Since the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) that causes Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) was discovered in the 1980s, the condom has scientifically proven to be the only technological device that can prevent transmission of the virus during sexual intercourse. This technical approach to the HIV has strongly emphasized that prevention is only possible if the condom is properly used. However, as a technological artifact the condom has shown that its use is laden with values. The question of values on condoms has brought in a heated debate on the moral justifications of its use. In Malawi, just as in other African countries, the Faith Community has rejected the Governmentsplea to promote condoms as the preventive measure against the virus.The Faith Community has emphasized on abstinence and mutual faithfulness as the only reliable means to the prevention of HIV/AIDS. The main argument from the Faith Community is that condoms promote promiscuity. Nevertheless, the Government agrees with the Faith Community on abstinence and mutual faithfulness, but still insists on condom use as a preventive measure against the virus. The Government argues that the condom is the only proven technical approach to the HIV prevention and therefore it should be promoted. T he main purpose of this study is to attempt an ethical analysis of the arguments for and againstcondom use as the preventive measure against HIV. In this case, the study tries to analyse the Government and Faith Community stands on condoms. In relation to the arguments for and againstcondom use, the study also touches such areas as: the concept of rights and condom use, ethics of condom advertisement, African cultural values versus condom use and the implications of condom use on behaviour change. From the study, it has been argued that condoms should be promoted. The argument comes from that understanding that AIDS has plundered Africa than any war or disease in human history, and therefore, it needs to be stopped. In this case, such theories as, Utility, Love, Autonomy, Rights and umunthu moral conscience have been used to support the argument.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:liu-2110 |
| Date | January 2003 |
| Creators | Dzama, Hedrix A. |
| Publisher | Linköpings universitet, Centrum för tillämpad etik |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0014 seconds