Here is an abstract from a poster at the international AIDS conference in DC. The [him] moderator has been unable to obtain a copy of the paper from one of the authors.
Consider the following extract: "Positive MSM/TG perceive research as an academic domain and as a barrier to community participation, however, approaches such as this have altered the use of “research language” and encouraged community involvement. The FGDs and dissemination mark the beginning of such social practice that will ultimately give rise to an enabling environment in the MSM/TG community and create grounds for favorable policy change."
Considering the last sentence, is it any surprise that men who have sex with men perceive research as an elite academic domain?
[him] moderator
++++++++++++++++++
TUPE535 - Poster Exhibition
MSM effectively demand tailored HIV services by using data for advocacy and influencing national policy reform
J. Jiravisitkul1, A.M. Htut2, S. Aryal3, D. Dobrowolski3
1PACT Thailand, Grants and Contracts, Bangkok, Thailand, 2Asia Pacific Network of People Living with HIV ( APN+), Positive MSM Program, Bangkok, Thailand, 3PACT Thailand, Program, Bangkok, Thailand
Background: In 2010, APN+ and Pact conducted FGD in 10 Asia-Pacific countries[1] to find out treatment, prevention and care needs of positive MSM/TG, enabling community members to undertake the research, do the analysis, interpret the results and use the findings for effective advocacy.
[1] Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, Thailand and Vietnam. Methods: 17 peer-led FGD in 10 countries with 124 positive MSM/TG, 19 married and 72 on ARV were conducted. Study design enabled community-based organizations to conduct research and combined the need for scientific rigor with socio-cultural variation. An additional 289 participants[1] took part in the research dissemination and action planning in Myanmar.
[1] Participants include government, donors, UN, INGOs, community, and civil society. Results: MSM/TG determined the research agenda, built their skills, owned the research findings and carried out effective advocacy. The current situation was determined along with impacts of key service gaps, status disclosure, stigma and discrimination, cost of medicines despite free ARVs and privacy of health-care setting. Findings indicate that interventions are geared towards quantifiable markers of health, universal access to treatment, medication adherence, condom use and quality of life issues neglecting the actual post-HIV needs of individuals in psychological, emotional, physical and social health domains. Conclusions: Research is not just a way to collect data but it could set in motion the process of empowerment that helps build an understanding that community can use data to advocate for tailored services. Positive MSM/TG perceive research as an academic domain and as a barrier to community participation, however, approaches such as this have altered the use of “research language” and encouraged community involvement. The FGDs and dissemination mark the beginning of such social practice that will ultimately give rise to an enabling environment in the MSM/TG community and create grounds for favorable policy change.
http://pag.aids2012.org/abstracts.aspx?aid=10493
