Global AIDS Bill Passage Good News But Marred by Abstinence-Until-Marriage Clause

May 1, 2003

Washington, DC — Population Action International (PAI) today welcomed passage of the global AIDS authorization bill by the House of Representatives, but expressed concern over the inclusion of abstinence-until-marriage language.

"It’s disheartening that a good bill with good intentions became burdened by ideology," said Sally Ethelston, Vice-President of Communications at Population Action International. "What could have been a giant leap forward in the battle against HIV/AIDS was instead marred by amendments responding to political and not program needs."

While the House version of the AIDS bill triples U.S. assistance for HIV/AIDS care, treatment, and prevention within five years, it also contains amendments that undermine proven successful prevention methods and overemphasize abstinence approaches. An amendment offered by Rep. Joseph Pitts (R-PA) requires one-third of HIV/AIDS prevention funds to promote "abstinence-until-marriage."

"We know from the Ugandan model that a multifaceted ‘ABC’ strategy — Abstinence, Be Faithful, Use Condoms — can successfully prevent HIV/AIDS," continued Ms. Ethelston. "A lopsided emphasis on abstinence is irresponsible. Efforts to prioritize the ‘A’ or ‘B’ to the exclusion of the ‘C’ will only make condoms less accessible to those who need them most."

Ms. Ethelston added, "This amendment completely denies the reality of AIDS in Africa, where women are disproportionately impacted by the spread of HIV. Gender inequities frequently leave them powerless to ‘just say no’ to sex, and unable to know whether their partners are being truly monogamous. Not to mention the fact that men in sub-Saharan Africa have access on average to fewer than five condoms per year."

The House also passed a "conscience" amendment offered by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), which excuses groups that express a "moral or religious objection" from providing comprehensive, accurate information about condoms or other prevention services.

Ms. Ethelston said, "Such an amendment can only perpetuate the cycle of ignorance and misinformation that has fueled the spread of this pandemic in the first place. The ‘moral imperative’ is not to impose certain mores on the world’s most vulnerable — but to save their lives, with whatever it takes."

"As the Senate begins consideration of HIV/AIDS legislation, we urge Senators to focus on the best interests of the people these bills are intended to help," concluded Ms. Ethelston. "It’s time to bring down the barriers and build access to a full-range of life-saving services."