As AIDS was beginning to be treated as a significant epidemic, San Francisco General Hospital recognized the need to create new standards of care for a disease that had never before been experienced.
Compassionate care has now become a priority worldwide and an expected standard in hospitals as there places a greater emphasis on the social, psychological, and economic aspects of treatment in addition to the medicine.
Gay communes, or communal living systems, were also created to celebrate and publicly acknowledge their prideful acceptance of free sexual preferences.
[4] Bathhouses were a major factor for the spread of this disease[citation needed], as it acted as a sexual outlet for homosexuals to practice risky behavior.
[5] Yet with the first infant case in San Francisco discovered by Dr. Art Ammann in 1982,[1] fear began to spread throughout the remaining population as many realized the disease could also infect through blood contamination.
As such, GRID was renamed to AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) in 1982— now encompassing the cases found in hemophiliacs, Haitians, and drug users.
Casual contact was considered a threat despite claims by Paul Volberding and other respected AIDS doctors because no proof was able to combat these fears.
In addition, the majority of AIDS patients were young adults suddenly subjected to the responsibilities of death and the harsh realities of social stigma.
The Shanti Project, in addition to providing buddy programs and counselors, teamed up with the city and county of San Francisco to arrange low cost housing options for AIDS patients.
The Hospice of San Francisco and the Visiting Nurse Association provided in-home and special care, allowing patients to reduce overall hospitalizations and maintain the option of having an at-home death.
Interior designers created comfortable spaces, legal workers helped make wills, florists provided flowers, and other people would donate food, games, and toys for the patients and their families.
Demands of this job were incredibly high—emotionally and physically— as the majority of patients died, and lack of funding did not allow for nurses to be paid for all the hours worked.
Exceptions were made for patients—visitor hours never ended, items from home were brought to the patients’ rooms— often because supervisors were unwilling to get involved with the novel ward and the risks associated with it.
[citation needed] Originally a county hospital, it was common for San Francisco General to receive inmates or homeless patients—those with less resources.
[1] Not only did caregivers provide for complex mental and social needs, but also for simple chores such as laundry, cooking, cleaning, and organizing appointments.
Care was also provided through informal social networks— support among people who could understand the true reality of AIDS, and who are accepted as a person and not a burden to be abandoned.
The trust, concern, and compassion freely provided by these caretakers were essential for the emotional well-being of AIDS patients, especially for those unaccustomed to reaching out for help.
In effect, nurses often were unable to sleep, emotionally numbed by the pain suffered by these patients, and physically drained from the chores required of them.
[10] The UNAIDS 90-90-90 target is aiming to have 90% of people living with AIDS knowing of their diagnosis, 90% of those infected being treated, and 90% of those on treatment suppressing their virus by 2020.
[16] Though the homosexual population is still the most affected in terms of size, there has been an increase in AIDS infections among African American and Hispanic gay and bisexual men.
The fight to eradicate the effects of stigmatization and discrimination directed towards AIDS patients remains constant, though the focus must expand to include other populations that are infected.
[18] Thus, the future of this model must now depend on the responsiveness of the health care system in order to ensure that current at-risk populations will continue to use these programs and remain in them.
The different implications of marginalized populations must be considered in continuing this model, adding greater emphasis on mental and health substance abuse services, or increasing the involvement of family members.
As the young AIDS patients of the 1980s are now able to live longer with ART treatment, PReP, and a possible future vaccination, these create different circumstances that must be considered.
With AIDS infecting a greater variety of people, more resources and a broader outlook will be needed in order to maintain this model of care.