Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T21:25:34.566Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

10 - Postscript: reflections on HIV/AIDS and history

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2010

Shula Marks
Affiliation:
Professor, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, London, WC1H 0XG
George T. H. Ellison
Affiliation:
Professor of Public Health and Director of the Institute of Primary Care and Public Health, South Bank University, London
George Ellison
Affiliation:
South Bank University, London
Melissa Parker
Affiliation:
Brunel University
Catherine Campbell
Affiliation:
London School of Economics and Political Science
Get access

Summary

Some 10 years ago, the British medical historian Virginia Berridge (1992a: 326), strikingly declared: ‘History and historians have had a significant role in interpreting the AIDS epidemic … History, in some national responses to AIDS, became a direct policy-relevant science.’ At the outset, she argued, history was used in two ways: as a form of background knowledge; and as ‘“historical partisanship”, the use of historical example to advance particular policy positions’ (Berridge, 1992a: 326). It entered the policy debate directly and, at least in the UK, ensured a liberal non-punitive approach to people with HIV/AIDS. Analysing the chapters in the pioneering volume edited by Elizabeth Fee and Daniel Fox (1989) she showed how, in the early days of the disease, the presence of historians at international conferences was assiduously courted in the United States and the UK. They were called on to deal with earlier public health and popular responses to the spread of infectious (especially sexually transmitted) disease – quarantine and compulsory vaccination – all of which had relevance to the contemporary debate. Even more surprisingly, she maintained, leading medical authorities (notably Sir Donald Acheson, Chief Medical Officer at the Department of Health, and Michael Adler at the Middlesex Hospital) had themselves drawn direct analogies with the past and addressed historical precedents in their advocacy of a liberal public health policy (Berridge, 1992b; see also: Berridge, 1992a; Berridge and Strong, 1993; Berridge, 1996).

Information

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×