LAST October I heard that all Muslims have to undergo HIV testing before getting married. My main reason for disagreeing with this edict is the blatant abuse of human rights of the individual.

I am sure that many will condemn my disapproval. And I also expect many will agree wholeheartedly with the government and religious department’s ruling.

On Monday, I read that the Perak menteri besar, who had earlier proposed that HIV sufferers should be quarantined, had relented and suggested that they should be treated in special wards and finally that the sufferer should prove to his intended spouse that he was undergoing treatment (”Put HIV carriers in special wards, says MB” — NST, Dec 28).

Is Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin aware that the HIV sufferer is already under intense pressure from his debilitating condition? He does not need more stigma and discrimination. HIV sufferers will only go underground with all this extra scrutiny.

If we are to assume that the relationship and ensuing marriage of two people has a solid foundation based on love and trust then we should assume that infected partners will inform their spouse of their condition.

For those who argue that the person who is infected may not be truthful, and that it would need an HIV test to prove he has the disease, then they should ask themselves why the family of the spouse that the infected person is to marry would allow the marriage to proceed.

The Malaysian public is not as well informed or as forgiving as its Western counterparts. Moreover, our practices are steeped in deep-rooted prejudices.

The stigma and discrimination that we show towards HIV/AIDS sufferers will drive them underground. Those of you who think we are more tolerant should admit that we are not. The majority of us are still not mature enough, yet.

Look at how we treat the disabled or those suffering from mental health. Today the Perak MB talks about HIV. Tomorrow another person may indeed pass a law on another less debilitating disease. We are slowly marching backwards.

Anyone is susceptible. The virus that causes HIV does not discriminate by age, race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status. However, those more at risk are men who indulge in gay sex, drug users and commercial sex workers.

Let us assume a hypothetical situation whereby a Muslim couple who would like to get married test negative for HIV. What if either partner then has unprotected sex with other people and gets infected with HIV?

The HIV test is no guarantee of a faithful marriage. If the man decides to take on a second wife, does he have to be HIV tested again? If he is not faithful and is HIV-positive, but is not tested, then he will infect his new second wife.

I also wonder what happens to those teenagers and a tiny percentage of children (especially those forced against their will) who are sexually active? It would be naive of us to think that all our teenagers are virgins when they get married.

There are those who may never marry at all but who will nevertheless remain sexually active. If the HIV test is a pre-condition for marriage and is to stop HIV infection, then it fails miserably.

The virus does not discriminate, so to be fair, all races should undergo the test. But I am not going to advocate that. I would rather the money to be used for all this HIV testing before marriage be used to educate all strata of people of all races and all religions.

Let us be pragmatic in our response to HIV/AIDS.

The government should increase funding and long-term investment for the prevention, identification and treatment of HIV/AIDS.

It would also help if the money is channelled to the appropriate departments and also be used to provide more health workers for testing, supplies, counselling and the associated services like maternal and child health.

There should be better coordination between the non-governmental organisations, the government and other donors so that there is no duplication of effort or repeat of inaccuracies.

We also need to focus on a specific AIDS programme in our workplaces, schools, learning establishments to educate, provide information and have prevention services. If necessary, there should be a supply of free condoms at massage parlours or barber shops.

Finally, the antiretroviral drugs used in HIV treatment should be supplied without any interruption. This means that management and supply should be well organised.

The ABC approach is still widely used worldwide for preventing HIV infection:

A — abstaining from sex until marriage;

B — be faithful to your partner (or reduce the number of partners);

C — use condoms consistently and correctly (protected sex).

None of these is infallible because of cultural, behavioural and legal norms, physical restrictions or control.

I still maintain that the best weapon is education and information, not short-sighted knee-jerk reactions nor narrow-minded decisions.

MARIAM MOKHTAR, Ipoh

Source: NST – December 31, 2008