HIV testing for HIV prevention: a comparative analysis of policies in Britain, Hungary and Sweden.
This paper compares policies on named HIV testing in the context of HIV prevention in Britain, Hungary and Sweden, and considers the extent to which these policies are based on evidence of effectiveness or on other, more contextual, factors. In Britain, testing has not featured significantly as a prevention strategy, and named testing has generally been carried out only with the voluntary, informed consent of individuals. In Hungary, testing is central to HIV prevention, and is required by law of certain groups. HIV testing is carried out mainly on a voluntary basis in Sweden, but, unlike in Britain, it has been actively promoted by public health authorities. The paper contrasts the 'right not to know' one's HIV status which is widely respected in Britain, with the 'responsibility to find out' which is more pervasive in Hungary and Sweden. Although policy makers in all three countries appear convinced that their's is the right approach, there appears to be as yet a dearth of convincing evidence to support their arguments.
Danziger
R
R
Health Services Research Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK. r.danziger@lshtm.ac.uk
D003140:Communicable Disease Control / Q000458:organization & administration; D015658:HIV Infections / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000517:prevention & control*; D006291:Health Policy; D006801:Humans; D006814:Hungary; D018580:Mandatory Testing; D013548:Sweden; D014342:Truth Disclosure; D006113:United Kingdom; D035141:Voluntary Programs