ALQ,June 2007 Edition – Access to Information

Editorial...

…the right of access to information is often depicted as the ‘oxygen of democracy’ or the ‘oxygen of knowledge’ and underpins and supports other fundamental human rights and freedoms. [Richter, 2005]

It is within this context that this issue of the ALQ focuses on access to information and the extent to which the available information and messaging facilitates informed decision-making in the context of HIV and AIDS. The various articles in this edition examine a range of information sources, as they relate to HIV and AIDS realities and impact on people’s choices. The impact of the information disseminated through HIV awareness and prevention mass media campaigns; the extent to which cultural information influences people’s choices in the context of HIV and AIDS, religion impacts on HIV-related stigma, and sex and HIV information and education at schools facilitate informed decision-making; and language as an area informing sexual and reproductive choices; as well as legislative provisions promoting the right of access to information are some of the issues discussed in this edition. This issue continues with the integral features of the ALQ, introducing experiences and challenges from a project in Hillcrest, Kwa-Zulu Natal, aimed at behavioural change through providing access to sex and HIV information to learners, as well as from Yabonga, a project in the Western Cape, inspiring women living with HIV; ‘making a point’ about the need for public involvement in legislative processes; and ‘commenting’ on the dire need for community home-based care services to be recognised and protected.

In this edition, Emma Harvey explores the impact of HIV awareness and prevention mass media campaigns on people’s sexual choices and behaviour. Examining three ‘major’ South African mass media campaigns as to their exposure, message content and impact, she argues that the impact of these campaigns is rather limited, since the information disseminated fails to provide facts required to make informed choices, and fails to take into account the context in which messages are heard and decisions are made – thus, people are not in the position to make free and fully informed choices.

The extent to which culture, as one source of information, influences people’s choices and, at times, defines people’s risk of HIV infection, is explored by Nonhlanha Mkhize. Looking at the concept and meaning of culture in people’s lives, the ways in which cultural information is accessed, and the use of cultural information in decision-making within the context of HIV, she argues that there is a serious challenge in educating and engaging society in dialogues about HIV, since, cultural myths, misconceptions and stereotypes about HIV and HIV transmission, despite all the exposure to HIV information, remain largely unchanged and unchallenged.

Recognising the apparent gap between HIV prevention efforts focussing on the youth and the limited impact on HIV infection rates amongst the youth, Johanna Arendse and Johanna Kehler raise the question as to whether or not schools are adequately equipped to provide sufficient sex and HIV education that facilitates informed decision-making. Examining some of the realities of HIV education and management within the school environment, the article argues that as long as schools, and communities, are largely discriminatory and non-caring, and educators are ‘inhibited’ by their cultural and religious value, norm and belief systems, young people will remain at a disadvantage and at high risk of HIV infection.

The role of religion, and the extent to which religious messaging influence HIV-related stigma, are examined by Adrian Blom. Analysing the ‘pillars’ of HIV-related stigma within religion, and the paradoxical messages of religion as to their restrictive attitude to sex and sexuality, as well as their power to overcome stigma, he argues that while religion is the source and ultimate cause of stigma, it also holds the key to non-discrimination and holistic acceptance of people living with HIV and thus, the key to unleash its de-stigmatising energy, creating a freer and more supportive society for everyone.

Marion Stevens explores information and language used to describe women’s rights as human rights in relation to sexuality and reproduction. Discussing international and national documents defining sexual and reproductive health and rights, she argues that the language of sexual and reproductive health and rights has become an area to inform decision-making and thus, the use of language, especially regarding the continuum of care in the context of HIV and AIDS, has to be monitored so as to ensure informed sexual and reproductive choices.

Challenges, successes and limitations of the behavioural change through access to information approach, utilised with learners in Hillcrest, are introduced by Zandile Shange. Discussing the experiences from a project providing sex and HIV and AIDS information and education to learners within the school environment, she argues that even though gender stereotypes and sexual relationships are understood and well-known, it is difficult for, especially girls, to implement the acquired knowledge, since the understanding and knowledge is based within, and influenced by, their social and cultural contexts.

The constitutional and legislative framework, providing for the right of access to information, is introduced by Urvashi Rajcoomar. Looking at some of the sections within the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), as well as the judicial interpretation of the right of access to information, she argues that as long as the most vulnerable members of society, which are meant to benefit from the right of access to information are largely left out, due to a lack of information, the positive features of the legislation providing for access to information are overshadowed by its shortcomings.

The experiences and challenges of Yabonga, a Cape-based organisation focusing on education and training in the context of HIV and AIDS, are introduced by Ulpha Robertson. Discussing the development of the project, since its inception; the changing focus of activities and programmes as a response to the changing needs over time; and the interrelating factors that ensure its sustainability, she argues that women living with HIV are inspired through continued good practice of encouraging independence and individuality in both its peer educators and clients.

Michelle O’Sullivan is ‘making a point’ about the need of public involvement in legislative processes. Examining the meaning and implications of the constitutional court challenges to the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Act, brought forward by Doctors for Life, she argues that it is imperative to comply with the constitutional obligation to facilitate public involvement, so as to avoid significant disruptions and limited access to termination services and to ensure that women’s constitutionally guaranteed right of access to healthcare, including reproductive healthcare, is not limited and/or denied.

While the sources of the information examined in these articles may vary, the common argument seems to be that the available information does ‘taint’ and/or limit people’s choices, rather than facilitate a process of informed decision-making, since information tends to be normative, prescriptive and value-based; and fails to take into account the societal context in which the information is accessed and decisions are made. Thus, despite an enormous amount of HIV information available, there seems little measurable impact, in that HIV infection rates are not decreasing, women remain to be at greater risk of HIV infection, and large-scale behaviour change does not take place.

This seems to raise the question as to whether or not access to information does indeed carry the potential of informed decision-making and/or behaviour change. Acknowledging the lack of factual information and the gendered, unequal and often discriminatory societal context in which the information is accessed and decisions are made, the answer seems to be ‘no’. Even if people would have access to factual information that could facilitate informed choices, and possible behaviour change, the gendered and unequal context of society would still ‘disallow’ people to make informed choices. Thus, as long as the societal context, in which information is heard, accessed and ‘implemented’, is gendered, unequal, moralised and judgemental, decision-making will be based as much on the information as on the fear of judgement and ‘condemnation’ – and the right of access to information, as the
‘oxygen of knowledge’ leading to behaviour change, will remain but an ideal.

If we are to agree that access to information is imperative to make informed choices, then we need to equally agree that the accessed information needs to be ‘liberated’ from its gendered, prescriptive, normative and judgemental nature. Similarly, if we are to agree that the content of the information is as crucial as the societal context in which the information is accessed and ‘translated’ into action, then we need to equally ‘liberate’ society from its gendered, prescriptive, normative and judgemental nature, so as to create a ‘safe’ environment for individuals to make informed choices. And finally, if we want to belief that access to information does carry the potential to behaviour change, then we need to ensure that the societal context is ‘accommodating’ to the implementation of the acquired knowledge – thus, outside the paradigm of gendered expectations and the concept of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ choices. Hence, only as and when the information itself, and the societal context in which information is heard, accessed and implemented, are ‘liberated’ from their gendered, prescriptive, normative and judgemental nature, will individuals feel ‘safe’ to make informed choices, and ‘liberated’ to change behaviour. Until then, the limited access to information will manifest itself in limited access to, and realisation of, other fundamental human rights and freedoms; in the gendered nature of the HIV and AIDS pandemics; as well as in continuing HIV-related stigma, discrimination and violation of rights; whilst the ‘liberated’ few, who have access to information and make informed choices, will continue to be judged and ‘condemned’…