AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 543–550 | Cite as

Motherhood and HIV Risk Among Female Sex Workers in Andhra Pradesh, India: The Need to Consider Women’s Life Contexts

  • E. Reed
  • J. G. Silverman
  • B. Stein
  • J. T. Erausquin
  • M. Biradavolu
  • A. Rosenberg
  • K. M. Blankenship
Original Paper

Abstract

This study examines whether the challenges of motherhood among female sex workers (FSW) are linked with vulnerability to sexual risk factors for HIV. FSW at least 18 years of age (n = 850) were recruited through respondent driven sampling for a survey on HIV risk in the Rajahmundry area of Andhra Pradesh, India. Logistic regression models adjusted for demographic characteristics were used to assess the relation between reported caretaking challenges and sexual risk indicators for HIV. In adjusted logistic regression models, FSW who reported three or more children in their household or current child health concerns were significantly less likely to report consistent condom use (adjusted odds ratios (AORs) range: 0.5–0.6) and more likely to take more money for sex without a condom (both AORs: 2.5). Women who reported current child health concerns were also more likely to report an STI symptom in the past 6 months (AOR = 1.6; 95 % confidence interval: 1.1–2.3). Findings suggest that challenging responsibilities related to caretaking of children are associated with heightened vulnerability to HIV risk among FSW. Such findings add to the cumulating evidence urging for the implementation of HIV prevention interventions that consider the multiple challenges across various domains of women’s lives.

Keywords

Female sex workers Children’s health Sexual risk HIV 

References

  1. 1.
    National AIDS Control Organization (NACO) (2010), Government of India. Ministry of Health & Family Welfare Department of AIDS Control. http://www.nacoonline.org/upload/HomePage/NACO%20Press%20Release%20on%20HIV%20Estimates.pdf. Accessed 28 Feb 2011.
  2. 2.
    UNAIDS/WHO. AIDS epidemic update.www.unaids.org/epi/2005/doc/report_pdf.asp. Accessed 28 Feb 2011.
  3. 3.
    National AIDS Control Organization (NACO) (2005), Government of India. State wise HIV prevalence, 1999–2003, India. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. http://www.nacoonline.org/facts_statewise.htm. Accessed 28 Feb 2011.
  4. 4.
    Reed E, Gupta J, Biradavolu M, Devireddy V, Blankenship KM. The role of housing in determining HIV risk among female sex workers in Andhra Pradesh, India: considering women’s life contexts. Soc Sci Med. 2011;72(5):710–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reed E, Gupta J, Biradavolu M, Devireddy V, Blankenship KM. Economic insecurity, violence, and risk factors for HIV among female sex workers in Andhra Pradesh, India: quantitative and qualitative findings. Public Health Rep. 2010;125(Suppl 4):81–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zalwango F, Eriksson L, Seeley J, Nakamanya S, Vandepitte J, Grosskurth H. Parenting and money making: sex work and women’s choices in urban Uganda. Wagadu. 2011;8:71–92.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ntumbanzondo M, Dubrow R, Niccolai LM, Mwandagalirwa K, Merson MH. Unprotected intercourse for extra money among commercial sex workers in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo. AIDS Care. 2006;18(7):777–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saggurti N, Verma RK, RamaRao S, Jain A, Singh AK, Mahendra VS, Achyut P, 2008. http://www.popcouncil.org/pdfs/AIDS2008Posters/Saggurti.pdf. Accessed 28 Feb 2011.
  9. 9.
    Chapman J, Estcourt CS, Hua Z. Saving ‘face’ and ‘othering’: getting to the root of barriers to condom use among Chinese female sex workers. Sex Health. 2008;5(3):291–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ngo AD, Ratliff EA, McCurdy SA, Ross MW, Markham C, Pham HT. Health-seeking behaviour for sexually transmitted infections and HIV testing among female sex workers in Vietnam. AIDS Care. 2007;19(7):878–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Heckathorn DD. Respondent driven sampling II: deriving statistically valid population estimates from chain-referral samples of hidden populations. Soc Probl. 2002;39:11–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Magnani R, Sabin K, Saidel T, Heckathorn D. Review of sampling hard-to-reach and hidden populations for HIV surveillance. AIDS. 2005;19(suppl 2):S67–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blankenship KM, Burroway R, Reed E. Factors associated with awareness and utilization of a community mobilization intervention for female sex workers in Andhra Pradesh, India. Sex Transm Infect. 2010;86:i69–75.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sloss CM, Harper GW. When street workers are mothers. Arch Sex Behav. 2004;33(4):329–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dalla RL. Exposing the pretty woman myth: a qualitative examination of the lives of streetwalking prostitutes. J Sex Res. 2000;37:344–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hanck SE, Blankenship KM, Irwin KS, West BS, Kershaw T. Assessment of self-reported sexual behavior and condom use among female sex workers in India using a polling box approach: a preliminary report. Sex Transm Dis. 2008;35(5):489–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Botta RA, Pingree S. Interpersonal communication and rape: women acknowledge their assaults. J Health Commun. 1997;2(3):197–212.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fisher BS, Daigle LE, Cullen FT, Turner MG. Acknowledging sexual victimization as a rape: results from a national-level study. Justice Q. 2003;20:535–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yacoubian GS Jr, VanderWall KL, Johnson RJ, Urbach BJ, Peters RJ Jr. Comparing the validity of self-reported recent drug use between adult and juvenile arrestees. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2003;35(2):279–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Semaan S, Lauby J, Liebman J. Street and network sampling in evaluation studies of HIV risk-reduction interventions. AIDS Rev. 2002;4(4):213–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Semaan S, Santibanez S, Garfein RS, Heckathorn DD, Des Jarlais DC. Ethical and regulatory considerations in HIV prevention studies employing respondent-driven sampling. Int J Drug Policy 2009;20(1):14–27.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Abdul-Quader AS, Heckathorn DD, McKnight C, Bramson H, Nemeth C, Sabin K, Gallagher K, Des Jarlais DC. Effectiveness of respondent-driven sampling for recruiting drug users in New York City: findings from a pilot study. J Urban Health. 2006;83(3):459–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Argento E, Reza-Paul S, Lorway R, Jain J, Bhagya M, Fathima M, Sreeram SV, Hafeezur RS, O’Neil J. Confronting structural violence in sex work: lessons from a community-led HIV prevention project in Mysore. India AIDS Care. 2011;23(1):69–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sarkar K, Bal B, Mukherjee R, Chakraborty S, Saha S, Ghosh A, Parsons S. Sex-trafficking, violence, negotiating skill, and HIV infection in brothel-based sex workers of eastern India, adjoining Nepal, Bhutan, and Bangladesh. J Health Popul Nutr. 2008;26(2):223–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rekart ML. Sex-work harm reduction. Lancet. 2005;366:2123–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dunkle KL, Jewkes R, Nduna M, Jama N, Levin J, Sikweyiya Y, Koss MP. Transactional sex with casual and main partners among young South African men in the rural Eastern Cape: prevalence, predictors, and associations with gender-based violence. Soc Sci Med. 2007;65(6):1235–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    El-Bassel N, Witte SS, Wada T, Gilbert L, Wallace J. Correlates of partner violence among female street-based sex workers: substance abuse, history of childhood abuse, and HIV risks. AIDS Patient Care STDs. 2001;15(1):41–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Reed
    • 1
  • J. G. Silverman
    • 2
  • B. Stein
    • 1
  • J. T. Erausquin
    • 3
  • M. Biradavolu
    • 4
  • A. Rosenberg
    • 5
  • K. M. Blankenship
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Prevention and Community HealthGeorge Washington University School of Public HealthWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Division of Global Public HealthSchool of Medicine, University of California, San DiegoSan DiegoUSA
  3. 3.Duke Global Health Institute, Duke UniversityDurhamUSA
  4. 4.Department of SociologyAmerican UniversityWashingtonUSA
  5. 5.Innovations for Poverty ActionNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations