|
|
The power of partnership,
and the call to re-authorize PEPFAR
E. Ablorh-Odjidja, Ghanadot
Dr. Thomas Kenyon, Principal Deputy Coordinator and Chief
Medical officer, Office of Global Aids Coordinator, spoke to the
media at a press conference in Washington, DC, December 5, 2007,
about the progress of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS
Relief (PEPFAR) in the developing world.
PEPFAR, he said, would end by 2008 after the expenditure of some
$18.3 billion, on behalf of the American people to fight global
HIV/AIDS. It would soon be followed by a proposal under
consideration in Congress for $30 billion to continue and expand
the scope of the original PEPFAR plan for the next five years.
“Assuming Congress meets the President’s request for Fiscal year
2008” Dr. Kenyon explained, the entire PEPFAR project would
commit some “$48.3 billion across 10 years to fight HIV/AIDS.”
Dr. Kenyon, who is a board certified pediatrician,
epidemiologist, clinician and a researcher has served for 17
years in these various capacities in the Third World, and has lived in
places like Namibia and Botswana.
The original PREFAR phase, according to Dr. Kenyon, has
progressed according to schedule. Through partnerships with the
G8, governments, non-governmental, faith and community based
organizations, the plan has been able to achieve some notable
successes.
It was within the partnership arrangement that, he said, PEPFAR
has been able to build capacity and assure sustainability for
most aspects of its plan.
To illustrate some the benefits of this partnership, Dr. Kenyon
talked about an initiative dubbed “country led response.” It was
through this approach that some African partners of PEPFAR offered
the ABC - Abstain, Be faithful and Correct and Consistent Condom
usage – approach.
Though the ABC approach has become controversial today, Dr.
Kenyon emphasized that it was essentially meant to encourage
youngsters to wait until they were biologically and socially
ready to become sexually active.
The controversy aside, Dr. Kenyon’s point was that there was no
gainsaying the fact that abstinence could certainly prevent
consequences to early sexual activities that go beyond HIV/AIDS.
Contemporary cases of teenage pregnancies affirm the disruptive
nature of this factor in education for girls; incidences which by themselves
could easily engender other negative social outcomes.
Another benefit that ABC could possibly bring was when people
already infected and living with the HIV/AIDS uphold the
practice. It could mean holding back the rapid spread of the
contagion.
The core of the problem for HIV/AIDS was to identify what Dr.
Kenyon called the “drivers” of the disease in society.
Essentially, these were factors within behavior patterns and
lifestyles that helped the spread of the virus.
He said “If you are not able to describe the drivers, you will
not be able to create a viable response” to the HIV/AIDS
problem.
One huge “driver” for Africa that desired the most attention, Dr.
Kenyon noted, was sex with “multiple partners.” He made sure to
differentiate this aspect of sex from that with “sequential
partners.” Without saying it, this writer knew that control in
this one area in Africa would be like driving a stake through
the heart of the HIV/AIDS Dracula.
The ability to bring change in this critical area, however, was
beyond the aptitude of PEPFAR. Since the behavior pattern was
societal, the affected society would have to be more responsible
in shaping the outcome. PEPFAR, Dr Kenyon said, could only act
as catalyst.
But he had some suggestions. The view that empowerment of women
in various economic activities could reduce their dependency on
relations that involve multiple sexual partners and other risk
factors was agreeable to many.
At the same time, the thought of empowerment should invite the
question as to why the thousands of condoms bought by PEPFAR
from abroad could not be manufactured inside Africa? It
certainly could be one way to create jobs, to empower the
disadvantaged and to reduce the poverty and the psychological
mindset that allowed a fatalistic view of the HIV/AIDS contagion
to spread.
There is also a question of how much attention PEPFAR has paid
to indigenous medicine in its plans in Africa. Granted that
traditional medicine has its stock of charlatans, a request for
a definite product, without the usual mumbo jumbo, could be an
approach to consider.
Many of these medicine men are veritable botanists. Why,
therefore, not set up a prestigious prize or a life time award
for those who come forward with useful knowledge? A million
dollar award could, perhaps, purchase the information on a
mixture of two or more herbs that can offer something approaching a
cure.
In all, the goal for PEPFAR, as described by Dr. Kenyon, for the
next 10 years could be the best so far.. The intention, Dr.
Kenyon promised, would be to boost care for more than “12
million people, including 5 million orphans and vulnerable
children,” offer treatment “for 2.5 million people” and to
provide “prevention care for over 12 million people worldwide.”
E. Ablorh-Odjidja,Publsiher www.ghanadot.com, Washington, DC,
December 7, 2007
Permission to publish: Please feel free to publish or reproduce,
with credits, unedited. If posted at a website, email a copy of
the web page to publisher@ghanadot.com . Or don't publish at
all.
|
