The Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health System delivered its final report in February of this year, and it was tabled in Parliament in March. Among the matters the Commission was appointed to consider was the need to address the stigma associated with mental health, and the need to safeguard human rights.
Since late 2019, COVID-19 has been the global health crisis absorbing much of our attention. Efforts to respond to it, including the redeployment of people and resources, have necessarily had impacts on other public health programs and pandemics. The World Health Organization’s ambitious goal to eliminate hepatitis C by 2030 is one program that has been slowed and, in some places, stopped in its tracks by COVID-19.
The Mandatory Disease Testing Act 2021, recently passed through the New South Wales Parliament,establishes a new scheme under which a person can be ordered to provide a blood sample for the testing of blood-borne viruses if, as a result of their deliberate action, their bodily fluid has come into contact with a health, emergency or public sector worker.
What does life look like for people after they have cleared hepatitis C?
What does life look like for people after they have cleared hepatitis C? Do people whose blood shows no detectable amount of the hepatitis C virus need to inform their doctor or dentist about their previous hepatitis C status? What about prospective employers or insurance providers? Does hepatitis C–related stigma and discrimination remain a challenge for people post-cure? In what ways, and in what settings?
Australia is spending billions on the universal rollout of direct-acting antiviral drugs (DAAs) as part of its ambitious goal of achieving virtual elimination of hepatitis C by 2030. These ‘revolutionary’, ‘transformative’ drugs can bring about a sustained virological response – that is, a cure – for hepatitis C in over 90 percent of people treated. They are available on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme for all Australians who are covered by Medicare.
As Australia works towards its ambitious target of reducing hepatitis C stigma by 50% by 2022, it is necessary to investigate and understand the issues that continue to affect people who have – and have been treated for – hepatitis C. One significant example of such issues is the set of laws and policies devised in a pre-cure world that have yet to be reformed since the advent of curative treatments. Do people who had hepatitis C need to disclose this to insurers or prospective employers? And could you be refused employment or insurance on such a basis? Does the fact you once had hepatitis C need to be retained in your medical records? There are literally dozens of questions like these to be asked.
We are delighted to introduce you to a new research program at the Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society (ARCSHS).
With new Australian drug laws required to comply with human rights frameworks, researchers at the GLaD program are conducting a new study funded by the Australian Research Countil to develop a world-first ‘post–human rights’ framework for drug policy.
In Australia, a new generation of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for the treatment of hepatitis C have been rolled out in a globally unique program of
Australia has long been a leader in critical alcohol and other drug (AOD) scholarship. Much of this work draws on feminist theory, including feminist science studies, to identify and examine ideas about agency and materiality in drug policy and practice. Often, this work also prioritises issues specific to gender, such as how the law conceptualises links between drugs and family violence, or how it understands the relationship between alcohol and sexual assault.