Introduction
Currently HIV and AIDS, is the world’s worst pandemic. It is responsible for deaths of millions of people weekly around the world. Efforts have been made to contain the pandemic but in vain, and that is why researchers are concentrating on the social determinants of health in the context of HIV/AIDS. This is in their bid to try lessening the severity of the disease. Therefore, this paper intends to highlight on the social determinants of health in regard to HIV/AIDS.
Main body
The social determinants of health in regard to HIV/ AIDS are embodied in education (how ignorance impacts on the spread); poverty (how the lack of basic necessities can influence prostitution); the availability of basic medical services that help in reducing severity; gender aspects in some societies; availability of hospitals and institutions offering medical services; nongovernmental organization that help in impact reduction, social amenities and structural interventions.
The issue of social determinants of health cannot be completed without the mention of structural interventions. As shown by Blankenship et al (2006), “structural interventions refer to public health interventions promoting health by altering the structural context within which health is produced and reproduced”. As an intervention, this aspect has only of late received attention in regard to the pandemic. It includes “community mobilization, integration of HIV services, contingent funding and educational and economic interventions” (Blankenship et al, 2006).
The above aspects include a mixture of actions which encompass the creation of awareness, identification of the challenges to prevention measures; emphasis on prevention measures rather than treatment, VCT services and anti-retroviral therapy medication; funding aimed at boosting prevention measures and the boost of economic aspects together with educational interventions (aimed at teaching people on the pandemic and boosting peoples economic status to avoid social ills such as prostitution).
Prevention and control, is another aspect that is deeply rooted in the social determinants of health. This is aimed at curbing all diseases associated with the pandemic in the society i.e. TB and malaria. “Most cities in the world are poorly equipped to handle the ecological and social pressures brought on by the rapid urban population increase and its attendant consequences” (Annette et al, 2007). Circumstances related to the mentioned diseases are the likes of mobility, overcrowding, and inefficient regulatory interventions do inhibit social interventions.
As stated by Luginaah, Yiridoe & Taabazuing (2005), regardless of the increase in knowledge on the pandemic, research has shown that nations having high prevalence speed have limited behavior changes. This is due to voluntary testing and nongovernmental intervention. This has become a very important shot in the arm aimed at combating the disease.
Mc Donald & Roberts (2006) on their part assert that “whenever the epidemic strikes it imposes severe human and social consequences. Family life is disrupted as adults cannot work to support their families. This reduces productivity while increasing healthcare expenses. Therefore AIDS creates substantial economic costs”.
Another factor that is a social determinant of health is centered on people taking care of AIDS victims. Currently the spread of the pandemic in rural and urban areas is almost same. The spread of the pandemic has impinged on the willingness of care givers to carry out their duties efficiently. One of the reasons is the fear that they might easily contact the disease (Preston et al, 2000).
Low income on the other hand, is another significant social determinant. As shown by Meredith et al (2000), “lack of health insurance has been repeatedly identified as one of the significant barriers to obtaining healthcare for AIDS victims”. This together with lack of basic necessities (the needed proper diet) and the inability to obtain required medication has had a significant negative impact.
The issue of gender is again an important social determinant as far as the pandemic is concerned. Turmen for example says that women are more vulnerable to the pandemic. Among other things the author says that, “women lack power and economic independence to negotiate safe sex or insist on condom use. One again, the women who exchange sex for income seldom mention safe sex” (Turmen, 2003).
Conclusion
The above mentioned situations are currently most significant in the spread of HIV/AIDS. Initially they were overlooked but countries are realizing just how important they are in regard to the pandemic spread and severity. Therefore as shown in this paper if all these situations are addressed effectively countries can mitigate the pandemic to some extent.
References
Annette, et al. (2007). The Prevention and Control of HIV/AIDS, TB and Vector-borne Diseases in Informal Settlements: Challenges, Opportunities and Insights. Journal of urban health, 83 (1): 65-72.
Blankenship, et al. (2006). HIV Perspective After 25 Years: Structural Interventions. Journal of urban health, 83 (1): 60-68.
Luginaah, I., Yiridoe, E., & Taabazuing, M. (2005). From mandatory to voluntary testing: Balancing human rights, religious and cultural values, and HIV/AIDS prevention in Ghana. Social Science and Medicine, 61 (1): 1690-1698.
Mc Donald, S., & Roberts, J. (2006). AIDS and economic growth: A human capital approach. Journal of Development Economics, 80 (1): 229-245.
Meredith, et al. (2000). Housing Status and Health Care Service Utilization Among Low-income Persons with HIV/AIDS. J Gen Intern Med, 15 (4): 731-737.
Preston, et al. (2000). Personal and Social Determinants of Rural Nurses Willingness to Care for Persons with AIDS. Research in Nursing, 15 (5): 67-77.
Turmen, T. (2003). Gender and HIV/AIDS. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 82 (4): 412-418.