Do HIV infected women in Kenya have the guaranteed right to free choice contraception?

Government’s commitment to voluntary and free-choice family planning practices comes to question as Kenyan HIV infected women continue being coerced to use the IUCD. The Citizen TV on November 22, 2011 ran a story[1] about a widow in Mbita who has benefited from a fish farming venture supported by a grant from an American based non-governmental organisation. The sole qualification she needed to qualify for the grant was to be HIV positive and willing to be fitted with an intrauterine contraceptive device (IUCD). It is probable that this poor widow had no choice but to accept the condition- she needed help to support her family and, to that end, would take considerable risk. The question here is whether she had any choice in embarking on this method of family planning? Is it fair to assume she was in fact coerced to accept an IUCD by the grant of much needed cash?  What is the position of the Kenya Government on the matter?

Cash for contraception? Photo: Edgar Mwakaba/IRIN

According to Prof Peter Anyang’ Nyong’o, Minister for Medical Services, family planning practice should be voluntary[1]. Service providers must educate clients on the range of choices available, and let them choose that which suits them best. “But to flash money and say take this – no, that is not how to do it!” he added. However, it is not clear what the Minister has done to arrest the coercive practices.

Coerced sterilization of HIV-positive women came to light in 2007 when 13 cases were documented in Namibia[2]. Shortly afterwards there were reports of HIV-positive women in Kenya being paid money to accept long-term contraceptive methods, particularly IUCD[3]. These activities in Kenya (which include the case in point) are supported by Project Prevention, an American NGO founded in 1997 which also pays female drug users in the U.S. and UK to be sterilized. Whereas HIV-positive women do have a legitimate need for FP services, like every other woman they are entitled to exercise choice free of coercion or manipulation through incentives. Use of incentives and disincentives to pressure poor people to be sterilized was rejected at both the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo, and the 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing. In particular, the Beijing Platform for Action states clearly that “The human rights of women include their right to ….decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality, including sexual and reproductive health, free of coercion, discrimination and violence”.

Coercion for sterilisation through incentives reached its peak in India during the rule of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, with her government’s policy of sterilising (vasectomy) millions of Indian men who had fathered two or more children, being compensated with a transistor radio! This policy was ruthlessly and often illegally applied to the extent it came to symbolize the dangers of authoritarian rule[4]. It is notable that payment for sterilisation continues in India to this very day; for example, a medical college was recently reported to pay men that opt for non-scalpel vasectomy 1,100 Indian Rupees[5]. In Uttar Pradesh, to obtain a shotgun licence requires two people being sterilised; for a revolver licence, the price would be five. Wealthy farmers have managed to stock their armory through forcible sterilization of their poor farm hands![6]

Proponents of coerced contraception are usually driven by the wish to create an HIV-free tomorrow by preventing birth of children infected by their mothers. It is known that in Africa before the advent of antiretroviral drugs up to 40 percent of children born to HIV infected mothers were also infected. However, in Kenya, there has been an increasing access to services for prevention of mother-to-child HIV transmission (PMTCT), most often offered at antenatal clinics and at delivery. According to the Kenya Service Provision Assessment Survey of 2010, 58% of all health facilities nationwide offered some component of PMTCT services, with 33% of these facilities providing all four components for the minimum PMTCT package (HIV testing with pre- and post-test counseling, ARV prophylaxis for mother and newborn, counseling on infant feeding, and FP counseling or referral). This is increasingly reducing the incidence of perinatal transmission as well as rates of mortality among infected children. Accumulated evidence to date shows that administration of antiretroviral therapy to the mother during pregnancy, labour and delivery, and then to the newborn, as well as delivery by Caesarean section for women with high viral loads, can reduce the rate of perinatal HIV transmission to well below 10 percent[7]. What this means is that despite the many challenges not addressed here, it is possible to dream of an HIV-free generation without having to resort to cruel acts of forced contraception for HIV infected persons. Indeed this was the view expressed by UNAIDS Executive Director Michel Sidibé, during a visit to a Millennium Villages Projects (MVP) in Kenya: “We have seen that it is possible to virtually eliminate infant HIV infections in high-income countries ….Now we must apply the knowledge and tools to create an AIDS-free generation in Africa and the rest of the world.”[8]


[1]Brett Davidson and Lydia Guterman. What’s Wrong with Paying Women to Use Long-Term Birth Control? February 21, 2011 http://blog.soros.org/2011/02/whats-wrong-with-paying-women-to-use-long-term-birth-control/ accessed October 22 2011

[3]Brett Davidson and Lydia Guterman. What’s Wrong with Paying Women to Use Long-Term Birth Control? February 21, 2011 http://blog.soros.org/2011/02/whats-wrong-with-paying-women-to-use-long-term-birth-control/ accessed October 22 2011

[4] “The World: The Issue that Inflamed India” Lawrence Malkin, TIME New Delhi Bureau Chief, Monday, Apr. 04, 1977

[5] Team to probe forced sterilisation charge Express News Service

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/team-to-probe-forced-sterilisation-

[6] Outrage at guns for sterilisation policy, Indian farmers given firearms licences as an incentive to curb population growth. Randeep Ramesh in Lakhimpur The Guardian, Monday 1 November 2004 23.56 GMT http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/nov/01/india.randeepramesh

Advertisements
Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: