Housegood--Danielle W.

One of the most telling statements from the article by Hosegood et al was the following: "in no society do households exist in isolation" (1250). This could refer to the more abstract outside or institutional influences that are reflected in the behaviour of households, but I'd like to consider it in the context of networks. The article describes the impact of HIV on households and their networks: the presence and resulting fear of such a seemingly ceaseless, indiscriminate killer plays a huge role in shaping network exchanges--suspicions, doubts, anger, loss, etc lead to changes in economic behaviour and familial ties. As the article points out, "inter-personal and inter-household relationships are not necessarily supportive and may become marred by conflict, disappointment and suspicion, and weakened by distance, differing priorities and changing circumstances" (1250). The loss of a group or of an entire generation deeply unsettles affected communities, raising many questions like who will take care of children or house in the absence of the prior holders. It also begs the question of the importance of networks--is it possible to temper the effects on one's own community of a grievous event that occurs elsewhere? How vulnerable does a household make itself when engaging in a network?