Re; Comments are invited: Draft GIPA Policy Guidelines for HIV Programmes; Reply by 10 May 2010

[Guest guest]

Dear Shantamay Chatterjee

Re: /message/11371

The draft policy looks comprehensive. The principle of inclusiveness

will definitely help the concerned populations in raising voices for various

concerns.

Though at the same time, I am a bit doubtful how much this would be effective

for those PLHIV living at remote rural India.

I request to consider the below recommendations for inclusion in the GIPA policy

towards meaningful inclusion of PLHIV located in the remote areas.

 

1. Development of IEC:

The GIPA Coordinator at the state level should be involved

in the development process of IEC, not only as mentioned in the draft GIPA

policy, in the dissemination process. The IEC material must be developed in

consultation with the concerned populations “PLHIV (including developing

specific IEC material for PLHIV belonging to MSM/TG/Hijra/IDU/Women/CSW

populations).

Apart from developing generic IEC for mass awareness, the GIPA

Coordinator should provide inputs for development of population specific IEC

material (especially on prevention issues) keeping in mind the socio-economic

and cultural background of the target populations.

GIPA Coordinator also should help the JD (IEC) develop the

IEC in regional and local languages. The content of the material should be

suitable for the target populations and if needed material must be developed

keeping in mind the colloquial language used by the concerned populations.

GIPA Coordinator should ensure that the IEC should not be

developed as merely a print material. While developing the IEC, the cultural

heritage and practices of that particular area and region should be kept in

mind; the form of the IEC and the messages should also be easily understandable

by the target populations.

Therefore, the concerned populations should be involved in the development

process that include from ideation to field testing

of a particular IEC material. The concerned populations would also have a role

in IEC dissemination process.

2. Reduction of Stigma and Discrimination:

The GIPA Coordinator should ensure the placement of community

guides / treatment escorts (representative/s of PLHIV and other vulnerable

groups) at every secondary and tertiary level health settings (where HIV/AIDS

and related services available at minimum level) to mitigate the stigma and

discrimination against PLHIV.

3. Accessing the livelihood options:

GIPA Coordinator should be liable in coordinating with the state

level PLHIV network/ governing body so that the beneficiaries of the network/s

could access the various government health and development schemes.

Apart from that, GIPA Coordinator should also be responsible for collaborating

with concerned state and district level network/s in linking up the PLHIV,

especially the WLHIV, with the existing self help groups and other micro finance

initiatives.

Therefore, the GIPA principle should ensure that PLHIVs most in need from rural

and sub-urban areas would be self sufficient in terms

economic independence.

4. Duties of different parties:

As per the language of rights based approach the concept of

duty bearers and rights holders, the GIPA Coordinator would be the duty bearers

and the concerned populations would be rights holders. Both the duty bearers and

rights holders should be made aware of each others roles and responsibilities.

Therefore, the GIPA policy should clearly specify the roles

and responsibilities of GIPA Coordinator, PLHIV groups and others civil society

organizations. All the parties should be made aware of representation and

accountability issues associated with them in decision making process as well as

in the service delivery mechanism.

Regards

Subhadip Roy

SAATHII, Kolkata Office

www.saathii.org

e-mail: <subhadip_roy_04@...>