The current lack of structured and comprehensive school-based HIV/AIDS programs is a major problem. Much of Tanzania's institutional infrastructure has limited capacity to respond to HIV/AIDS. Constraints include providers' knowledge gaps, limited human and financial resources, commodity shortages, and poor management capacity. Personnel and other human resource limitations are likely to become increasingly acute as the response to the epidemic is scaled up, and the flow of HIV/AIDS funds into the country increase. There are no laws to protect the rights of PLWHA (People Living With HIV/AIDS).

Despite macroeconomic progress, Tanzania remains one of the poorest countries in the world. Its HIV/AIDS solutions are heavily reliant on external donors; which raises concerns regarding sustainability. Certain sectors of the Tanzanian economy appeared to be particularly vulnerable to HIV/AIDS, including transport, mining, and tourism.

According to the 1996 TDHS (Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey), 18 percent of Tanzanian women were circumcised: young women ages 15-19. Women living in Zanzibar, and those living in urban areas on the mainland were less likely to be circumcised. A higher proportion of circumcised women lived in the Arusha region (81 percent).

The Sexual Offences Special Provisions Act of 1998 outlaws the act of female genital mutilation, terming the offense "cruelty to children." Punishment is imprisonment from five to fifteen years or a fine not exceeding 300,000 shillings (approximately US$380) or both, as well as compensation for injuries caused. There have been some arrests under this legislation, but no reports of prosecutions yet.

Even with laws forbidding the practice of female genital circumcision (FGC), it has been an enduring tradition difficult to overcome on the local level, with deep cultural and even political significance. During the British colonial rule of Kenya in the 1950s, forbidding the procedure among tribes gave strength to the resistance to the British government and increased support for the Mau Mau guerrilla movement. During that time, FGC increased, because it was seen as a form of resistance to colonial rule.

The practice of FGC to the East African cultures is an identifying feature associated with the marriage potential of a young woman. For a family to "deprive" their daughters of the procedure can place them at a disadvantage to gaining a husband. Because of the social significance, anti-circumcision activists realize that to end this practice it is necessary to work closely with local communities. What has been discovered, is that marriage networks must give up the practice simultaneously, so no individuals are placed at a disadvantage.

Stopping FGC which is presented as stopping something that is violent disfigurement and barbaric can be seen as an attitude reminiscent of colonial rule and Christian missionary enforcement. This can have a negative impact. Senegal has seen success in stopping FGC when it is initiated by indigenous women working at the local level, assisted by educational materials developed by Molly Melching of Tostan—a Non-Governmental Organization. Since 1997, 12 percent of Senegal's population who practice FGC have voluntarily given up the practice. The success has been attributed to the fact that locals carry the message to other villages within their marriage networks, and that it's through education rather than cultural imperialism, that the message is received. A non-judgemental approach allows men and women to question their own traditions, and make changes by their own choice, instead of feeling the need to defend their traditions against the criticism of outsiders.

Another obstacle is the attitude and experiences related to partner violence and HIV disclosure of women. The major reason for non-disclosure of HIV test results among all women, regardless of HIV serostatus, is fear of a partner's reaction, especially the fear of abuse or abandonment. Domestic violence is often seen as a way to "correct" or "educate" women; and that violence that does not leave a physical mark on a woman is considered justifiable. This adds to the stigma and non-disclosure problems.

^TOP   NATIONAL RESPONSE >