|
Essential
Action
P.O.
Box 19405 Washington, D.C.
20036
Telephone:
202-387-8030 ð
Fax: 202-234-5176 ð
E-mail: action@essential.org
The IMF, the
World Bank asnd
the HIV/AIDS Crisis
How
does Third World debt affect health care and HIV/AIDS treatment
and prevention?
In
two destructive ways: First, governments with overwhelming foreign
debt payment obligations must cut back on what they might otherwise
allocate to the healthcare sector, including funds that may be used
for HIV/AIDS prevention -- condoms, HIV testing, posters, STD treatment,
etc. They are utterly unable to address the challenge of HIV/AIDS
treatment. Second, export earnings that go to service foreign debts
are not available to pay for imports of pharmaceuticals, equipment
or other products.
These
problems are severely compounded by structural adjustment policies.
What
is structural adjustment, and how does it affect health care expenditures?
As
a condition for receiving loans, the International Monetary Fund
(IMF) and World Bank require countries to adopt austerity programs
known as structural adjustment. Key structural adjustment measures
include: privatizing government-owned enterprises and government-provided
services, slashing government spending, orienting economies to promote
exports, trade liberalization, higher interest rates, eliminating
subsidies on consumer items such as foods, fuel and medicines and
tax increases.
After
undergoing severe criticisms for forcing cuts in health care and
education spending, the IMF and World Bank now insist that their
current structural adjustment programs carve out social services
from mandated budget cuts. This is a disputed claim.
The
focus on health care spending obscures a more important issue with
health care provision, Kolko notes. Structural adjustment policies
have stagnated economic growth and increased income and wealth inequality
throughout the developing world -- and the resultant poverty has
severely undermined the standard of living and quality of health
care for most people in poor countries.
How
do fee-for-service plans and privatization affect health care provision?
Not
surprisingly, charging for health care limits access. And user fees
are a central feature of the fee-for-service schemes that the IMF
and Bank push in their structural adjustment and sectoral adjustment
programs.
One
World Bank report argued that the pre-1980s policy of many African
states "to treat [health care] as a right of citizenry and
to attempt to provide free services to everyone ... prevents the
government health system from collecting revenues that many patients
are both able and willing to pay." Another report added, "When
a service costs money, people will think twice about demanding it."
When
the World Bank mandated that Kenya impose charges of US$2.15 for
STD clinic services, attendance fell 35 to 60 percent, with similar
results seen throughout the developing world.
What
does this mean in people terms?
Here
is how Njoki Njoroge Njehž, who is from Kenya and now direct the
50 Years is Enough campaign, describes her experience: "When
I was a young girl growing up near Nairobi, Kenyatta Hospital
was the pride of East and Central Africa -- a sophisticated regional
center of care like, say, the Washington Hospital Center."
"When
I visited my aunt there in 1997, she was sharing a bed with another
patient. Most wards
have no beds because of lack of resources, and all the beds had
two people in them. Guards used to check visitors to prevent them
from bringing food in from the outside; now the guards are gone
and if you don't bring food your relatives simply won't eat.
My aunt was lucky that the dollars I brought with me could
buy the medications she was prescribed, and which we had to purchase
elsewhere and bring back to the hospital for the nurse to administer.
Not everyone has relatives in the U.S., or can get to Kenyatta,
the best public hospital in Kenya -- which is far from being one
of the poorest African countries."
"In
1981, there were ten thousand people for every doctor in Kenya;
by 1994 that ratio had gone up to nearly 22,000 people for every
doctor. In Uganda,
just to our west, there were 661 people for every hospital bed in
1981, while in 1994 there were 1,092 for every bed.
In Ghana, a country often touted as an example of how structural
adjustment can work, the percentage of infants with low birth weight
has gone from 5% in 1988 to 17% in the period of 1992-1995."
Does
structural adjustment contribute to the spread of HIV/AIDS?
In
the journal AIDS, Dr. Peter Lurie and collaborators argued yes.
They argued that the displacement of the rural sector under structural
adjustment programs -- as imports undermine local farmers and the
shift to large-scale plantations for exports further displaces the
rural population -- contributes to migration and urbanization. Many
men leave rural villages for work in big cities or in mines, contract
HIV/AIDS from casual sex partners or sex workers, and then spread
the disease to spouses in their home village. The displacement of
children and young women into the cities has led to a sharp increase
in commercial sex work and heightened rates of HIV/AIDS.
"The
breakdown of health delivery systems that may accompany structural
adjustment programs also inhibits surveillance and testing for HIV,"
Lurie, et. al. add. "Even HIV screening of blood used for transfusion
can be limited; in some countries only 50 percent of blood transfusions
were screened. Funding shortages also encourage the reuse of disposable
syringes, potentially contributing to HIV transmission."
What
are the solutions to these problems?
First,
the debts of the poorest countries must be cancelled. Second, the
structural adjustment package must be scrapped, with countries free
to pursue policies designed to emphasize building up of the local
economy and maintaining the government's role in guaranteeing health
care and other essential services. Third, the World Bank and IMF's
emphasis on health care privatization and fee for services must
be abandoned.
For
more information, visit the Health Gap web site at www.healthgap.org
|