Ugandan Health Workers Could Become Front-Line Enforcers Of Anti-Homosexuality Act

Uganda FlagOn April 23, 2014 Buzzfeed World reported: Updated draft guidelines propose to let health workers break confidentiality of LGBT patients when “a person has been sodomized” or in cases of “aggravated homosexuality.”

Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni meets religious leaders after a thanksgiving prayer in support of his anti-gay bill

Ugandan health workers could become frontline enforcers of the newly passed Anti-Homosexuality Act, according to an internal health ministry document obtained by BuzzFeed.

These guidelines could help determine the fate of millions of health care dollars Uganda receives from international donors who are concerned about the AHA. A team of consultants for the World Bank submitted a report on Tuesday recommending that a $90 million health care grant be disbursed only if the government implements guidelines protecting LGBT patients and their health care workers from prosecution under the law, which not only makes homosexuality a crime but also makes it illegal to “abet” homosexuality by providing services to LGBT people.

This document shows the health ministry is moving in the opposite direction than donors want to see.

The document, an April revision of “Draft Guidelines for Health Workers Regarding Health Services for Homosexuals,” suggests the agency would make health care facilities more dangerous for LGBT people than in a draft produced in March. The April revision specifies that health care workers could “break confidentiality” of “clients with homosexual orientation” even when not required by law in cases when “a person has been sodomized” or in “cases of aggravated homosexuality as defined by the anti-homosexuality act.” (Ugandans can be sentenced to life in prison for “aggravated homosexuality” in cases where they have same-sex intercourse repeatedly, or in cases where same-sex intercourse involves a minor, a disabled person, or a person who is HIV positive.)

This disclosure clause is far broader than the one included in the March draft, which only singles out three cases in which confidentiality may be broken without a legal requirement: “where a client is a child,” “where a woman has been sodomised,” and “in cases [where] mental status is compromised.”  Continued 


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s