What You Really Dont Know About HIV and AIDS - Essay Example

HIV and AIDS - What You Really Don’t Know Introduction HIV and AIDS, while not the most common sexually transmitted diseases, are the most well-known. This is due to the horror that ensued when the diseases first reared their ugly heads in 1981. People were frightened by this disease, not knowing how it was caused and who was at risk. Since then, science and technology have come a long way. While we are no closer to finding a cure for these diseases, it is now understood how someone can contract the disease and what happens when they do. Furthermore, medications have been designed to help make the diseases more bearable; they are not cures, but they are steps in the right direction (Bernstein, 1998). Unfortunately, now that HIV and AIDS are better understood, people have become more cautious about the disease. There is no longer the uproar that there once was, but now people are aware of possibilities of contracting the diseases, and are therefore taking the steps in preventing them. There are some ethical and moral concerns in regard to some of the steps that people wish to take in prevention, especially those that involve divulging into the personal lives of HIV and AIDS patients. These concepts are explored throughout this paper. Mandatory reporting One of the options that people are looking into is the mandatory reporting of HIV and AIDS patients. In such, anybody diagnosed with either of the diseases would be forced to report their diseases upon diagnosis. While this may be relevant for the medical community, it serves no purpose for the public (Van Vugt, 1993). The medical community can keep track of their patients, including who is on what medication or certain form of treatment, as well as their current condition with the disease. However, there are some ethical issues that have opposing viewpoints to the consideration of mandatory reporting. While people have every right to go to clinics and doctors to determine whether or not they have a sexually transmitted disease, they also have the right to have this information be readily available to doctors with their consent and not by a mandatory law. If they wish all doctors to be aware of their situation, then it should be something decided by the patient. This mandatory reporting also stretches as far as businesses when looking for jobs, or other events or situations that cause HIV and AIDS patients to be in close proximity with others. If certain places and people demand these medical reports, then the person would be required to give them. Patients with these sexually transmitted diseases should not be required by any law to provide anyone with information that they do not want to. The reporting of HIV or AIDS, or any other sexually transmitted disease, should be done at the discretion of the patient, and not implemented as a law or rule that must be adhered to. There are other diseases that are just as dangerous, if not more so, that do not require reporting of any kind. International register for patients Almost hand-in-hand with the aforementioned mandatory reporting of HIV and AIDS is the consideration of an international register for patients of these sexually transmitted diseases. These registers would contain all of the medical information in regard to patients with sexually transmitted diseases. Quite similar to the mandatory reporting, these registers would be made available to those that wish to seek the information that they hold, which would mean that the information is public and can be accessed by anyone. This concept seems to hold less of a beneficial purpose than mandatory reporting for the medical community. It also has more ethical concerns than the aforementioned concept. Though human beings constantly are subjected to the presence of people that may have sexually transmitted diseases, it does not become an issue unless bodily fluid, the factor of the disease that can allow others to contract it, is at risk of making contact with someone else. As most people, regardless of whether or not they have a sexually transmitted diseased, are careful with theirs and everyone else’s bodily fluid, this is not an immediate issue. An international register of HIV and AIDS patients would be a violation of rights and privacy of those patients (Appleton, 1991). As previously stated, illnesses that are more easily contracted, such as the flu and airborne viruses, do not require everyone else’s curiosity as to has them and who does not. Unless there are situations in which a person might contact the disease from someone else, such as in a medical situation, there is no need for people to have easy access of names and be aware of everyone that has either of the diseases. A register should not exist for patients as it is to their discretion on who knows or does not know. Their medical and disease histories are no one else’s concerns but their own. Global AIDS problem Back in 1981 when the AIDS epidemic first came to light, out of fear people began to assume where it came from and how it could be passed from one person to another. In the chaos that ensued, it was believed that there was a global AIDS problem (Gladwell, 1999). While this might have been true for the first few years as doctors and scientists tried to find and understand all that they could on the disease, outbreaks have long since decreased. In the beginning, as people did not know how AIDS could be contracted, outbreaks were fairly common. Being unaware of prevention techniques and methods, lifestyles were not changed. After doctors and scientists made the breakthrough of understanding AIDS - how it is contracted, what happens when it does, and various techniques to prevent contracting the disease - they were able to rely this information to the public. People were able to take precautions to avoid contracting the disease; furthermore, by inquiring of the sexually transmitted disease of their partners, more precaution was executed. Though there is no cure, and the medication available does not prevent the contracting of AIDS or other sexually transmitted diseases, the education and information easily available to the public have allowed a deterrence from a global AIDS problem. Nowadays, the places that still see numerous outbreaks of the disease are those that are unable to afford proper medication or education in regard to the disease. However, even these locations have seen decreases in how many people contract AIDS yearly due to the missions and projects that are undergone to educate and prevent the disease on a worldwide basis (Rosenthal, 2009). Conclusion When people do not understand something, or if they fear it, they desire to know as much as possible about it. If they feel better about knowing who around them has a sexually transmitted disease, then not only can they take precautions to be careful of physical interaction, but they can feel safer knowing who does or does not have the disease. Unfortunately, by doing this would cause a serious breech in privacy and rights. It should be at the discretion of the person with the disease to tell their friends, family, and partners of their disease; if they do not wish some people to know, then that is their judgement. Even though some of these people fail to mention to partners their disease history, it is still nobody’s business but their own to relay this information. People - the medical community and citizens alike - are taking the retrieving of HIV and AIDS information too far. The sharing of information in regard to HIV and AIDS should be a need-to-know basis, and not something that is done purely out of fear or paranoia. Patients with HIV or AIDS, or any other sexually transmitted disease, have the right to decide who should know about their disease. In many cases, those that want to know have no business in knowing. As there is not a global AIDS problem, there is no need to have mandatory reporting or an international registry of patients with HIV or AIDS (Barton, 2006). It is up to the patients to tell the people they come in contact with; it is their decision to decide who should know and who has no purpose in knowing. This kind of information should not be forced out into the public unless the AIDS disease reaches pandemic portions, but as science and technology continues to prevail, this may never happen. References Appleton, P. (1991). AIDS: Rights, risk, and reason. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis, Inc. Bernstein, J. "Science, Fraud & the Baltimore Case." Commentary 106.6 (1998): 40. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Web. 24 Aug. 2010. Barton, L. (2006). A guide to acting on AIDS: Understanding the global AIDS pandemic and responding through faith in action. United Kingdom: Authentic Media. Gladwell, M. (1999). The Threat of Infectious Diseases Has Been Overstated. Opposing Viewpoints: Epidemics. Ed. William Dudley. San Diego: Greenhaven Press. Rosenthal, B. (2009). Opposing viewpoints: Birth control. Detroit: Greenhaven Press. Van Vugt, J.P. (1993). AIDS prevention and services: Community based research. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. Read More