On 8/27/07, the California Senate overwhelmingly approved a bill to allow HIV-positive men to have their sperm washed and used for fertility treatments. The bill would allow the washed sperm to be used in artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization under certain guidelines. Since 1989, California has prohibited HIV-positive people from donating sperm, blood or tissue in an attempt to curb the spread of the virus. The law has prevented HIV-positive men from using reproductive technologies that lower the risk of transmitting HIV to their partners. The bill would allow couples to use reproductive technology as long as the HIV-positive donor's sperm is processed to minimize the risk of HIV transmission; informed mutual consent is documented; and the couple uses American Society for Reproductive Medicine-approved sperm processing procedures. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation and Deborah Cohan, medical director of the Bay Area Perinatal AIDS Center, California is one of two states where couples with an HIV-positive man cannot undergo fertility treatments with his donated sperm.
Over 50 diverse non-profit organizations including the Center for HIV Law and Policy, HIV/AIDS service organizations, reproductive rights advocates, womens and other policy organizations and religious groups together submitted a letter to the members of the State-Foreign Operations Appropriations Conference Committee, asking that they maintain the Senate-approved $461 million funding level for bilateral family planning and reproductive health programs and urging them to also adopt the $40 million contribution for the United Nations Population Fund as recommended by the House of Representatives.
The United States has fallen behind on its efforts to improve global health when adjusted for inflation, current U.S. funding is 41% below FY 1995, yet since that time the number of women of reproductive age in the developing world has increased by approximately 275 million women. These women and men lack access to basic reproductive health care such as contraception (reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies and, therefore, reducing the number of abortions), prenatal and pediatric care, and HIV prevention services and testing.
Given the steep funding reductions that have taken place over the last decade, the minimal but critical increase called for by the Senate is warranted
General Comment No. 3 was issued by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child to promote the realization of the human rights of children in the context of HIV/AIDS as guaranteed under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (“CRC”). General Comment No. 3 identifies and elaborates on several rights of children and corresponding obligations of state parties with regard to HIV/AIDS issues such as discrimination, HIV-prevention information, health services, counseling and testing, mother-to-child transmission, and children affected and orphaned by HIV/AIDS. For example, General Comment No. 3 explains that under Articles 24, 13, and 17 of the CRC, children should have the right to access adequate information related to HIV/AIDS prevention and care through both formal and informal channels. It also states that “accessibility of voluntary, confidential HIV-counseling and testing services, with due attention to the evolving capacities of the child, is fundamental to the rights and health of children.”
General Comment No. 3 is especially useful for those seeking to understand how HIV/AIDS impacts children and families and what states’ obligations are to respond; it is best read alongside the CRC, available separately in the Resource Bank.
New York Civil Liberties Union, Reproductive Freedom Project, Financing Ignorance: A Report on Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Funding in New York (September, 2007), assesses the result of an extensive study of the abstinence-only-until-marriage programs In New York that received federal funding through 2006. Since1998, New York has received $3.5 million a year for abstinence-only education, and the state had spent an additional $2.6 million annually on it over the past decade. After reviewing more than 33,000 pages of state and federal documents from 39 funded programs, the NYCLU concluded that ab-only programs across the state contain serious medical inaccuracies and fear-based approaches to health issues; demonstrate bias against LGBT persons and engage in negative gender stereotyping; in many cases redirected money to other after-school activities not directly related to sex education; relied on instructors with no training or expertise as educators; were neither required to, nor on their own, and engaged in evaluation of program effectiveness. In addition, 53 % of abstinence program funding goes to religious groups without real safeguards against the incorporation of religious content in ab-only programming; religious content was in fact included in the programming of some of these groups .
On September 20, 2007, New York State Department of Health Commissioner Richard Daines announced that New York would no longer accept federal abstinence-until-marriage-or-death funding. Since 1998, New York has received $3.5 million a year for abstinence-only programming, and the state had spent an additional $2.6 million annually on it over the past decade. That money will now be used for actual sex education programming, according to Commissioner Daines, whose statement can be found in this section of the Resource Bank.
Language from the document itself, created by the Center for Reproductive Rights, explains that, “this briefing paper addresses the fundamental human rights standards that governments must uphold in creating PMTCT programs. These standards include requirements of informed consent, provider-patient confidentiality, and health-care access without discrimination. The briefing paper concludes with recommendations for government action to ensure that women are treated with dignity and respect through every phase of HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, and care.” The paper also discusses the disproportionate effect that HIV has had on women, and how that effect is exacerbated when women are pregnant.
This report summarizes discussion from two international electronic fora in which advocates, service providers, and HIV-positive women discussed services and policies related to the sexual and reproductive health of HIV-positive women. While the discussions spanned numerous countries and cultures, common threads appeared regardless of the geographical or cultural context. These threads provide lessons for all advocates seeking to promote the well-being of HIV-positive women. Issues such as confidentiality, domestic abuse, and reproductive rights were discussed, with the overarching issue being the high degree of stigma and discrimination experienced by HIV-positive women. Most strikingly, the discussions revealed widespread violations of the human rights of HIV-positive women as a result of the stigma and discrimination that they faced. These violations provided a backdrop to virtually all other topics discussed, creating major obstacles to the attainment of appropriate care and services by HIV-positive women. Another major theme was the lack of the most basic services responsive to the needs of HIV-positive women. Women described significant barriers at the domestic, community, regional and national level in realizing their rights and sexual and reproductive health. Among those mentioned included: inaccessibility of health centers; lack of respect for female patients' rights and judgmental attitudes among health care workers. The report is published by EngenderHealth, Harvard University, International Community of Women Living with HIV/AIDS, Ipas, and the United Nations Population Fund.
This report prepared by the Center for Health and Gender Equity focuses on the role that female condoms can play in HIV prevention, and how the U.S. needs to be the leader in global distribution of, and education about, female condom use.
The document’s executive summary explains that, “as international donors and country governments move forward with plans to make male circumcision more accessible and invest millions of dollars into developing microbicides and vaccines, they cannot afford to overlook the only available HIV prevention intervention that was designed to allow women to initiate protection: female condoms.”
This UNAIDS policy paper is aimed at those with a leadership role in HIV prevention, treatment and care. It highlights the need for strengthening HIV prevention, key actions for an effective response, and core principles underlying these actions. While it appears to be intended primarily for low-income countries, the content is relevant for any efforts to overcome barriers to increased prevention efforts. The paper addresses barriers such as limited capacity to track and demonstrate the results of HIV-prevention programs; the lack of effective and efficient coordination of stakeholders; and limited institutional and human capacity to manage and deliver HIV-prevention programs. The paper also identifies essential policy actions, such as building and maintaining leadership from all sections of society, including people with HIV, and supporting the mobilization of community-based actions. To the extent that the policy position paper focuses on problems inherent in low-income countries, it provides a useful framework for those working in resource-poor areas of any country, including the United States.
This guide aims to provide sexual and reproductive health program planners, managers, and providers with the information necessary to integrate voluntary counseling and testing (VCT) for HIV within their services. VCT is not merely the simple assent to testing, but rather "the process by which an individual undergoes confidential counselling to enable the individual to make an informed choice about learning his or her HIV status and to take appropriate action." Counseling for VCT consists of pre-test, post-test, and follow-up counseling. VCT is a human-rights based approach to HIV testing and treatment that enables patients to make informed decisions; it has been shown to be an effective strategy to facilitate behavior change for HIV prevention, as well as to reduce the stigma and discrimination associated with HIV. The guide discusses the benefits of VCT and the barriers to implementation, and provides specific steps for each stage of implementing VCT, including the initial assessment of community need, planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation. The guide was produced by the United Nations Population Fund and the International Planned Parenthood Foundation.
Because many women do not access health services outside of pregnancy, maternal health services provide an excellent resource for HIV interventions tailored to the needs of pregnant and postpartum women. Such services also provide the opportunity to provide treatment, care, and support for HIV-positive mothers and their families. This guide focuses on the prevention of HIV infection among pregnant and post-partem women, with some discussion of related issues such as prevention of unintended pregnancies, mother-to-child transmission, and treatment for HIV-positive women. The guide can be used to strengthen the integration of HIV prevention into existing maternal health services and build the capacity of health workers to address the prevention needs of pregnant and postpartum women. The guide is particularly useful for planners, program developers, and trainers who are looking for opportunities and guidance to address the underlying gender inequities that present obstacles to successful HIV prevention interventions. For example, it provides guidance for helping women negotiate condom use, advocating with policymakers to change discriminatory legislation, and working with community leaders to raise awareness about common harmful practices. The guide was produced by the United Nations Population Fund and EngenderHealth.
HIV-positive women need access not only to appropriate health care and antiretroviral medications, but also to HIV treatment support. This paper discusses the unique barriers women face to Access to Care, Treatment, and Support (ACTS). Issues include the limitations of health centers as points of access, the lack of research on the effects of antiretrovirals that is specific to women, and the stigma and discrimination that keep women from obtaining the care and support they need. The paper argues that HIV-positive women are in the best position to understand these issues, and that they therefore should be involved in attempts to identify and address these barriers. The paper could be useful for HIV-positive women and their advocates, as well as health-care providers, who seek to understand and reduce gender inequalities and obstacles to HIV treatment. Produced by the International Community of Women Living With HIV/AIDS.
This policy vision paper outlines the key priorities for women with HIV as identified by a group of young HIV positive women from across Eastern and Southern Africa who met in Durban in April 2004. The meeting was a dialogue organized by the International Community of Women Living with HIV/AIDS (ICW) in partnership with Youth Against AIDS Network (YAAN) and Gender AIDS Forum (GAF). Three primary priorities are identified: 1) Access to sexual and reproductive rights, 2) Access to screening, treatment, and prevention, and 3) meaningful participation and action of women with HIV in decision-making at the community, national, and regional levels. Within these three priorities, several specific issues and examples are identified, citing experiences of real women with HIV. The vision paper then provides a call to action, identifying specific steps that must be taken to remedy these shortcomings. The paper provides a useful starting-point for HIV-positive women and advocates seeking to identify, address, and mobilize around HIV issues specific to women, or anyone seeking to understand the unique obstacles facing HIV-positive women. While many of the issues are identified by women around the world, the themes of disenfranchisement, marginalization, and stigma are universal. Produced by the International Community of Women Living with HIV/AIDS.
This fact sheet, created by the American Foundation for AIDS Research (amfAR), describes the rising rates of HIV/AIDS among women in the United States and worldwide, and outlines the factors that have contributed to this rise. For example, it describes economic and social factors that increase women's vulnerability to HIV, such as disproportionate earning power and assets due to prescribed gender roles, and limited access to education, healthcare, and other resources that help women prevent and treat HIV/AIDS. Other factors that may lead to the disproportionate rise in HIV/AIDS among women include biological factors, gender-based violence, and sex differences in HIV treatment. The fact sheet advocates ten policies to address these factors, such as making women a priority in national HIV/AIDS strategies, increasing public knowledge and decreasing stigma and discrimination, reducing barriers faced by women in disadvantaged populations, and investing in the development of female-controlled prevention methods. The fact sheet is a useful resource for those seeking to illuminate the rising HIV/AIDS rates among women and the factors that contribute to it, and those advocating policy changes to address these factors. It is also useful to view it in conjunction with the amfAR survey on the stigma faced by HIV-positive women in the United States, which is posted separately in CHLP's Women's Advocacy Resource Collection.
This document summarizes the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and describes the status of CEDAW in the United States, and describes CEDAW’s impact on several issues, including HIV/AIDS. It provides excellent insight into how CEDAW has been received by the federal government, and state and local government declarations with regard to CEDAW. It also specifically discusses the issues unique to women and HIV/AIDS and how CEDAW addresses these problems.
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (“CEDAW”), addresses women’s rights within the political, social, economic, cultural, and family life. It calls for state parties to overcome barriers of discrimination against women in areas of legal rights, education, employment, health care, politics, and finance, and sets benchmarks. Particularly relevant to HIV/AIDS issues are: the definition of discrimination against women (Article 1); a mandate that states condemn discrimination in all its forms and ensure a legal framework that provides protection and embodies the principle of equality (Article 2); mandate of the end of discrimination in employment, including the right to work, employment opportunities, equal renumeration, free choice of profession and employment, social security, and protection of health, including maternal health (Article 11); requirement of steps to eliminate discrimination in health care, including family planning access (Article 12); a focus on the unique problems that rural woman face in access to health care and adequate living conditions (Article 14); requirment of steps to ensure equality in marriage and family relations, including the right to freely determine the number and spacing of children (Article 16). Article 18 requires parties to submit reports periodically to the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women on measures they have taken to give effect to the Convention.
As a treaty, CEDAW is binding on all parties that ratify it; those who sign but do not ratify it are obligated not to act contrary to the purpose of the convention under Article 18 of the Vienna Convention. CEDAW also has an optional protocol that allows individuals to submit complaints to the Committee arguing that their rights have been violated by the state party, and which allows the Committee to investigate grave or systematic violations of CEDAW. Although the United States has signed CEDAW, it has failed to ratify it, placing it among a small minority of countries including Iran, Sudan, and Somalia.
On September 20, 2007, New York State Department of Health Commissioner Richard Daines announced that New York would no longer accept federal abstinence-until-marriage funding. Since 1998, New York has received $3.5 million a year for abstinence-only programming, and the state had spent an additional $2.6 million annually on it over the past decade. That money will now be used for actual sex education programming, according to Commissioner Daines.
For more information on abstinence programming in New York, see the September, 2007 report of the New York Civil Liberties Unions Reproductive Rights Project, Financing Ignorance: A Report on Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Funding in New York (September, 2007), also included in the Prevention section of CHLPs Resource Bank.
In a case brought by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, two organizations (AOSI and Pathfinder International) that received funding under the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (the Leadership Act) sued the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), among others, seeking to enjoin their narrow reading of the Leadership Act’s provision requiring funded organizations to have a policy expressly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking. In May, 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York had ruled that this requirement violated the organizational plaintiff’s First Amendment rights, restricting their privately-funded speech and forcing them to adopt the U.S. government’s views in order to be eligible for funding. The Court of Appeals remanded in view of proposed new HHS and UNAIDS guidelines to determine whether a preliminary injunction is appropriate.
In February 2008, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint to add Global Health Council and InterAction (international development and public health groups) as plaintiffs; Global Health Council and InterAction then moved for a preliminary injunction on behalf of their members. HHS represented to the court that its July 2007 guidelines will go through a notice and comment process by April 2008, after which the court will assess the constitutionality of the revised guidelines. For copies of pleadings and other information, go to http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/aosi_v_usaid/
In a case brought by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, two organizations (AOSI and Pathfinder International) that received funding under the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003 (the Leadership Act) sued the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), among others, seeking to enjoin their narrow reading of the Leadership Act’s provision requiring funded organizations to have a policy expressly opposing prostitution and sex trafficking. In May, 2006, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that this requirement violated the organizational plaintiff’s First Amendment rights, restricting their privately-funded speech and forcing them to adopt the U.S. government’s views in order to be eligible for funding. The opinion may also be useful to those looking for a source in which to discuss HIV among marginalized groups. The opinion discusses the larger context in which the debate takes place, citing the high rates of HIV among some populations sex workers and the difficulties in reaching this marginalized community.
The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit remanded in view of proposed new HHS and UNAIDS guidelines to determine whether a preliminary injunction is appropriate. In February 2008, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint to add Global Health Council and InterAction (international development and public health groups) as plaintiffs; Global Health Council and InterAction then moved for a preliminary injunction on behalf of their members. HHS represented to the court that its July 2007 guidelines will go through a notice and comment process by April 2008, after which the court will assess the constitutionality of the revised guidelines. For copies of pleadings and other information, go to http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/aosi_v_usaid/
Between March 22 and April 17, 2007, amFAR, the American Foundation for AIDS Research, conducted an online survey to assess stigma facing HIV-positive women in the United States. The survey revealed that HIV-positive women continue to face a high level of stigma in both their personal and their professional lives. The results showed pervasive negative views of HIV-positive women and a high level of discomfort interacting with them. The majority of respondents were uncomfortable with having an HIV-positive woman as a healthcare or childcare provider; most believed that HIV-positive women should not have children. Twenty percent of respondents would not be comfortable with having an HIV-positive woman as a close friend. Many of these responses were based on misinformation and lack of understanding about how HIV is transmitted. These results document how persistent HIV stigma creates obstacles for HIV-positive women on both the personal and professional levels, and how lack of information creates and sustains stigma.
This slide presentation, created by Dr. Susan J. Blumenthal of amfAR, summarizes the survey results. The complete survey results will be available in the Resource Bank after amFAR has fully mined the data collected.
Seven health care professionals, advocates, and HIV-positive women respond to the question, "What do you consider to be the most important treatment or health issues facing women with HIV today?"
This document includes discussion of medical and psychological needs in women with HIV, challenges to establishing and maintaining appropriate treatment for HIV-positive women, and the need for more clinical studies focused on women. Advocates and health care professionals may find this information particularly useful.
The July 2008 version of the guidelines includes language that reaffirms an HIV-positive pregnant woman’s right to retain control over treatment decisions that affect her and her fetus. The Nov. 2007 version had inexplicably omitted language about a woman’s right to refuse ARV therapy without penalty—language that had been included in the Oct. 2006 version. That language has been reinstated, and is accompanied by other language in the document that makes explicit a woman’s right to be counseled in a way that will enable her to make informed decisions about her care.
The recommendations review the special considerations regarding use of antiretroviral drugs for pregnant women, provide new information regarding the use of Viracept, update the results of PACTG 076 and related clinical trials and epidemiologic studies, discuss the use of HIV-1 RNA and antiretroviral drug resistance assays during pregnancy, provide updated recommendations on antiretroviral chemoprophylaxis for reducing perinatal transmission, and provide recommendations related to use of elective cesarean delivery to reduce transmission risk. The guidelines address issues such as evidence of toxicities connected with certain antiretroviral drugs, the importance of information and counseling to pregnant women, various clinical scenarios and appropriate clinical responses, the significance and prevalence of drug resistance, different transmission risks associated with different modes of delivery, recommendations for perinatal and long-term follow-up of HIV-positive women and their infants, and the need for clinical research on factors such as drug safety, drug resistance, stopping antiretroviral therapy, and the use of rapid testing at delivery.
The following sets out the noteworthy changes contained in the July 8, 2008 guidelines in more detail:
1. The introduction eliminates any mention of monotherapy to prevent perinatal transmission. It also adds this language: "After counseling and discussion, a pregnant woman's informed choice on whether to take antiretroviral drugs either for her treatment or for prevention of mother-to-child transmission or to follow other medical recommendations intended to reduce perinatal HIV transmission should be respected. Coercive and punitive policies are potentially counterproductive in that they may undermine provider-patient trust and could discourage women from seeking prenatal care and adopting health care behaviors that optimize fetal and neonatal well-being."
2. In the sections on antepartum care and infant prophylaxis, the guidelines provide updated information about Viracept, the use of which had not been recommended because of "a process-related impurity." As of 3/31/08, the drug was deemed safe for use in all populations, including pregnant women and children.
3. The section on postpartum follow-up care now acknowledges not only the physical changes women go through after delivery, but also the psychological changes.
4. Also in the section on postpartum follow-up, the recommendation on continuation of ARV therapy after delivery has been changed. The recommendation now is to make this decision in consultation with the woman's HIV provider, taking into account several factors. The recommendation used to be continuation of therapy without mention of consultation or consideration of other factors.
5. The section on sterilization as a possible method of contraception now includes the following sentence: "Advance counseling and discussion about sterilization is strongly encouraged in order to enable the woman to make a well informed choice."
The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (“CEDAW”), addresses women’s rights within the political, social, economic, cultural, and family life. It calls for state parties to overcome barriers of discrimination against women in areas of legal rights, education, employment, health care, politics, and finance, and sets benchmarks. Particularly relevant to HIV/AIDS issues are: the definition of discrimination against women (Article 1); a mandate that states condemn discrimination in all its forms and ensure a legal framework that provides protection and embodies the principle of equality (Article 2); mandate of the end of discrimination in employment, including the right to work, employment opportunities, equal renumeration, free choice of profession and employment, social security, and protection of health, including maternal health (Article 11); requirement of steps to eliminate discrimination in health care, including family planning access (Article 12); a focus on the unique problems that rural woman face in access to health care and adequate living conditions (Article 14); requirment of steps to ensure equality in marriage and family relations, including the right to freely determine the number and spacing of children (Article 16).
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the “ICCPR”) represents one-third of what is informally referred to as the “International Bill of Rights.” The other two thirds consist of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the “ICESCR”) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The ICCPR outlines universal civil and political rights; particularly relevant for HIV/AIDS issues are: the right to marry and found a family (Article 23); the right to privacy (Article 17); freedom of expression and information (Article 19); freedom of assembly and association (Article 22); freedom of movement (Article 12); the right to liberty and security of person (Article 9); and freedom from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Article 7). State parties to the convention must also guarantee that any person whose rights under the convention are violated shall have an effective remedy and shall have her right to such a remedy determined by a competent authority provided by the legal system of the state, and that the state will develop the possibilities of judicial remedy specifically.
As a convention, the ICCPR is binding on all parties that ratify it; those who sign but do not ratify it are obligated not to act contrary to the purpose of the convention under Article 18 of the Vienna Convention. Article 40 of the covenant requires state parties to submit reports on the national human rights situation every five years, which are studied and commented on by the United Nations Human Rights Committee. Article 41 establishes an optional procedure by which states grant other states the right to bring a complaint against them before the Committee alleging a violation of human rights; the result is an attempt at a “friendly solution.”
There is also an optional protocol, available separately in the Resource Bank, to allow individuals who are victims of violations of ICCPR to present complaints before the Committee against a state that has ratified the convention and violates its obligations.
The United States is a party to the ICCPR, but not to the optional protocol, and has made several “reservations” – a declaration that purports to exclude or modify the meaning of certain provisions of the treaty. However, the validity of some of these reservations is subject to debate; many states objected to the reservations as contrary to the object and purpose of the ICCPR, and as impermissibly citing domestic law to dodge obligations under the Convention.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child (“CRC”) is an international treaty that discusses many of the rights children, some of which are in addition to those also enjoyed by adults. Particularly relevant to HIV/AIDS issues are: the right to life and corresponding obligation of the state to ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child (Article 6); the right to seek, receive, and impart information (Articles 13, 17); the right to education (Article 28); the right to the highest attainable standard of health, including preventative health care, guidance for parents, and family planning education and services (Article 24); rights of disabled children to special care and to conditions that ensure dignity and facilitate active participation in the community (Article 23);the right to a standard of living adequate for physical, mental, spiritual, moral, and social development (Article 27); and the right to be actors in their own development and to express their opinions in all matters affecting the child (Article 12). States are also obligated to respect and ensure the rights in the CRC without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child’s or his or her parent’s disability (Article 2). The best interests of the child must be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children (Article 3). Moreover, states are obligated to ensure that the child as such protection and care as is necessary for his or her well-being, and to ensure that institutions, services, and facilities responsible for the care or protection of the child conform with the standards established by competent authorities, particularly in the area of safety and health (Article 3).
As a treaty, the CRC is binding on all parties that ratify it; those who sign but do not ratify it are obligated not to act contrary to the purpose of the convention under Article 18 of the Vienna Convention. State parties must submit periodic reports to the Committee on the Rights of the Child detailing their progress on upholding the treaty’s provisions.
General Comment No. 3 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, available separately in the Resource Bank, analyzes the obligations of the CRC in the context of HIV/AIDS.
The United States has signed, but not ratified, the CRC.
The Political Declaration, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in June 2006, renews the General Assembly’s commitment to the Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS issued in 2001. It commits to several actions as part of a human rights-based approach to HIV/AIDS, including: promoting prevention, treatment, care, and support; overcoming legal or other barriers to block access to effective HIV prevention, treatment, care, and support; ensuring pregnant women have access to antenatal care, including voluntary and confidential counseling and testing with informed consent; intensifying efforts to enact, strengthen, or enforce legislation and other measures to ensure those with HIV have full enjoyment of all human rights; eliminating gender inequalities and protecting women’s rights; and addressing the vulnerabilities of children affected by and living with HIV/AIDS.
The Declaration undertakes to provide comprehensive reviews of its progress in these areas in 2008 and 2011 within the annual reviews of the General Assembly.
It requests that the Secretary General of the United Nations include in his annual report the status of the implementation of the 2001 Declaration of Commitment.
A revised and consolidated version of the original guidelines published in 1996, the purpose of the Guidelines is “to assist States in creating a positive, rights-based response to HIV that is effective in reducing the transmission and impact of HIV and AIDS and is consistent with human rights and fundamental freedoms.” The Guidelines are a joint project of the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and UNAIDS. The consolidated guidelines include the revised Guideline 6, which reflects the human rights dimensions of access to HIV prevention, treatment, care, and support. The document consists of three parts: 1) twelve guidelines for state action; 2) recommendations for dissemination and implementation of the Guidelines; and 3) a description of the human rights principles underlying a positive response to HIV. The primary users are intended to be states, but it is also meant to inform intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations, networks of people living with HIV, community-based organizations, networks on ethics, law, human rights, and HIV, and AIDS service organizations. It is also useful for any person looking for interested in a rights-based approach to HIV/AIDS and specific steps needed to implement such an approach.
