Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This man served 3 years in prison and has to register as a sex offender because he did not disclose that he had HIV to two women he slept with. (Neither woman contracted HIV from him, fortunately.) He says it is unfair and there shouldn't be a law keep HIV a secret with sex partners, and that he shouldn't be required to register as a sex offender.
The Push to End Punishment Fever against People with HIV:
Pretty sure there was a "Law & Order" about this in the 90s. I can't remember the outcome of the episode. There is a good case to be made for charging someone who does not disclose their HIV-positive status to sexual partners. If you know you are positive and don't tell your lovers and don't use precautions, you're basically paying Russian Roulette with someone else's life.
As I've explained numerous times in this thread, this is not necessarily true given the miracles of modern medicine. There has not been a documented case of someone with an undetectable viral load passing HIV to an HIV negative individual. Similarly, if someone if on PrEP, there have been a few cases where an HIV negative person on PrEP has contracted HIV. For both cases, doctors say that it is virtually impossible to contract the virus. Note, even under such circumstances I still think that people should be required to tell their partners of their status, but I think some of the disconnect comes from the belief that the law shouldn't punish people in the aforementioned categories with a crime based on medical advances. The above virtually guarantees that an uninfected person will not contract HIV, which makes much of the legislation at issue outdated.
Note, even in the case of an undetectable viral load or someone on PrEP, I believe that the HIV negative partner has a right to know of their partner's status so that they may make an informed decision about whether to have sex. Indeed, even if the risk of contracting HIV in the above situations is virtually non-existent, it is technically still there (in real world terms, though, the risk is 0%): https://www.preventionaccess.org/faq Now, the risk of getting HIV if you're negative and on PrEP is higher than if your partner has an undetectable viral load, but it is still very low. Still, because there is a "chance" under both scenarios, I believe that you (as an HIV negative individual) has a right to know what you're getting into. I just disagree with what the punishment should be for someone in the above situations if they fail to disclose.
Intentional transmission is probably extremely rare (more or less limited to psychopaths and the like), unlike negligent transmission.
Yes, but isn't there still the issue of responsibility? What if an HIV positive (or some other STD) person is really intoxicated and doesn't think to reveal his/her status? I could see arguments for and against culpability by the professionals.
HPV can be life threatening (cancer). What about Hep B? I'm old and out of the loop, is that no longer a concern? Syphilis is treatable but can be deadly. Anyone who is HIV positive (or has any other STD), in my opinion, has a moral obligation to disclose this information (assuming they know it) to a sexual partner. I'm going to have to ponder a while on whether it should be charged as a crime. I'm assuming the sex act is between consenting adults.
How is intentional transmission separate from being negligent. If a person is being negligent/careless and they don't use contraceptives, that almost seems like intentional.
The difference between intentional and negligent is like with any other crime. In this case intentional means the person knows they are HIV positive and deliberately wants to infect someone whom he obviously hates for some reason. Negligent means the person knows they are HIV positive and has sex with someone they might even love, hoping that no infection will occur, anyway.
At least that is my understanding, but I am no legal expert nor is English my mother tongue.
Although it is reprehensible for someone living with hiv to not share that detail with individuals they get intimate with, it is everyone’s responsibility to take care of their own health. Anyone can have hiv. And, most people don’t understand that someone whose virus is controlled by anti viral medications and whose viral load is undetectable, will not spread the virus to others. People need to educate themselves and then take precautions accordingly.
Anyone can theoretically get HIV via some freakish accident, yes. But knowing when people around you have it, makes you much more careful and thus reduces your risk considerably.
Yes, but isn't there still the issue of responsibility? What if an HIV positive (or some other STD) person is really intoxicated and doesn't think to reveal his/her status? I could see arguments for and against culpability by the professionals.
I would imagine if a person in a committed relationship got drunk had a fling their significant other may not find the excuse that they were drunk sufficient.
Neither should the legal system if someone with HIV gets drunk and fails to disclose their status to their sex partner.
Last edited by Oklazona Bound; 05-17-2019 at 06:37 AM..
Agreed. Callous disregard for the health and safety of another should be unlawful.
Well, then tons of guys and gals with gonorrhea, trich, and a variety of other diseases should be in jail.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.