IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0155510.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Non-Uptake of HIV Testing in Children at Risk in Two Urban and Rural Settings in Zambia: A Mixed-Methods Study

Author

Listed:
  • Sonja Merten
  • Harriet Ntalasha
  • Maurice Musheke

Abstract

This article investigates reasons why children who were considered at risk of HIV were not taken for HIV testing by their caregivers. Qualitative and quantitative data collected in Zambia from 2010–11 revealed that twelve percent of caregivers who stated that they had been suspecting an HIV infection in a child in their custody had not had the child tested. Fears of negative reactions from the family were the most often stated reason for not testing a child. Experience of pre-existing conflicts between the couple or within the family (aOR 1.35, 95% CI 1.00–1.82) and observed stigmatisation of seropositive children in one’s own neighbourhood (aOR 1.69, 95% CI1.20–2.39) showed significant associations for not testing a child perceived at risk of HIV. Although services for HIV testing and treatment of children have been made available through national policies and programmes, some women and children were denied access leading to delayed diagnosis and treatment–not on the side of the health system, but on the household level. Social norms, such as assigning the male household head the power to decide over the use of healthcare services by his wife and children, jeopardize women’s bargaining power to claim their rights to healthcare, especially in a conflict-affected relationship. Social norms and customary and statutory regulations that disadvantage women and their children must be addressed at every level–including the community and household–in order to effectively decrease barriers to HIV related care.

Suggested Citation

  • Sonja Merten & Harriet Ntalasha & Maurice Musheke, 2016. "Non-Uptake of HIV Testing in Children at Risk in Two Urban and Rural Settings in Zambia: A Mixed-Methods Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0155510
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155510
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155510
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155510&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0155510?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0155510. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.