Search

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses several articles published within issue on topics related to the study of time in health and illness.

In recognition of the broader relational aspects of viral infections, family support is considered important when someone is diagnosed with a blood-borne virus (BBV), such as HIV, hepatitis C (HCV) and hepatitis B (HBV). However, families' own support needs are often not a priority in service provision within the BBV sector. In this article, we draw on qualitative interviews with 20 key informants working in various professional capacities in health, social policy, care and advocacy sectors in Australia, and explore their experiences and perspectives on family inclusivity in their services. Overall, key informants acknowledged the diversity of what constitutes family, and consistently viewed family engagement as beneficial to both diagnosed individuals and the wider familial networks affected by a diagnosis. However, prioritising individual care in support services presented barriers to engaging families, which are further complicated by the role of stigma in shaping the social realities of living with a BBV. Increasing understanding in service provision settings that serodiscordance can be a family experience has the potential to widen this analytic lens to consider the support needs of families in their own right. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The broadening of access to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in Australia has rekindled debates about which types of clinicians are best suited to deliver HIV prevention innovations: specialist HIV services or primary care physicians and general practitioners (GPs). We conducted 21 semi-structured qualitative interviews in 2017 with Australian HIV sector experts working across policy, advocacy, clinical service provision, research, and health promotion. These interviews took place before a national policy commitment to subsidising access to PrEP was achieved. We explored how participants conceptualised PrEP, patients and GPs at this key turning point in the history of HIV prevention. Participants expressed varied views regarding GPs' anticipated ability to successfully navigate the potential complexities associated with PrEP roll-out. While participants were supportive of greater patient access to PrEP, they expressed concerns about non-specialist GPs' cultural competence and expertise regarding sexuality and clinical practice, and the potential for patients to experience discrimination and homophobia from non-expert GPs. This study has broad implications for thinking about experts and expertise, the implementation of previously specialised medicine into mainstream settings, and the anticipated challenges of LGBTIQ+ inclusive healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]