The Widespread Distribution of Condoms in Africa is in Africans' Best Interests

Argument 1. Con claims that women are generally pressured to have sex and that condoms will lead to more cases of rape (the argument is not explicit). The alternative, fewer cases of consensual sex is not supported by his premise. Consensual sex requires, not surprisingly, consent. If the sex is consensual then arguments about condoms as a mitigating factor are void. Con is left with availability of condoms promotes rape. An unsupported base claim. In fact African women themselves are promoting condom use. http://www1.voanews.com... Men feeling less responsible, again unsupported - research? That children conceived from condom users suffer from parenting styles as opposed to those children not, also unsupported. Argument 2. Con argues that condom use is unlikely to reduce the transmission of HIV/AIDS. Research states the opposite. Con makes the fundamental error that advocacy of condom use exists in a vacuum. That is, with the distribution of condoms little else in the way of harm reduction occurs. Very few programs run in this manner; most use sex education alongside the distribution of condoms. This is an important point to maintain. Con is arguing for the removal of a salient piece of technology that can reduce transmission risk. When programs are in place that deal with harm minimisation, the removal of any component can fundamentally undermine the entire structure and success of the program. Con needs to make the case of, in those areas where programs are run where harm minimisation includes education of safe sex practices, the drive for later onset of first time sexual intercourse and reduced polygamy - why the removal of condoms - a key factor in the reduction of the spread of disease and pregnancy - should be seen as valid. It makes no sense to remove a successful, unique portion of a program and expect the program to run with greater results. Studies in Thailand and China has shown that mass distribution of condoms along with education significantly reduced the incidences of HIV/AIDS. Similar programs in Africa and America have had positive results. [2][3][4][5] http://www.who.int... Argument 3. Next Con argues that condom availability will lead to greater transmission (more sex) and promote polygamy. Con needs to show that abstinence would be/has/is greater in countries where such programs aren't run and where incidences of HIV/AIDS are high (research). In the Caribbean where programs are less available the prevalence is high (around 2% of the general population - ranking the region 2nd in the world). It simply doesn't follow that population prevalence equals self monitoring abstinence in those populations. The second part is that condom usage will create cases of HIV/AIDS at a greater rate. In addition to what has been already listed, studies of discordant couples where proper condom use is maintained find transmission to the partner is extremely rare. [6] Argument 4. The amount of research against abstinence is large. A study of declining HIV prevalence in Uganda found no evidence that abstinence or monogamy had contributed to the decline. [4] In the U.S. the results are the same - abstinence education does not achieve its goals. It does not reduce prevalence of sexual encounters, age of onset of first time sexual intercourse nor reduction in partners. Positive intent towards abstinence does not correlate with behaviour at all. [7] [8] [9] Cons arguments are largely baseless and contradict research. The proposal to remove a necessary component in harm reduction whilst having sex is at best misguided. == [1] http://www1.voanews.com... [2] Weller. S. C. A meta-analysis of condom effectiveness in reducing sexually transmitted HIV. Soc Sci Med, 36 1635-1644 [3] CDC. Condoms and Their Use in Preventing HIV Infection and Other STDs. Atlanta, GA: CDC. [4] Wawer MJ et al. Declines in HIV Prevalence in Uganda: Not as Simple as ABC. Presentation at the 12th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, February 22-25, 2005. [5] de Vincenzi I. A longitudinal study of human immunodeficiency virus transmission by heterosexual partners. New England Journal of Medicine 1994; 331:341-346. [6] Weller SC & Davis-Beaty K (2007), 'Condom effectiveness in reducing heterosexual HIV transmission [7] Kirby D. Emerging Answers: Research Findings on Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy. Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 2001. [8] LeCroy & Milligan Associates. [Final Report, Arizona Abstinence Only Education Program Evaluation, 1998-2003]. Phoenix: Arizona Dept. of Health Services, Office of Women's and Children's Health, June 2003 [9] Barnett JE and Hurst CS. Abstinence education for rural youth: an evaluation of the Life's Walk program. Journal of School Health 2003; 73: 264-268