posted on December 2, 2003 07:29:27 AM new
I don't know how it is were you live, but in CA they locked up the toliet paper in public places so people wouldn't 'five-finger' it. But the taxpayers in DC must be rich...
Would you support this in your area, no matter the cost? Or would you rather see the same funds spent on Aids/Hiv education? Or let everyone purchase their own condoms?
washingtonpost.com District To Offer Condoms For Free Dispensers in Offices Aimed at Rise in AIDS
By Avram Goldstein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, December 2, 2003; Page B01
District health officials, who every day confront the nation's highest incidence of AIDS, will soon install plain white condom dispensers in select government offices and begin distributing the contraceptives for free.
The goal is to place more than 50 dispensers in offices frequented by the public, including the D.C. Housing Authority and the departments of human services, motor vehicles and public works, among others.
"They're going to be as common as water fountains," Ivan O. Torres, interim director of the city's HIV/AIDS Administration, said of the dispensers. "The mayor is committed to this. . . . This is no longer something to be ashamed of. It affects all of us."
City officials, who announced the measure on World AIDS Day yesterday, said they know of no other city or state that has distributed prophylactics so broadly from within government buildings.
The condoms are intended for the public and not for city workers, Torres said. They will not be displayed prominently in lobbies but they will be readily available.
In the next 12 months, the administration plans to pass out about 550,000 male condoms, 45,000 latex dental dams and about 30,000 female condoms in a variety of venues, including the public school system, which gives out 50,000 condoms a year. Male condoms cost the city less than a nickel apiece, and female condoms cost several dollars each.
Beauty salons, barbershops and nightclubs in the District hand out government-provided condoms, and Torres said their role will be stepped up as well. In recent tests of free dispensers in restrooms at District nightclubs Dream and Zanzibar and Georgene's restaurant and bar, male condoms were in demand, officials said. At Dream, about 900 condoms were dispensed over a recent two-day period, he said.
The distribution plan was greeted with enthusiasm yesterday by D.C. Council members but dismissed by others who questioned the logic behind it.
posted on December 2, 2003 07:35:00 AM new
Because I see people with HIV/AIDS every day, I support this wholeheartedly! Believe it or not, a lot of people are still too embarassed to go into a store to buy them. Mind you, they aren't embarassed to have casual sex with a stranger, though. I was watching the news the other day and listening to a man from the CDC. The CDC is concerned that HIV/AIDS is not being taken seriously enough anymore. A great number of people now consider it an African or Asian problem and not a US problem. They are so wrong. It's still spreading. The highest rising community now are African American heterosexuals and heterosexual women of all nationalities. I'd say they are about 20 years too late.
posted on December 2, 2003 07:44:31 AM new
I do understand what you're saying.
One of my concerns, if this program began in my town, would be that those who CAN afford to buy them will now get them for free....with the taxpayer footing the bill. Rather than being given out based on financial need. And also the unlimited amount any one person can take will greatly affect the cost of this program. And anyone can take them and sell them themselves........again at taxpayer expense.
Valid points. However, we already hand them out for free and we get them free from another organization who also gets them free. Taxpayers are already paying for them. We already pay for ridiculous things so why not pay for a legitimate one? However, it would be nice if the manufacturers would do their part. Maybe they will be. The cost of healthcare for individuals with HIV/AIDS who are on SSD is much, much higher than the cost of a condom.
posted on December 2, 2003 08:08:22 AM new
We can't possibly have airtight control over the equitable distribution of condoms, linda. Your perceived "risk" of some wealthy guy taking advantage of the taxpayers and getting a free condom is outweighed by the benefits.
posted on December 2, 2003 08:12:06 AM new
The cost of an unlimited program like this could prove to be prohibitive. There appear to be no restrictions/limits of any kind, to this program, that's what I'm saying. And for those you speak of already on assistance of some kind...they could be distributed through those facilities....rather than like a 'grab bag' affect in public places. Or be distributed in restrooms, like feminine products are now....for a very low cost.
posted on December 2, 2003 08:43:15 AM new
I would not support this in any shape or form.
just another form of 'welfare' and we have enough of that.
if people won't buy them and won't ask for them... most public health places give them away... then they can reap the consequences of their actions... can't afford the medicine... well now that will solve your problem permenately
posted on December 2, 2003 10:32:11 AM new
twelvepole
All sweetness and light and compassion, as usual. I'm surprised a dozen women haven't scooped you up yet (off the sidewalk, I mean). Seriously, those that cannot afford the medication receive it -FREE. Yes, twelve, they do. So, in your opinion it's a good thing if a child born with HIV/AIDS dies because the parents can't afford the medication thus solving the problem permanently? So, what's cheaper condoms or the medication? Not a hard one to figure out. We're not just talking adults here. We're also talking horny ass teenagers who think they are invincible.
Had HIV/AIDS been taken seriously by our government back in the 80's and not seen strictly as a way of population control for the gay community, it might not be the crisis it is today. The very least this government can do is supply condoms. Or, do you feel better about your tax money being spent on toilet paper at $50 a roll?
posted on December 2, 2003 03:11:14 PM new
I think this type of program should be funded by public or churches.
I don't believe in the clean needle program either nor the methadone programs or any of the "paying druggies" programs.
Sound a little heartless? Maybe so. Let them die off and make way for hopefully a better generation.
I do believe in the education programs for AIDS and Drug abuse.
Illegal drug abuse is not a disease, it’s a choice. If these people can't quit the drugs. They should be incarcerated. If that would be there demise...so be it.
Injected drug users and Homosexuals are still the highest risk groups, as far as I know.
Homosexuals are no longer the highest risk group. They at least have the sense to know the consequences. The heterosexual community is now at greatest risk. For too long it was considered a "gay" disease and unfortunately many of our young people still feel they can't get it.
In 1999, there were 227,976 people living with HIV/AIDS. In 2000, that number rose to 245,409; 263,098 in 2001 and 281,931 in 2002. Those are only the reported cases. It is still on the rise. How can anyone not see that it is still an epidemic?
Edited to add: What I mean to say is that heterosexual persons have the highest rising numbers. There are still more homosexuals living with the disease than heterosexuals. Hope I explained that right.
posted on December 2, 2003 03:36:29 PM new
This is from July 2003. I doubt it's changed that much.
"The AIDS epidemic in the United States is far from over," said Dr. Harold Jaffe of the C.D.C.
An estimated 850,000 to 950,000 Americans have the AIDS virus. AIDS killed 16,371 people across the nation last year, about 6 percent fewer than in 2001, the agency said.
Although health officials have been preaching H.I.V. prevention to all Americans, they have become particularly concerned in recent years by an apparent resurgence of infections among gay and bisexual men."
BTW this is from the "Gay and Lesbian
Political Action and Support Groups"
So you don't think I found it on a far Right wing website.
You may find that numbers are rising in hetro groups, but ask your self why that is?
Who were the propagators of AIDS in the beginning? (And may very well still be the major spreader of the virus.)
They are the first to scream for more money for research and medication but what are they doing in the community to stop or even slow it down among themselves?
Amen,
Reverend Colin
posted on December 2, 2003 03:46:20 PM new
Wow, colin, it's risen that much? I think rather than blame any one group, we should find out where it truly originated. It's a huge problem in Africa and we know it was brought here by a homosexual airline attendant. There are, of course, theories that it was spread by the government as a form of population control. Highly doubt it. It has cost the government too much money (although it has made the pharmaceutical companies billions!) It's a huge problem that affects everyone from every walk of life. When I was fighting Cancer I became dangerously anemic. The doctors wanted to do a blood transfusion. When he wouldn't guarantee I'd be safe from infection, I refused the transfusion.
Education will continue to be important. Acceptance is equally as important. Young gay men afraid of being "found out" are more likely to have unprotected sex. I think parents should talk to their children as soon as they think they're old enough to understand. They also need to be told that if they are gay, it's okay. Children hide far too much from their parents and they do it in fear of rejection. Parents of older children should keep a box of condoms in the medicine cabinet and should let their children know they are there if they need them. You can preach morality all you want, but they will do what they will do. I used to slip a box in my son's dresser drawer. We never made a big deal out of it. I'd rather they be safe than deadly sorry and I'd rather see the government spend money on things to protect its citizens than to spend money on things (or events) that harm them.
posted on December 2, 2003 04:02:41 PM new
I agree with you on being fearful of a transfer of blood.
A cure would be a great thing. I'm sure it's just around the corner. The entire drug cost thing should be on another thread.
It still bothers me that the gay men are still the largest risk group. I think any blame should fall on this group. How many years has it been under the microscope? There’s NO reason for unprotected sex in the gay male community. It's like running across a busy hi-way just to see what happens.
I too think education should start at home. I don't believe sex is a bad thing and have always had frank conversation about it with my kids. (All grown up and one but one has kids of their own.)
posted on December 2, 2003 05:01:22 PM new
The spread of AIDS in North America, is mainly due to poor and addicted drug users - sharing needles and having sex for money to buy the drugs. That includes gay people. That's why these people need to be helped the most and not incarcerated for being sick. If drugs were legal, there would be more than enough money from the "drug war" to spend on rehab centers and other education programs to truly help these people.
posted on December 2, 2003 06:47:11 PM new
ALL animal populations peak and crash. Why should people be any diferent. Because we can think? No - most people choose not to. So be it disease or outrunning the food supply the population will crash and it won't be pretty.
Flu is a bigger danger than aids for really crashing the numbers in a few months.
Seriously, those that cannot afford the medication receive it -FREE. Yes, twelve, they do. So, in your opinion it's a good thing if a child born with HIV/AIDS dies because the parents can't afford the medication thus solving the problem permanently? So, what's cheaper condoms or the medication? Not a hard one to figure out. We're not just talking adults here. We're also talking horny ass teenagers who think they are invincible.