Red Cross HIV policy questioned<\/p>\n
By Renata Arianingtyas<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Jaka (not his real name) donated blood 32 times
\nbetween 1987 and July 1996 before he found out he had the Human
\nImmunodeficiency Virus (HIV).<\/p>\n
His first concern was whether he had, through blood donations,
\ninfected other people. An official at the Red Cross said airily
\nthat he had not -- the sample of his blood was taken, tested and
\nfound HIV positive, and so was not given to anyone.<\/p>\n
As Support, the magazine for people with HIV or Acquired
\nImmune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), said, Jaka became very upset.
\n\"Why couldn't they tell me outright, so that I didn't give blood
\nfor nothing,\" he said.<\/p>\n
The Red Cross official, however, said the organization was
\nonly adhering to the policy of \"unlinked, anonymous and mandatory
\nHIV-antibody testing\", as stipulated by the 1992 Health Law.<\/p>\n
The policy states that the object of HIV\/AIDS screening is the
\nblood, not the donors. The argument was that the identity of
\ndonors with HIV\/AIDS would be protected.<\/p>\n
The problem was, as Jaka pointed out, HIV screening of blood
\nsamples was not mandatory before 1992, while the first HIV-
\npositive person was found in 1987. There was a possibility that
\nHIV transmission through blood donations occurred before the law
\nwas enacted in 1992.<\/p>\n
Jaka was not the only one.<\/p>\n
As of June this year, the official figure for people with
\nHIV\/AIDS was 550, although officials admitted the actual number
\ncould be 100 times higher. About 50 people in the official record
\nhad at one time or another donated blood; in fact, one of them
\ndonated blood 56 times.<\/p>\n
AIDS activist Nafsiah Mboi, who is also a legislator of the
\nGolkar faction, brought this case up in a recent hearing with
\nMinister of Health Sujudi. She questioned blood donors' right to
\nbe informed of an illness.<\/p>\n
As a health expert, Mboi argued that the World Health
\nOrganization applied the principle of \"voluntary testing and
\nconfidential counseling\", which means that bodies such as the Red
\nCross should tell a blood donor, in strict confidentiality, if
\nhe\/she was infected by HIV. The organizations should also offer
\ncounseling prior to and after testing.<\/p>\n
The same principle, she argued, was also stated in the
\nnational strategy for the campaign against AIDS drafted in 1994
\nby the office of the Coordinating Minister for People's Welfare.<\/p>\n
Sujudi, however, believed the principle of \"unlinked,
\nanonymous and mandatory HIV-antibody testing\" was more
\nbeneficial. Although HIV-infected blood cannot be given away for
\ntransfusion, it can still be used for research purposes.<\/p>\n
He also pointed out that the government would not have to pay
\nfor counseling before and after testing.<\/p>\n
\"If we tell people (about whether a blood donor is HIV
\npositive), they may think blood donations are actually part of an
\nHIV-screening process. Remember, we are still in short supply of
\nblood donors,\" he said.<\/p>\n
Policies<\/p>\n
Chief of Blood Transfusion at the Indonesian Red Cross,
\nMelanie Wikanta, said that both policies were actually in effect
\nand for different reasons.<\/p>\n
The first principle, she said, was used for blood transfusions
\nand survey purposes. The second was only used for diagnostic
\npurposes, where patients voluntarily ask for screening and are
\nprepared to face further developments related to their health.<\/p>\n
In order to meet criteria of unlinked and anonymous screening,
\nblood donors have to reveal details about health and sexual
\npractices.<\/p>\n
The Red Cross, for instance, is also obligated to keep donors
\nanonymous. In practice, however, \"we still keep donor files for
\nemergency cases, such as when we need a certain type of blood,\"
\nshe said.<\/p>\n
\"In addition, there's a decree that screening results of
\npeople with HIV have to be reported to the Ministry of Health. So
\nit's not really unlinked and anonymous,\" Melanie admitted.<\/p>\n
Melanie pointed out that the policy of unlinked and anonymous
\nwas against a doctor's obligation to inform patients of
\nillnesses. Samsuridjal, a health expert and activist at the
\nPelita Ilmu Foundation for AIDS, agreed, adding that an
\nuninformed person with AIDS may unknowingly infect others through
\nmeans other than blood transfusion.<\/p>\n
If informed, a blood donor would be able to take necessary
\nprecautions to avoid infecting others, he said.<\/p>\n
Melanie said many countries choose to inform donors if they
\nhave HIV and offer them counseling. \"Even some African countries
\nwhose welfare levels are lower than Indonesia's,\" Melanie said.<\/p>\n
In fairness, the Red Cross carried out an experiment in
\nJakarta in which donors were given counseling before and after
\nscreening. The medical workers informed donors who were screened
\nwhether or not they had HIV, hepatitis or syphilis.<\/p>\n
Only after donors filled in an informed\/consent form were
\nblood samples taken. Those who were found to be HIV-positive were
\noffered counseling.<\/p>\n
Results of the German-funded experiment were promising. \"There
\nwas no drastic decline in donors, so the government's concern
\nabout this particular problem was not proven,\" Melanie said.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/red-cross-hiv-policy-questioned-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}