wazua Sun, Oct 6, 2024
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In | Register

2 Pages12>
Asunta is a mother again
Options
Previous Topic · Next Topic
kelele.com
#1 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 4:30:00 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 6/28/2010
Posts: 293
Location: Gigiri
To a HIV negative baby
Sina Signature. NKT
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
dossy7
#2 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 4:41:12 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 12/9/2009
Posts: 1,491
Location: Nairobi
Asunt is a living testament of a living very positive human in this world congratulations n we wish you may more years to live
Kenya ni yetu sisi sote
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
marex
#3 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 4:50:07 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 10/4/2007
Posts: 656
the third kid?

I know his first born..huz in campus..the boy is a special type of a genious
The way I am
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
My 2 cents
#4 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 4:52:25 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 6/2/2010
Posts: 1,059
In the decision to have a child, I think the interests of the baby should precede those of the mother.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
atiriri
#5 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 4:55:33 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 12/7/2009
Posts: 320
Location: nairobi
Congratulations Asunta
Back to top
WWW
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
marex
#6 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 4:57:16 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 10/4/2007
Posts: 656
@ My two cents

I can see u are a good student of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mills....its is called utilitarianism where a decision is ethical depending on its benefit to the larger part of the society
The way I am
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
Intelligentsia
#7 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 5:18:20 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 10/1/2009
Posts: 2,436
My 2 cents wrote:
In the decision to have a child, I think the interests of the baby should precede those of the mother.


I agree.
There's something I found disqueting about her having Joshua because she put her interests first, (like in this case)and not the baby's.
We are happy and glad for her and esp. the baby that its -ve Pray and twas a safe delivery, but would our applause have been similarly loud if the kid was born +ve and remained so - condemned to a lifetime of drugs for the rest of its life - merely coz its mother wanted to have it while she could have exercised her maternal instinct differently by adopting?
She sends mixed signals to PLWAs. Shame on you
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
karqui
#8 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 5:35:20 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 8/2/2010
Posts: 480
Location: chokoo
she is not sending a very nice signal to PLWAs, as they may feel short changed when they are advised not to go forth and exercise there mothering instinct, yet she comeout as a sure winner.
A disclaimer should be in place of the straineous ways she goes through to ensure that the child is born and remains -ve.
By virtue of her being position she has at hand all the required medication & info ever available & provided,even may be freely, by supporting bodies and not every wanjiku can get access as well or knowledge on the required regime to maintain 'healthy' status.
my 2 cents
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
Impunity
#9 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 6:50:40 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 3/2/2009
Posts: 26,325
Location: Masada
This lady really liked pine tree; see how she get children.
How old is the first born now that they are 3 in total?
And did she get them with one father?
And how was she mounted?
Is the huzzy also +ve?
And are they living together as huzzy and wifey?
Or ni mambo ya ma pine trees tu?
Shame on you Shame on you Shame on you Shame on you
Shame on you Shame on you Shame on you Shame on you
Portfolio: Sold
You know you've made it when you get a parking space for your yatcht.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
jguru
#10 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 7:29:49 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 10/25/2007
Posts: 1,574
The probability of a HIV positive woman getting a HIV positive baby, when she is on ARVs and with proper obstetric care and no breastfeeding for the baby is close to 0%. We need to get the stigma from our heads.
Set out to correct the world's wrongs and you will most certainly wind up adding to them.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
sheep
#11 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 7:40:03 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 7/24/2008
Posts: 781
Its her life...we have no right to interfear...she has broken no laws,done no sin...let us learn to love and not condemn for nothing good can come from hate.
The utimate goal of investing is to buy low sell high;if we re-write this core equation in psychology terms it becomes buy fear sell greed.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
jguru
#12 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 7:42:05 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 10/25/2007
Posts: 1,574
karqui wrote:
she is not sending a very nice signal to PLWAs, as they may feel short changed when they are advised not to go forth and exercise there mothering instinct, yet she comeout as a sure winner.
A disclaimer should be in place of the straineous ways she goes through to ensure that the child is born and remains -ve.
By virtue of her being position she has at hand all the required medication & info ever available & provided,even may be freely, by supporting bodies and not every wanjiku can get access as well or knowledge on the required regime to maintain 'healthy' status.
my 2 cents


What do you mean by this statement? "...not every wanjiku can get access as well or knowledge on the required regime to maintain 'healthy' status."

PLWAs are people deserving of their rights and freedoms like all of us. We make a lot of fuss about nothing in particular. I know hundreds of HIV positive women with HIV negative babies.

HIV and AIDS comprehensive care, ARVs and support for HIV patients is one of the cheapest and the best in the country. ARVs cost not more than KES 100 per month in any government hospital, and HIV care supplements (Vitamins, Septrin) are also provided free.

Visit the government hospital near you and ask about pregnant mothers with HIV. You will be interested to know that they are seen by consultant obstetricians/gynecologists in the High Risk Clinics in addition to the normal MCH/FP clinic. Very specialised care, for no cost. And the babies when born, have to spend 48 hours in the Neonatology Unit under the watchful eye of the paediatrician, and for initial prophylactic medication.

Every HIV positive woman, with CD4 counts of at least 300 cells/microlitre, can have a HIV negative baby, if she so wishes to.
Set out to correct the world's wrongs and you will most certainly wind up adding to them.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM | Edit by user: Tuesday, August 10, 2010 7:46 PM | Reason: Emphasis
Kusadikika
#13 Posted : Tuesday, August 10, 2010 9:12:28 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/22/2008
Posts: 2,700
People seem to be sure when they make comments about Asunta's right or not to have a child while she is HIV positive. We have taken her HIV status as a given in that we assume we know what it means to be HIV positive.

If you have the patience and curiosity you can read the following:

http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/rrbdowe.htm

Still interested? Read on:

http://www.virusmyth.com.../data2/introduction.htm


Then ask yourself: What do we really know for sure???
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
Intelligentsia
#14 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 11:30:51 AM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 10/1/2009
Posts: 2,436
jguru wrote:
The probability of a HIV positive woman getting a HIV positive baby, when she is on ARVs and with proper obstetric care and no breastfeeding for the baby is close to 0%. We need to get the stigma from our heads.


Thanks for the clarificatin and I agree kabisa after some consultations - the point that a HIV+ve mother can have a HIV-ve kid so long as there's proper pre- and ante-natal care + ARVs is unfortunately not widely known, and most people take it that such a mum is gambling with the sero-status and thus life of the kid.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM | Edit by user: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 11:31 AM | Reason: Not specified
MaichBlack
#15 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 1:33:02 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 7/22/2009
Posts: 7,452
My 2 cents wrote:
In the decision to have a child, I think the interests of the baby should precede those of the mother.

HIV is no longer a death sentence. We should not stigmatize people living with HIV. Let them live a life as close to normal as they possibly can. Most of us 'healthy' Kenyans can get hit by a bus - metaphorically of course - today and leave our dependants behind.

Asunta tested HIV+ approximately 20 years ago. How many Kenyans have died during that period? How many of them had kids? And why do we imagine Asunta and any other person living with HIV has a lesser right to get a kid? Asunta probably has a better long term plan [including succession] for her kids than the rest of us who imagine we will live forever.

NB: 'Healthy' is in quotes because most of the people shouting from the rooftops don't even know their status.
Never count on making a good sale. Have the purchase price be so attractive that even a mediocre sale gives good returns.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM | Edit by user: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 2:15 PM | Reason: Not specified
slykat
#16 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 2:13:19 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 2/20/2007
Posts: 359
@All

Thanks MaichBlack and Kusadikika for attempting to educate ignorant geniuses...

Am shocked that some peeps in Wazua as clever and educated as they are, are still so ignorant about pertinent issues about living with HIV. If the talk by some at Wazua is ill-informed, judgmental, stigmatizing and discriminative if not malicious, what of the man on the street? God help us and our 2million plus positive brothers, sisters, daughters, sons, and parents.

@Marex

marex wrote:
@ My two cents

I can see u are a good student of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mills....its is called utilitarianism where a decision is ethical depending on its benefit to the larger part of the society


You are extremely generous to his two cents. For all he is worth, his statement simply means he is un-apologetically pro-abortion, for example in cases where a mother is positive. Now that is as atavistic as Bentham is a fossil, with due respect to his advocacy for Human Rights and equal rights for women among other noble tenets he held.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM | Edit by user: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 2:24 PM | Reason: Not specified
My 2 cents
#17 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 3:36:48 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 6/2/2010
Posts: 1,059
@slykat one of the marks of intelligence is the willingness to consider that issues can be viewed from multiple points. The often is no ABSOLUTE right. What you consider right is most often based on your set of values which are acquired though socialisation, religion etc.

As a person I strongly believe that PLWHAs have all the rights that the rest of us do. What I urge is that 'making babies' decisions be made after weighing all the circumstances. Just because we can procreate does not mean we all should. It is for the same reason I would ask a gay couple to probably not adopt. Put the interests of the child first.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
Impunity
#18 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 3:48:35 PM
Rank: Elder


Joined: 3/2/2009
Posts: 26,325
Location: Masada
My question is:
HOW WAS SHE MOUNTED?
Portfolio: Sold
You know you've made it when you get a parking space for your yatcht.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
slykat
#19 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 3:56:29 PM
Rank: Member


Joined: 2/20/2007
Posts: 359
My 2 cents wrote:
@slykat one of the marks of intelligence is the willingness to consider that issues can be viewed from multiple points. The often is no ABSOLUTE right. What you consider right is most often based on your set of values which are acquired though socialisation, religion etc.


Well said... my take though is that there is a danger that we may at times see our selves as the intelligent species.. so much so that we forget that we are animals in biological terms and with instincts, urges and desires... but most importantly...carrying out a biological function may not always be a choice! Obviously you are aware of unwanted pregnancies, just as you are aware of the existence of the abortion dilemma... very personal at that... my philosopher friend.... we are human, but then again Bentham was not a naturalist, if it be true that you are a Benthamer.

[quote=As a person I strongly believe that PLWHAs have all the rights that the rest of us do. What I urge is that 'making babies' decisions be made after weighing all the circumstances. Just because we can procreate does not mean we all should. It is for the same reason I would ask a gay couple to probably not adopt. Put the interests of the child first[/quote]

Our point of departure; as a person I believe everyone has the right not to think or even the right to make an unwise or stupid decision..that is why there are consequences. But then again your statement that people should hold divergent views freely flies in the face of your prescription of what views PLWHAs should hold on getting babies... u contradict yourself.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM | Edit by user: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 4:08 PM | Reason: Not specified
My 2 cents
#20 Posted : Wednesday, August 11, 2010 5:18:56 PM
Rank: Veteran


Joined: 6/2/2010
Posts: 1,059
slykat wrote:
[quote=My 2 cents]@slykat one of
Our point of departure; as a person I believe everyone has the right not to think or even the right to make an unwise or stupid decision..that is why there are consequences. But then again your statement that people should hold divergent views freely flies in the face of your prescription of what views PLWHAs should hold on getting babies... u contradict yourself.


Infact I do not contradict myself. You have a view, I have a view, everyone has a view. I ask that views be made rationally (using the highest form of reason).

P/S When a +ve female is seeking to get pregnant it entails having unprotected sex. So either she risks infecting another male or if the male is also +ve; they are mixing hiv strains, which is not advocated for the benefit of both.
Back to top
 Report Abusive | Report SPAM
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Wazua Club SK Theme
Powered by YAF | YAF © 2003-2009, Yet Another Forum.NET
Copyright © 2024 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.