Adam Taylor: Turning the Corner on AIDS in Africa
Five years ago I traveled to Nairobi to witness firsthand the devastating toll of the AIDS pandemic. I walked the streets of Kibera with a group of courageous and compassionate community health workers. We visited the dilapidated homes of the sick and dying, offering our prayers, blankets, and food, lacking the power of modern medicine to save life. At that time only the most elite and privileged of Kenyan society could access the drugs that perform a Lazarus effect among people in the advanced stages of the disease. With startling clarity I realized the degree to which AIDS exposes the deep fault lines of social inequity in our world.
In 2001 USAID introduced a rapid HIV test that provides a result within minutes instead of days. In a country in which an estimated 10% of the adult population is living with HIV, I was struck by the fact that this voluntary testing and counseling center was almost empty. My traveling companion (a Kenyan woman that worked for Action AID) and I agreed to take the test (with much less fanfare than the recent test taken by Senator Barack Obama). The inequality of AIDS permeated our pre-counseling session as we were both asked how we would cope with the disease if the results were positive. I thought about the friends and family that would respond to my status with love and acceptance, and about the medical care I would receive as a result of my health care coverage in the States (this scenario in the States is also shaped by my socio-economic status). For Susan, a positive result likely translated into both a physical and social death sentence. Due to the prohibitive cost and inaccessibility of AIDS drugs, a positive result meant that HIV would inexorably lead to a lonely and painful death. The pervasive stigma and shame surrounding the disease also meant that a positive status could lead to a social death, characterized by ostracism, rejection, blame, and at worst, violence from one's partner, spouse, or family.
Five years later, in November of 2006, I toured the same dirt roads that form a maze across the temporary housing structures that make up Kibera, the largest slum in Kenya with an estimated million residents. While the face of abject poverty remained hauntingly the same due to the widespread lack of access to clean drinking water, joblessness, and poor santitation- progress made around the crisis of HIV/AIDS provides an exceptional beacon of hope. Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders) now operates three clinics in Kibera that provide free AIDS and tuberculosis treatment to thousands of Kibera's poorest residents. I visited one of these clinics and was heartened to see the practical revolution that had taken place since 2001.
Many countries across the continent are turning the corner in the fight against HIV/AIDS. The recently released annual report of UNAIDS cites encouraging evidence that in seven African nations the prevalence rate has declined. These reversals are thanks in large part to breakthroughs in political and civic will from African governments as well as wealthy nations - including our own. Despite some initial challenges, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) had placed 561,000 people on Anti-Retroviral (ARV) treatment across Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean as of May 2006. The Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria has also served as an indispensable vehicle for mobilizing dollars where they are needed most for scientifically sound prevention and treatment programs. In two years, access to treatment has increased tenfold across sub-Saharan Africa. However, the epidemic finds a way to outpace even our most accelerated response. Only 1 in 6 Africans in need of treatment currently have access. Significant barriers remain to making second line therapies more affordable and accessible to those in greatest need.
While in Kenya I attended a conference on treatment literacy with over 40 Christian leaders from nine different African nations, which was sponsored by the Ecumenical Pharmaceutical Network. While parts of the Christian church are still awakening from what has been a devastating slumber, a majority of churches are now responding with greater compassion, charity, and even calls for justice.
The theme of this year's World AIDS Day is accountability. Targets such as the pledge made by world leaders last year to achieve universal access to treatment by the year 2010, and the Millennium Development Goal to halt and reverse the spread of AIDS by 2015, are in serious danger of being sidelined or ignored. While we should celebrate the corner that has been turned around AIDS treatment, the church must redouble its leadership and prophetic voice to ensure that these targets are realized and the battle around prevention is won. Through its leadership and action we can provide the answer to the timeless question, "is there a balm in Gilead?"
Adam Taylor is director of campaigns and organizing at Sojourners/Call to Renewal.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
Thank you Adam Taylor for sharing. The theme of everyday, and every presidential administration, should be "accountability."
It's encouraging to know at least some U.S. evangelicals are willing to hold themselves accountable to the gospel of Jesus.
And in addition to Sojourners and Barack Obama, I hear now Rick Warren is holding himself accountable too, despite the expected condemnation from the Sandherdin...>
Posted by: Tenoch | November 29, 2006 3:55 PM
Tenoch,
You begin nearly every single thread with some belligerent statement that effectively amounts to "the Religious Right is stupid and horrible!" that is based in neither fact nor logic. Do you think anyone is going to read your post and say
"you, know what? Tenoch's got a point. Christians oppose any effort to prevent the spread of AIDS, just like the Sanhedrin."
You are free to have a strong opinion on these issues, and to state that opinion frequently, but shouldn't you feel compelled to do somthing to back it up?
This President, with the support of the Christian Right, has done quite a bit to help with the AIDS crisis. Conservatives spend a lot of time, money and energy on these causes, and it is not just to please Rick Warren.>
Posted by: kevin s. | November 29, 2006 6:28 PM
You begin nearly every single thread with some belligerent statement... that is based in neither fact nor logic
Coming from Kevins S, that's an ironic statement if I've ever heard one!>
Posted by: splinterlog | November 29, 2006 7:22 PM
Is it true that the RR & Bush's plan will not pass out condoms to help prevent the spread of AIDS? I swear that when I watched the conference (the one that Bill Clinton spearheads w/other countries to help the AIDS/HIV crisis) that was held in Canada several months ago that no one would pass out condoms and everyone only wanted to teach about abstinence?
I know that the Catholic church recently sent a paper to the pope discussing the attributes of condoms for helping prevent AIDS/HIV. It will be interesting to see what happens.
It seems to make more sense to me that we should be handing out condoms while at the same time talking about abstinence. There are many wives getting AIDS/HIV because their husbands are having affairs. It is a shame!>
Posted by: Deb | November 29, 2006 7:43 PM
Kevin S.
I'm not interested in yet another de-railing or diversion from the very topic introduced by the current guest columnist here on God's Politics.
I'd say come back when you're ready to respond to Adam Taylor's thread. But if you really want to counter something I've said, I wonder why you fail to offer even the most elementary shred of evidence to the contrary?
Rick Warren is in fact being attacked by fundamentalists. This is a fact, Kevin S.
The Eagle Forum, the American Life League, and the American Family Association in particular are quite vocal in their opposition to Rick Warren's global AIDS conference:
http://www.abpnews.com/1534.article
And we could also recall Joel Hunter who just resigned as president of the Christian Coalition of America for very similar reasons, Kevin S.
Anyway, as I said, come back when you're ready to respond to Adam Taylor's thoughtful commentary.>
Posted by: Tenoch | November 29, 2006 7:47 PM
Tenoch - Interesting article. I guess one can't help others unless we our perfect ourselves. I'm sure that the people who are suffering in Africa can wait.>
Posted by: Deb | November 29, 2006 8:02 PM
Tenoch,
You derailed this thread with your post. My response is that I am glad the this President has committed more resources to fight AIDS in Africa than any other, and that your statement doesn't make any sense.
The article you reference calls on Rick Warren to disinvite Barack Obama to his conference. Right or wrong, that is not a call for Warren to stop committing time and resources to the fight against AIDS.>
Posted by: kevin s. | November 29, 2006 8:07 PM
kevin s - yes, Bush has pledged a great deal of money, but it seems to me (from reading the link in the article) that the money given is to have people tested and getting drugs to infected people. What about the prevention aspect? It would make much more sense to pass out condoms (much less cost than the drugs) and then we can preach to them.
And yes, I am glad that he is helping.>
Posted by: Deb | November 29, 2006 8:21 PM
Well, prevention is about more than just condoms. 20% is presnetly being devoted to prevention (including the distribution of condoms). You can argue from a policy perspective that more should be spent on prevention than treatment, but we're really just guessing as to which distribution will result in the greatest increase in life expectancy for dollars spent.
Regardless, I resent the insinuation the Christians do not care about AIDS. Simply lying back and saying "the people I support care more about AIDS than the people they support" does not constitute personal accountability.
Taylor's message is (surprisingly) unpolitical. The notion that this is a left-right issue, or that Conservatives are to blame for the AIDS crisis is just plain stupid.>
Posted by: kevin s. | November 29, 2006 8:39 PM
kevin s. - can you provide a resource that says 20% of the money is being spent on prevention (especially the condom part)? I swear that Bush said he was not going to support the condoms. I am not questioning you, I really want to know.
In no way am I saying that Christians don't care about AIDS. However, I saw a special on AIDS and Franklin Graham (who you know I dislike) was actually the first well-known Christian minister to want to help AIDS victims in Africa. According to the special Graham did NOT get much support from any other Christian organizations. They were not happy to say the least. Again, it seemed like it was due more to the fact that it was considered a gay disease and the other well-knows Christians did not want to associate with it.
What I don't like is that some Christians (NOT ALL) do not want to help unless their Christian values are taught. It is a shame that we let thousands die because we don't want to help prevent AIDS/HIV with condoms/spermacide.>
Posted by: Deb | November 29, 2006 8:57 PM
http://www.avert.org/pepfar.htm
I think Christian values are vital in preventing AIDS. It is, predominantly, a sexually-transmitted disease. Much of the culture in Africa, in particular the derogation of female sexuality, has facilitated the spread of the disease.
I think Christians certainly ought to advocate God's model of sexuality, especially when it would provide a real solution to the problem. Simply throwing condoms around and calling it a day hasn't solved the problem here, and it won't solve the problem abroad.>
Posted by: kevin s. | November 29, 2006 9:13 PM
Leprosy was the AIDS of Jesus' time. It was devestating, but also preventable. Many of the practical causes and preventions were known to the people of Judea at the time.
Still, people got it, and I would imagine many got it knowing full well they were opening themselves to the risk.
I see no record in the Bible of Jesus ever saying to a leper, "It's your own fault you're sick. If you hadn't done thus-and-so, you'd still be healthy and whole. You got what you deserve. Therefore, even though I can, I'm not going to heal you."
No. He healed them. Period. Simply because they were sick and needed to be healed.
Nowhere in the Gospels do I see Jesus healing a leper on the condition the leper "tow the line". Love is unconditional, or it's not love.
He simply healed them.
He stood in stark relief to the rest of the world, who shut lepers out and left them to disintegrate and die.
That is what Christians should do. Work toward a cure, and until that is acheived, make it their mission to get AIDS drugs to our modern "lepers". It needs to be free, and it needs to be for everyone afflicted, whether through at risk behavior, or through no fault of their own, no matter their religion or lack thereof. Whether they embrace our values or not.
Whether they do or don't is beside the point.
The point is, "Do WE embrace our values or not?"
"Whatever you do for the least of you, you do for me.">
Posted by: Matt Channing | November 29, 2006 9:50 PM
Okay, so of course throwing condoms around isn't going to be enough. On the other hand neither is a "Just say No" policy--especially since in many parts of the world--certainly Africa but not only there--women don't always have that option.
AIDS is a complex problem. There isn't going to be one simple solution. So why can't we try a lot of things--Make medicine available to those already sick, make condoms available, teach people how to use them properly, and teach them that they aren't 100% effective. Once we're keeping people alive and healthy a little longer, then we'll have time to try to persuade them that Christian moral values like chastity and fidelity to one's spouse are beneficial and increase human happiness. You have to meet people where they are, not stand and shout at them from where you want them to be! (It only took raising three kids for me to figure that one out!)
But really, the whole condom debate misses the point that things are improving (yay!) but aren't where they should be yet (not surprising)--and how do we keep things moving in a positive direction? What seems to still be a big problem in Africa is the social stigma attached to the illness. How can we got over that ourselves and help them to get over it as well so that people aren't so afraid to get tested, to know the truth?>
Posted by: p2ehling | November 29, 2006 9:59 PM
Matt--
Bravo! You are so right.>
Posted by: p2ehling | November 29, 2006 10:02 PM
It was EXTREMELY important to Jesus that the lepers bought into his values. Recall the instance in which Christ healed ten lepers (Luke 17), and only one came to thank him. Did he say, "okay that's cool, I did my job." Nope, he said "what? only one comes back to thank me?" And says to the one "You're faith has made you well".
That said, I don't think the people with leprosy were opening themselves to risk. There was no cure or way to prevent leprosy, so far as I know. Jesus could not encourage people to do A, B or C and hope that obedience to his advice would end leprosy.
If we change the mindset regarding sexuality, however, we can dramatically reduce the spread of AIDS. I do not see any scripture that says we should not seek to promote Godly behavior as part of our good works.>
Posted by: kevin s. | November 29, 2006 10:07 PM
Well no "leprosy" (the generic term for what was probably a number of skin conditions including the actual disease) was spread by repeated contact and the Levitical purity codes prescribed rules by which people could live to avoid being infected - much like the sexual mores of today.
I fail to understand from the example given from Luke 17 how this demonstrates that it was EXTREMELY important - only one returned. Grace is a gift from God not conditional on "buying into values" or "returning". Maybe we disagree on that point.>
Posted by: splinterlog | November 29, 2006 10:13 PM
I don't know that I would compare the sexual mores of today to Levitical law, but you make a fair point. However, surely you would agree that changing the way many Africans view their sexuality would help prevent the spread of AIDS?
Jesus could heal as many as he wished, free of charge. We are not so blessed, and must make decisions about where we spend our money.
I see grace a gift of God that is contingent upon its acceptance, and repentance before the son of God. Jesus performed mircales for the purposes of showing that he was the Son of God, not just to be a nice guy. Our work as Christians should give glory to Christ, and done with the purpose of promoting his good name.>
Posted by: kevin s. | November 29, 2006 10:54 PM
AIDs in many places is not primarily a sexually transmitted disease. In many developing countries, (my experience is in China, but I know it is true elsewhere) it is spread as much by contaminated blood supplies and unsterilized surgical needles as it is by unsafe sex (which only needs to happen once, and may be nonconsensual) or intravenous drug use.
What bothers me is that people are condenmed for having AIDs regardless of how they picked it up. A chaste wife who goes to the hospital and gets it from a blood transfusion is judged as harshly as a woman who is a drug-user ("she says she got it from a transfusion, but I heard that really....).>
Posted by: Barbara | November 29, 2006 11:00 PM
Barbara is correct, there is also the blood supply. I don't think that we are providing new needles for drug users in Africa either. What does everyone think about that?
We don't condone abortion, but if the women is taking drugs IV and sharing needles she is putting her baby at risk. So is providing her with a clean needle okay?
As far as judging anyone Barbara it is not right regardless of how you got AIDS.>
Posted by: Deb | November 29, 2006 11:22 PM
Thank you Adam Taylor!
As a person of privilege - white, male, health-insured (a Canadian public-private mix) - I have survived HIV infection since at least 1989. While I am old enough to remember the AIDS-as-God's-punishment rhetoric, from some branches of the Christian family, when it was at its worst it is precisely because of my circumstances - this privilege I referred to - that I have survived major AIDS-related illness.
I know there are still some people, Christian and otherwise, who believe I must repent of my homosexuality. I also know there are growing numbers who impose no such interpretation of 'what is required of me'.
What IS required of me is to speak truth to power which, in the HIV/AIDS context, is to ask - rhetorically - why any life blessed with health care is any more deserving of life-prolonging medications and prevention programs than the poorest of the poor, close to home and farther afield.>
Posted by: Kenn Chaplin | December 1, 2006 5:45 PM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?