Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
07.27.2008 9:01 pm

Monday editorial: finding the cure for ignorance

  • Email this
  • Print this

cd_cg_ericka_hayes2_opt.jpgPatient X is a 17-year-old girl, previously healthy, who visited a clinic for routine care. She is sexually active — as are nearly half of Missouri high school students. Her nurse practitioner ordered a battery of blood tests, but a lab technician misread the form. Instead of screening for hepatitis C, he ran a test for HIV. It came back positive.
The number of HIV-infected teenagers and young adults in the St. Louis region, while still relatively low, increased sharply in the past 10 years. Just 20 cases were reported in 1998. By 2006, there were 54. The girl above, being treated at St. Louis Children’s Hospital pediatric HIV clinic, is among them.
With the help of newer medications, doctors are able to manage HIV as they do many chronic diseases. That’s the good news. But such careful management is possible only if the infection is found. Too many teenagers and young adults don’t get tested.
Why not? Some are afraid a parent will find out they’re having sex. Others don’t think HIV is a problem anymore. Some just don’t want to know.
But if their HIV goes undetected, these young people will become casualties of a persistent epidemic that has disappeared from the headlines but that continues to claim lives.

St. Louis Children’s Hospital this week becomes the nation’s first pediatric hospital to offer universal, confidential HIV testing to everyone 15 or older who comes to the emergency room.
“Confidential” is key. Before the test is offered, parents or guardians will be asked to step out of the room. The decision to be tested rests with the young people themselves. So does the decision to tell a parent or guardian that the test has been performed and what it found. Hospital staff will counsel and encourage the young patients to share the information.
That will be difficult for some parents to accept — understandably. Although 15-year-olds try hard to assert their independence, most are still very much kids.
But early diagnosis is the key here, and not everyone who becomes infected will be lucky enough to be tested by accident. What matters most is getting information that can save lives.

Dr. Ericka V. Hayes of St. Louis Children’s Hospital specializes in pediatric infectious diseases. She helped design the confidential testing program. She also helps run the hospital’s pediatric HIV clinic.
Biology makes young women more vulnerable to sexually transmitted diseases than young men, she notes. STDs, in turn, make them even more vulnerable to HIV.
Teenagers and young adults in their early 20s have the highest rates of STD infection. St. Louis has the nation’s highest rates of chlamydia and gonorrhea. She says the prevalence of those diseases “makes me wonder how many cases of HIV we’re missing.”
If Dr. Hayes and her colleagues start treatment before the virus has begun to overwhelm a young person’s immune system, the patient can expect to live for decades. If treatment begins after the first symptoms of AIDS have appeared, the outlook isn’t nearly as good.

Arthur Kinnard was 15 when he was diagnosed with HIV. Now 19, he remembers the moment as if it happened yesterday.
“Everything slowed down. It kind of felt like a dream,” he said last week. “It seemed like something that would never happen to me.”
Most HIV-positive teenagers here are gay adolescents. But the fastest-growing group with the virus are African-American girls who have been infected by a male sex partner. Many never knew they were at risk.
Mr. Kinnard regularly talks to teenagers about HIV. “It’s better to know and get the treatment you need than be worried and not get it,” he tells them. “Not knowing is what’s killing us.”

Photo of Dr. Ericka V. Hayes by Christian Gooden/Post-Dispatch

5 comments

Comments are closed.

> But the fastest-growing group with the virus are African-American
> girls who have been infected by a male sex partner.

This is one of the great scandals of our generation. Older black males are going after underage females, in part because they are reputed to be “clean.” The result, of course, is that they often end up pregnant, infected with STDs, or both.

Unfortunately, the fact that this is also in most cases statutory rape is completely ignored. Instead, we simply hand over the benefits - free healthcare, free daycare, WIC, food stamps, and housing assistance, to name a few. Why are we not going after the criminals who are impregnating these girls? Why don’t we demand child support from them just like we do every other father? Instead, we are allowing an entire generation of African-American girls to be sexually victimized, to the extent that it is now considered a normal thing.

— Nick Kasoff
8:14 am July 28th, 2008

I’m not sure I understand what your comment has to do with the subject of the editorial — young people infected with HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases.

Most Missouri and Illinois teenagers who test positive for HIV under the current system are, as the editorial points out, men who have sex with men. They aren’t getting pregnant.

Many of the young women who are infected are not pregnant. What makes you think a substantial percentage of those who are pregnant are victims of statutory rape? What makes you think the young men responsible are not prosecuted? Are those comments based on any actual statistics, or is this just an assumption on your part?

— John G. Carlton
10:52 am July 28th, 2008

Mr Kasoff, while I do not disagree that African-American teenage girls are being victimized sexually, I think you may be confusing data from Africa where older African men are having sex with younger girls because they mistakenly think if they have sex with a “virgin” somehow they would not get HIV/AIDs. Of course the problem is that they are spreading the infection themselves.

Across the board, women comprise the group increasingly being infected.

As to all of the other of your conclusions, well they bear reviewing the underlying assumptions.

— RHarnack
2:07 pm July 28th, 2008

How can the PD possibly condone letting a hospital ask/make the parent(s) leave the room so they can perform an HIV test on the child? Then the hospital has no obligation to tell the parents about the results? 18 or over I have no problem with it, but how can anyone, let a lone a person in puberty, be expected to handle that themselves? Aren’t that what parents are for, to help their children?

I guess the PD editorial borad feels the hospital/state has a better idea of what is best for the child than the actual parent. I wonder how the PD Editorial board would react if this actually involved one of their children. I’m sure they would love being kept in the dark about the results.

— GTB
4:02 pm July 28th, 2008

It is a state law in Missouri that any person, regardless of age who is sexually active makes decisions for himself or herself. If this concerns you then you need to contact your state legislator, but don’t blame the hospital. The hospital is following the law.

— JAJ
5:49 pm July 28th, 2008