Same party, another mother, vehemently telling us what a disgrace it was
that the govt hospitals will not do C-sections on all HIV positive mothers,
to avoid transmitting HIV to the innocent babies.  I hadn't heard that this
was a major route of infection for the newborn.  Can't see why it doesn't
happen in utero, or even how they can tell when transmission occurs.  Does
anyone have more information on this?  Would caesareans save more babies
(ignoring the higher risk of the operation to the mother, if one can....,
let alone the incredible expense and use of non-existent resources)?  I
applaud her concern, but it seems misplaced.

HIV/AIDS is a huge problem here, with 30% of mothers at govt clinics being
HIV +ve, and apparently 30 - 40% of their babies eventually developing AIDS.
Great secrecy still surrounds victims due to the hangover of a strange
policy of ministerial denial of the problem in the mid 80s.  There is
extreme confidentiality in diagnosis, to the extent that the spouse is not
informed, nor even the medical personnel attending the patient.
Many of the patients do not want to know their status either - I am sure
this is worldwide.

Some doctors here are beginning to discourage breastfeeding because of HIV
transmission - a blanket discouragement, despite the official govt policy to
encourage universal breastfeeding with individual counselling for those who
know their HIV status.  As someone said, this is trying to fix the problem
on the wrong side of the belt.  Traditionally, men are often polygamous,
continue to have affairs outside marriage *particularly when the wife is
pregnant*, and refuse to use condoms.  We hear that newly infected women are
most likely to pass on the infection via the breastmilk.  It is true the
AIDS problem is not being handled well.... but when are people going to
start taking responsibility for their actions??
Jacquie, Zimbabwe