Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closeBut is AIDS-related stigma understood?
Posted by plosmedicine on 31 Mar 2009 at 00:01 GMT
Author: Arachu Castro
Position: Assistant Professor of Social Medicine
Institution: Harvard Medical School
E-mail: arachu_castro@hms.harvard.edu
Submitted Date: November 09, 2006
Published Date: November 13, 2006
This comment was originally posted as a “Reader Response” on the publication date indicated above. All Reader Responses are now available as comments.
Although its title attracted me to read this paper, I was quickly disappointed. First, it advances a Malthusian approach that applaudes the "potential benefits" of AIDS-related stigma. Second, it reflects a poor understanding of some of the existing literature on AIDS-related stigma cited in the article. The authors claim that the idea that stigma and discrimination thwart efforts to control the epidemic and constitute barriers for prevention and treatment is said over and over, with no evidence, "like a shibboleth," and cite eleven references that are meant as examples of this uncritical repetition. Surprisingly though, some of the articles cited already argue that "confusion surrounds debate over stigma as a barrier to introducing antiretrovirals to poor countries or to making voluntary HIV tests accessible" and that "to assess AIDS-related stigma and declare it a cause rather than both cause and consequence of inequality will probably weaken efforts to address AIDS among those with heightened risk of HIV because of poverty, racism, and gender inequality" [1]. Finally, the authors show limited understanding of social and sexual dynamics. Their distinction between "subpopulations" and "the general population" seems to imply that the former, such as the subpopulation of sex workers, lives in isolation of the latter and that it takes a certain amount of time for HIV to go from one to the other; it implies, for example, that sex workers first transmit HIV amongst themselves and that at some point they transmit it to "the general population." I am afraid that the authors are actually conceptualizing HIV transmission in the similar linear frameworks that they are trying, unsuccessfully, to criticize.
[1] Castro A, Farmer P. Understanding and Addressing AIDS-Related Stigma: From Anthropological Theory to Clinical Practice in Haiti. American Journal of Public Health 2005, 95:53-59.