December, 01 2010, 10:58am EDT
Kenya: Support Disclosure of HIV Status to Children
Ignorance Threatens HIV Prevention and Treatment
NEW YORK
Children have the right to age-appropriate information about their
HIV status and should not be the last to find out that they are
HIV-positive, Human Rights Watch said on World AIDS Day, December 1,
2010. Human Rights Watch described its research in Kenya about the
subject and called on the Kenyan government to provide guidance to
health workers and parents on disclosure, which could start from the age
of 6, taking into account the child's maturity and the specific
clinical and social context.
Governments around the world need to create sound policies on supportive ways to disclose HIV status to children and adolescents as more children worldwide are tested for HIV and have access to anti-retroviral treatment (ART), Human Rights Watch said.
"Parents, caregivers, and health workers who avoid telling children
about their HIV status can do a lot of harm, unwittingly," said Juliane
Kippenberg, senior children's rights researcher at Human Rights Watch.
"They can shatter a child's emotional and physical health and carry
stigma about HIV to the next generation."
Human Rights Watch research in Kenya shows the disastrous effects of
poor disclosure policies. Children who do not know they are HIV-positive
may be less likely to take their medication regularly, which can lead
to drug resistance and death. Children who belatedly find out that they
are HIV-infected may be more likely to internalize stigma and feel
betrayed by those who hide their status. If adults withhold such
important information for years, children may sense a problem and live
in great anxiety. Some children are confronted with the news of their
illness through public comments from others, and experience trauma and
depression.
Approximately 180,000 children in Kenya are living with HIV, and
slightly more than 40,000 children are on ART. Most of these children
have been infected all of their lives through mother-to-child
transmission, yet parents and caregivers in Kenya often do not tell
their children that they are HIV-positive until they reach adolescence.
Human Rights Watch interviewed children between ages 8 and 14 who had
not been told of their HIV status, as well as parents and other
caregivers, health workers and counselors.
Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, children under age
18 have a right to information about their own health. But Kenya's
National Guidelines for HIV Testing and Counseling leave the
responsibility for disclosure with the caregiver and do not allow health
workers to disclose HIV-status to a child unless a parent or guardian
has given permission. The guidelines permit health workers to inform
children who are pregnant, married, or sexually active. In practice,
though, sexually active children do not always disclose this information
to health workers, and hence are not told if they are HIV-positive.
Denying older children information about their HIV status violates
the child's right to information and privacy, and the child's right to
voluntary, confidential HIV counseling and testing, Human Rights Watch
said. It also compromises the child's ability to participate in his or
her own medical care, an important part of the right to health.
"Many parents are reluctant to tell their children that they are
infected with HIV," Kippenberg said. "They want to protect the child
from the stigma they experience themselves, and mothers in particular
may feel guilty for having infected their children or worry that their
own status may become known."
Kenya should provide more support and information for parents about
how to tell their children they are HIV-positive, Human Rights Watch
said.
Kenya's guidelines only cautiously encourage health providers to
"attempt to introduce age-appropriate information about HIV as early as
possible" and to "offer to assist with disclosure in case difficult
questions arise." Kenya's National AIDS/STD Control Programme (NASCOP)
has developed good training material on child disclosure, but few health
workers have been trained. NASCOP is setting up a committee to deal
with the issues of child testing, counseling, and disclosure, a positive
move, Human Rights Watch said.
"Accepting HIV is more painful when children find out late,
particularly during adolescence," Kippenberg said." Children should be
told about their HIV-positive status in a supportive manner from an
early age, and counseled about prevention when they grow older."
Early disclosure is also necessary for prevention, Human Rights Watch
said. Many adolescents start having sex before learning about their
status, and they risk spreading the virus to others.
The World Health Organization has stated that "informing older
children of their diagnosis of HIV improves adherence," to taking
anti-retroviral medication and has recommended that children above age
10 should be involved in discussing HIV testing. It has also urged
governments to provide guidance to healthcare workers about the process
of informing a child of their HIV status, because "informing children
and disclosing their HIV status to them is a process best performed with
support from skilled health professionals." The American Academy of
Pediatrics encourages disclosure of HIV status to school-age children.
Human Rights Watch called upon the government of Kenya to:
- Provide clear, accessible guidelines for disclosure of HIV status
that recommend consideration of disclosure to children starting from age
6, taking into account each child's cognitive and emotional maturity,
family dynamics, and the clinical context;
- Allow health workers to disclose HIV status to a child within these
new guidelines if they judge the child to be ready, and if the child
wants to know his or her status and has been appropriately counseled;
- Provide counseling for parents and caregivers at HIV testing and
counseling centers to overcome their concerns regarding disclosure and
guide the disclosure process;
- With the support of donors, train health workers at HIV testing and counseling centers on disclosure to children; and
- Ensure that HIV/AIDS and life skills education programs take into
account the situation of children living with HIV in addition to
prevention methods, and that the programs are carried out in a sensitive
manner.
Nearly 90 percent of HIV-positive children worldwide live in
sub-Saharan Africa. The barriers the Kenyan government faces in
addressing the needs of children living with HIV and AIDS are similar to
those other Eastern and Southern African countries confront. In recent
years, important progress has been made in providing children with ART
in Africa, with nearly 300,000 children now receiving the drugs there.
However, close to one million children on the continent still do not get
the life-saving drugs because they have not been tested for HIV, lack
transportation or adequate food, or have poor family support.
Personal Accounts From Kenya:
(Names of children, caregivers, and counselors are pseudonyms)
"We had a 13-year-old boy whose father was alive and HIV-positive,
but his mother died of HIV. The father stigmatized HIV. The boy was
positive but did not know, and the father did not want to disclose. The
boy came to us with a TB cyst and rashes.... ARVs [anti-retrovirals]
eventually became available, but the boy never found out [his status],
because his father and aunt never told him. The boy refused to take his
medications. He died in 2009."
- Community counselor, Kayole, Nairobi, November 5, 2010
"My 5-year-old, Martha, is positive. She takes ARVs, but I tell
Martha that she needs to take the drugs for a chest infection and also
show her that I take the same drugs. Sometimes she doesn't want to take
them and says that she's healed, or says, "Drugs, drugs, drugs," or "Why
me only and not the others?" I have not received any training on
disclosure and I do not know of any place to get this training.
Community health workers have told me that I need to tell the child that
she is positive but they have not given me a way to do so."
- Mother of Martha A., Kayole, Nairobi, November 5, 2010
"My son is 10 and was told by his teachers at school that HIV
happened to people who had 'bad manners'... He is HIV positive and I
have been trying to slowly disclose, but it is difficult because of the
wrong information he has gotten from the school. He was watching TV and
saw someone drinking alcohol and said, 'That man has bad manners, he
will get HIV.' Then I asked him if he thought he could ever get HIV, and he said, 'No Mom, I am a good boy I do not have bad manners.'"
- Hannah K., community health worker and parent, Nairobi, November 3, 2010
"My son David is 12, he doesn't know that he is [HIV] positive. He
takes ART... He [thinks] that it [is] because he had chest problems.
Sometimes he throws his drugs away. He is tired of taking drugs.... I
have thought of telling him that he's positive, but I am afraid that he
will hang himself or kill himself... David thinks that only adults have
HIV and kids are not supposed to [have it].... I asked him what he would
do if he was HIV positive and he said, 'I will kill myself, I will take
poison.' If you can come up with a program to educate kids on HIV, it
will be better for me."
- Mother of David B., Kayole, Nairobi, November 5, 2010
"Two or three days ago Elaine found out that she was positive. She
overheard some people here... talking about it... She heard that the
medicines that she is taking are for people with HIV/AIDS.... For the
first two days [after this] she refused to take them [the drugs]."
- Mother of Elaine, age 12, Eldoret, August 19, 2008
"I was surprised [about my HIV-positive status] but not upset, I take
my medicines and I am healthy. It is better to know your status so you
can avoid getting sicker and dying."
- James W., age 12, who was told about his disease by his mother, Kayole, Nairobi, November 5, 2010
"I felt very bad. I had no idea I had HIV. I didn't understand at
first. I wanted to know that I will not die, that I can have a family
and be loved. I have not told anyone at school, not even teachers. But
it is better that I know, because I might be dead or very sick. I now
have [HIV] positive friends, and I can talk and sit with other children
at school because I feel better. Before, I was suffering alone, I was
ashamed of my illness and I ate alone at school [due to fingernails
breaking off, and other opportunistic infections]."
- Rose W., age 11, who was told about her status at age 9, and
recently joined a child support group, Kayole, Nairobi, November 5, 2010
"I would say any time the child starts asking questions about why I
am here, why am I taking these medications, is the right time to tell
the child. [Disclosure] can be a gradual process.... I would say this
can be from age 7 to 10. At the very least, a child above 10 should know
their status. There is a gap in training in the country on how to do
disclosure to children."
- Kenyan pediatrician, Eldoret, August 19, 2008
"There is a conflict of interest between the parents' needs and the
child's needs, but we need to disclose before the child reaches
adolescence because they run into very serious problems with adherence
[to ART]... The problem once you get to into adolescence, they feel
cheated if they are not disclosed. There is a loss of trust for adults
in their lives, they are not sure what they can believe."
- Professor Ruth Nduati, associate professor of pediatrics at the
School of Medicine, College of Health Sciences, University of Nairobi,
November 12, 2010
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
LATEST NEWS
Congressional Report Calls Trump Deportation Plan 'Catastrophic' for Economy
"All it will do is raise grocery prices, destroy jobs, and shrink the economy," JEC Chair Martin Heinrich said of the president-elect's plan to deport millions of immigrants.
Dec 12, 2024
Echoing recent warnings from economists, business leaders, news reporting, and immigrant rights groups, Democrats on the congressional Joint Economic Committee detailed Thursday how President-elect Donald Trump's planned mass deportations "would deliver a catastrophic blow to the U.S. economy."
"Though the U.S. immigration system remains broken, immigrants are crucial to growing the labor force and supporting economic output," states the new report from JEC Democrats. "Immigrants have helped expand the labor supply, pay nearly $580 billion a year in taxes, possess a spending power of $1.6 trillion a year, and just last year contributed close to $50 billion each in personal income and consumer spending."
There are an estimated 11.7 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, and Trump—who is set to be sworn in next month—has even suggested he would deport children who are American citizens with their parents who are not and attempt to end birthright citizenship.
Citing recent research by the American Immigration Council and the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the JEC report warns that depending on how many immigrants are forced out of the country, Trump's deportations could:
- Reduce real gross domestic product (GDP) by as much as 7.4% by 2028;
- Reduce the supply of workers for key industries, including by up to 225,000 workers in agriculture and 1.5 million workers in construction;
- Push prices up to 9.1% higher by 2028; and
- Cost 44,000 U.S.-born workers their jobs for every half a million immigrants who are removed from the labor force.
Highlighting how mass deportations would harm not only undocumented immigrants but also U.S. citizens, the report explains that construction worker losses would "make housing even harder to build, raising its cost," and "reduce the supply of farmworkers who keep Americans fed as well as the supply of home health aides at a time when more Americans are aging and requiring assistance."
In addition to reducing home care labor, Trump's deportation plan would specifically harm seniors by reducing money for key government benefits that only serve U.S. citizens. The report references estimates that it "would cut $23 billion in funds for Social Security and $6 billion from Medicare each year because these workers would no longer pay into these programs."
Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), who chairs the JEC, said Thursday that "as a son of an immigrant, I know how hard immigrants work, how much they believe in this country, and how much they're willing to give back. They are the backbone of our economy and the driving force behind our nation's growth and prosperity."
"Trump's plan to deport millions of immigrants does absolutely nothing to address the core problems driving our broken immigration system," Heinrich stressed. "Instead, all it will do is raise grocery prices, destroy jobs, and shrink the economy. His immigration policy is reckless and would cause irreparable harm to our economy."
Along with laying out the economic toll of Trump's promised deportations, the JEC report makes the case that "providing a pathway to citizenship is good economics. Immigrants are helping meet labor demand while also demonstrating that more legal pathways to working in the United States are needed to meet this demand."
"Additionally, research shows that expanding legal immigration pathways can reduce irregular border crossings, leading to more secure and regulated borders," the publication says. "This approach is vital for managing increased migration to the United States, especially as more people flee their home countries due to the continued risk of violence, persecution, economic conditions, natural disasters, and climate change."
The JEC report followed a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday that explored how mass deportations would not only devastate the U.S. economy but also harm the armed forces and tear apart American families.
In a statement, Vanessa Cárdenas, executive director of the advocacy group America's Voice, thanked Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) "for calling this important discussion together and shining a spotlight on the potential damage."
Cárdenas pointed out that her group has spent months warning about how Trump's plan would "cripple communities and spike inflation," plus cause "tremendous human suffering as American citizens are ripped from their families, as parents are separated from their children, or as American citizens are deported by their own government."
"Trump and his allies have said it will be 'bloody,' that 'nobody is off the table,' and that 'you have to send them all back,'" she noted, arguing that the Republican plan will "set us back on both border control and public safety."
Cárdenas concluded that "America needs a serious immigration reform proposal—with pathways to legal status and controlled and orderly legal immigration—which recognize[s] immigrants are essential for America's future."
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Rule From Agency Trump Wants Destroyed Would Save Consumers $5 Billion Per Year in Overdraft Fees
One advocate called the CFPB's new rule "a major milestone in its effort to level the playing field between regular people and big banks."
Dec 12, 2024
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, one of President-elect Donald Trump's top expected targets as he plans to dismantle parts of the federal government after taking office in January, announced on Thursday its latest action aimed at saving households across the U.S. hundreds of dollars in fees each year.
The agency issued a final rule to close a 55-year-old loophole that has allowed big banks to collect billions of dollars in overdraft fees from consumers each year,
The rule makes significant updates to federal regulations for financial institutions' overdraft fees, ordering banks with more than $10 billion in assets to choose between several options:
- Capping their overdraft fees at $5;
- Capping fees at an amount that covers costs and losses; or
- Disclosing the terms of overdraft loans as they do with other loans, giving consumers a choice regarding whether they open a line of overdraft credit and allowing them to comparison-shop.
The final rule is expected to save Americans $5 billion annually in overdraft fees, or about $225 per household that pays overdraft fees.
Adam Rust, director of financial services at the Consumer Federation of America, called the rule "a major milestone" in the CFPB's efforts "to level the playing field between regular people and big banks."
"No one should have to pick between paying a junk overdraft fee or buying groceries," said Rust. "This rule gives banks a choice: they can charge a reasonable fee that does not exploit their customers, or they can treat these loan products as an extension of credit and comply with existing lending laws."
The rule is set to go into effect next October, but the incoming Trump administration could put its implementation in jeopardy. Trump has named billionaire Tesla CEO Elon Musk to co-lead the Department of Government Efficiency, an advisory body he hopes to create. Musk has signaled that he wants to "delete" the CFPB, echoing a proposal within the right-wing policy agenda Project 2025, which was co-authored by many officials from the first Trump term.
"The CFPB is cracking down on these excessive junk fees and requiring big banks to come clean about the interest rate they're charging on overdraft loans."
"It is critical that incoming and returning members of Congress and President-elect Trump side with voters struggling in this economy and support the CFPB's overdraft rule," said Lauren Saunders, associate director at the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC). "This rule is an example of the CFPB's hard work for everyday Americans."
In recent decades, banks have used overdraft fees as profit drivers which increase consumer costs by billions of dollars every year while causing tens of millions to lose access to banking services and face negative credit reports that can harm their financial futures.
The Federal Reserve Board exempted banks from Truth in Lending Act protections in 1969, allowing them to charge overdraft fees without disclosing their terms to consumers.
"For far too long, the largest banks have exploited a legal loophole that has drained billions of dollars from Americans' deposit accounts," said CFPB Director Rohit Chopra. "The CFPB is cracking down on these excessive junk fees and requiring big banks to come clean about the interest rate they're charging on overdraft loans."
Government watchdog Accountable.US credited the CFPB with cracking down on overdraft fees despite aggressive campaigning against the action by Wall Street, which has claimed the fees have benefits for American families.
Accountable.US noted that Republican Reps. Patrick McHenry of North Carolina and Andy Barr of Kentucky have appeared to lift their criticisms of the rule straight from industry talking points, claiming that reforming overdraft fee rules would "limit consumer choice, stifle innovation, and ultimately raise the cost of banking for all consumers."
Similarly, in April Barr claimed at a hearing that "the vast majority of Americans" believe credit card late fees are legitimate after the Biden administration unveiled a rule capping the fees at $8.
"Americans pay billions in overdraft fees every year, but the CFPB's final rule is putting an end to the $35 surprise fee," said Liz Zelnick, director of the Economic Security and Corporate Power Program at Accountable.US. "Despite efforts to block the rule and protect petty profits by big bank CEOs and lobbyists, the Biden administration's initiative will protect our wallets from an exploitative profit-maximizing tactic."
The new overdraft fee rule follows a $95 million enforcement action against Navy Federal Credit Union for illegal surprise overdraft fees and similar actions against Wells Fargo, Regions Bank, and Atlantic Union.
Consumers have saved $6 billion annually through the CFPB's initiative to curb junk fees, which has led multiple banks to reduce or eliminate their fees.
"Big banks that charge high fees for overdrafts are not providing a courtesy to consumers—it's a form of predatory lending that exacerbates wealth disparities and racial inequalities," said Carla Sanchez-Adams, senior attorney at NCLC. "The CFPB's overdraft rule ensures that the most vulnerable consumers are protected from big banks trying to pad their profits with junk fees."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Arrests of US Journalists Surged in 2024 Amid Crackdown on Gaza Protests
Police use of "catch-and-release" tactics is particularly worrying for press freedom advocates, according to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker.
Dec 12, 2024
Arrests and detainments of journalists in the United States surged in 2024 compared to the year prior, according to the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, a project of the Freedom of the Press Foundation.
The tracker reports that journalists were arrested or detained by police at least 48 times this year—eclipsing the number of arrests that took place in the previous two years combined, and constituting the third highest number of yearly arrests and detentions since the project began cataloging press freedom violations in 2017. 2020, however, still stands as far and away the year with the most arrests and detentions.
The 48 arrests and detentions this year is also part of a larger list of "press freedom incidents" that the tracker documents, including things like equipment damage, equipment seizure, and assault.
While a year with a high number of protests typically leads to more arrests, "it was protests in response to the Israel-Gaza war that caused this year's uptick," according to the tracker.
The vast majority of the arrests and detainments out of the total 48 were linked to these sorts of demonstrations, and it was protests at Columbia University's Manhattan campus that were the site of this year's largest detainment of journalists.
The report also recounts the story of Roni Jacobson, a freelance reporter whose experience on the last day of 2023 was a harbinger of press freedom incidents to come in 2024. Jacobson was on assignment to cover a pro-Palestinian demonstration for the New York Daily News on December 31, 2023 when she was told to leave by police because she didn't have city-issued press credentials with her. She recounted that she accidentally bumped into an officer and was arrested. She was held overnight at a precinct and then released after the charges against her, which included disorderly conduct, were dropped.
Even five arrests that the tracker deems "election-related" took place at protests that were "at least partially if not entirely focused on the Israel-Gaza war." Three of those election-related arrests took place at protests happening around the Democratic National Convention in August.
One police force in particular bears responsibility for this year's crackdown: Nearly 50% of the arrests of journalists this year were at the hands of the New York Police Department (NYPD). Many of those taken into custody had their charges dropped quickly, but the tracker notes that the NYPD's use of "catch-and-release" tactics was particularly worrying to press freedom advocates.
Two photojournalists, Josh Pacheco and Olga Federova, were detained four times this year in both New York City and Chicago while photographing protests. They were both "assaulted and arrested and [had] their equipment damaged" while documenting police clearing a student encampment at Manhattan's Fashion Institute of Technology; however, they were released the next day and told their arrests had been voided.
"While [we are] glad that some common sense prevailed by the NYPD not charging these two photographers with any crime, we are very concerned that they are perfecting 'catch-and-release' to an art form,” Mickey Osterreicher, general counsel for the National Press Photographers Association, told the tracker.
"The fact that they took two photojournalists off the street, preventing them from making any more images or transmitting the ones they already had on a matter of extreme public concern, is very disturbing," he said.
Besides covering protests, 2024 also saw the continued practice of "criminally charging journalists for standard journalistic practices," according to the tracker. For example, one investigative journalist in Los Angeles was repeatedly threatened with arrest while attempting to cover a homeless encampment sweep in the city, and then was detained in October, though he was let go without charges.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular