laws make their drug problems much worse than they would be were drugs all legal and regulated.
Please don't be embarrassed to get a blood test. If you infected HIV, you would get immediate treatment to kill virus before your white blood cell got destroyed. In my opinion, people who infected by HIV is still a human, so you should respect, and treat them like what you do with others.
ReplyDeleteIf I were forced to get blood test by a government, I would also not like it. NOT because I am afraid to know whether I have HIV, but because I know that I don't have it and don't want to feel pain as a needle goes in.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I may support the policy because, seeing the big picture, it seems to have more pros than cons. Preventing HIV spreading is a good idea.