Should your sex partner know if you have AIDS?

[Lightmeup]

In a recent New Zealand court decision, a man was acquitted of criminal charges of not informing his sex partner that he was HIV+, because he wore a condom. New Zealand law says people with HIV should disclose their condition if it could endanger their partner. But the court decided that the condom usage was a good enough precautionary measure to relieve the man of his responsibility to inform his partner of his infected status.

What do you think of this? Considering the fact that condoms can break, I think that the healthy partner should have the chance to decide whether they want to take that risk or not. AIDS is a potentially deadly disease, no one should have the right to unknowingly expose another human being to possible infection, even if the probability of infection is very low. Would you want to be the unlucky 1 person out of 100 to win the AIDS lottery?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4311174.stm

 

[B@rt]

No matter if you use a condom, if you have AIDS you should inform your partner.

 

[gadget_lover]

A good friend of mine was stupid enough marry a man with AIDS, though she did not know it at the time. She did, however, know that he was a bisexual IV drug user who was promiscuous and did not practice safe sex. She should have known.

She's been HIV+ for about 8 years, and has almost died twice of pneumonia. He killed himself a while back.

Failure to disclose should invoke a permanent quarantine, not just a jail term. Or maybe life in prison. It is, after all, attempted murder.

Daniel

 

[Icebreak]

Pretty harsh, Daniel. I agree almost 100% except that I think it is attempted torture/murder and could be said to be a crime against society.

---------------

- Jeff

 

[JackBlades]

If you know you are HIV+ you should not be attempting to engage a partner!

 

[chmsam]

I'm not a lawyer, but...

It's probably not illegal to not inform, and probably unconstitutional on some level to require someone to give up information on any medical condition. The problem comes not from this, but from if you require it, where does it lead to next and where does it then stop?

Having said that, anyone who knows that they have just about any disease that can be passed along to their partner and/or family and then does so is the slime that sticks to the stuff that sticks to the stuff that sticks to the bottom of your shoes when you walk through a cow pasture.

 

[nikon]

It sounds like another case of the courts preferring to protect the "rights" of the perpetrator instead of those of the victim.

On the other hand, one should take the responsibility of knowing their prospective sexual partner before hopping in the sack with them.

 

[reefphilic]

If you know you are HIV+ you should not be attempting to engage a partner!

No, you can attempt to engage a partner.......................................................................provided that your partner is also HIV positive!

 

[James S]

probably more like reckless endangerment and involuntary manslaughter if someone actually gets it from you.

Definitely something that should be disclosed, but since it's liable to alter someones behavior, hopefully to the point of NOT having sex with that partner, I can see that it's unlikely to be disclosed in a casual relationship.

When I talk to my friends who are just 8 or 10 years older than me they have a very much more casual attitude towards sex. If you could avoid pregnancy there were no consequences for them. My generation was going through high school when AIDS was a death sentence, just about the time that drug therapy was starting to make some headway. If you got HIV in the early 80's you would die from it. Now you can live for much longer, but you have to use really nasty drugs to stay alive. Unfortunately, the drugs appear to be tendering again a more casual attitude towards sex in the younger folks again. It's not seen as important a risk as it is since you can just take a pill if you get it right?

Unfortunately, 50% of the people in the world are below the average intelligence And then when this is an issue you're not really thinking as clearly as you might otherwise do... So unfortunately, bad decisions are made quite often and sometimes they have life long, or life shortening consequences.

 

[powernoodle]

I must be an old fuddy duddy. If you get to know someone over several months or a few years, then marry him or her, then play tummy tennis, in that order, then VD, HIV and b*stard kids are a non-issue.

best regards

 

[gadget_lover]

I must be an old fuddy duddy. If you get to know someone over several months or a few years, then marry him or her, then play tummy tennis, in that order, then VD, HIV and b*stard kids are a non-issue.

best regards

That would be nice, but it is not true. You seem to be assuming that both parties are virgins that have never been kissed. Some illnesses don't present recognizable symptoms. That's why some states require VD tests before issuing a marriage license.

HIV can be unnoticed for years. There are STDs that can be spread orally.

On the other hand, really getting to know a prospective partner is always a good idea. The chances that a lover will keep thier medical condition secret is slimmer the longer you know them. Of course, as many divorce victims can tell you, you don't always know your partner as well as you think.

Daniel

 

[BentHeadTX]

If someone had AIDS and knowingly gave it to me... I would be the one charged with murder. People can't walk around with explosives, flame throwers, machine guns etc.... if you have a lethal illness, you can't walk around and spread death either.

 

[powernoodle]

> That would be nice, but it is not true.

Ok, cite some examples wherein someone dated/was engaged for an extended period, got married before playing tummy tennis, then unexpected was infected with HIV.

Just because there are theoretical exceptions to my statement (though I doubt that you could cite many real-world examples), the veracity of my statement remains intact. HIV is easily avoided.

 

[DarkLight]

Should be a felony to have sex of any kind with a person if they do not have knowledge of your condition.

If they get sick and or die from it the appropriate charges should then apply.

Assault with a deadly weapon?

 

[LaserFreak]

There was an episode on Law & Order about this very subject last night. There, of course, was no solution to the story because the carrier (also the accused) was expected to die 2 weeks later from pneumonia, but was accused of having sex with multiple women, not using a condom, and not informing his partners that he had AIDS. He even told one of his partners that he intended to "take as many with him as possible". IMO, this would escalate any legal charges to murder, or at least attempted murder.

IMO, there is no excuse for not informing your partner, condom or no condom, that you have a potentially deadly disease, and if you do, you should be charged appropriately.

 

[gadget_lover]

> That would be nice, but it is not true.

Ok, cite some examples wherein someone dated/was engaged for an extended period, got married before playing tummy tennis, then unexpected was infected with HIV.

Just because there are theoretical exceptions to my statement (though I doubt that you could cite many real-world examples), the veracity of my statement remains intact. HIV is easily avoided.

The chances that soemone would admit to those circumstances are pretty slim, so I cannot rise to your challenge. I don't know many people who have had long engagements, nor do I know of any that abstain from all forms of intimate contact during the courting period.

Yor original assertion was

If you get to know someone over several months or a few years, then marry him or her, then play tummy tennis, in that order, then VD, HIV and b*stard kids are a non-issue.

Since many STDs have symptoms that can be ignored they are passed on all the time between un-suspecting partners.

Since a large number of people who contract HIV do not get tested, the ability to avoid it diminishes. The infidelity rate is such that even if you and your betrothed are disease free now you can not say, with 100 percent certainty, that STDs will never be an issue. A recent study had 20% of the women admitting to infidelity. It's unknown how many lied.

So my assertion is simple; It's an issue. It must be addressed and should be backed up by lab tests prior to intimacy. That kills the spontaneity, but if you care, you care.

Daniel

 

[Shanghaied]

No, you can attempt to engage a partner.......................................................................provided that your partner is also HIV positive!

Actually, there are several different strains (sorta like sub-species) of HIV, so it is in fact possible to be HIV-positive and still be infected by another kind of HIV. Sort of like having two different, yet somewhat similar diseases at the same time. Which is actually worse than having just one kind of HIV, as hard as it is to imagine being worse than HIV-positive.

That's why it is advised that even HIV-positive couples use protection.

 

[turbodog]

Enough has been said about the hiv question that I'll just affirm that I'm with PN on this one. I think the important phrase is "get to know". My getting to know isn't finding out what color her panties are. Getting to know is finding out all about someone.

With that said, it's important for you guys to know that there are many other things out there that fall into the same category. Are we to ship all people to a desert island that have:

hiv
aids
hepatitis
incurable stds (herpes/etc)
???
genetic disorder that's passed on to offspring

Ask someone that's on kidney dialysis what they think of hepatitis.

 

[chmsam]

Sorry for the rant, but...

The one thing most people never understand -- you cannot legislate morality, it has to be cultured and nurtured. Even then, some of the most supposedly moral and respected people are practicing some of the most risky and even morally dispicable, sexual behavior.

Wanna get a real good shock? Ask a bunch of kids (say, any group of people 21 and younger, and even much, much younger) if there are virgins among them. Quite a few, and many more than you would assume, will say that they are. However, then ask them what sort of things they and their friends do when they're making out. Be prepared to pick your jaw up off the ground.

Next, ask any group of people of almost any age how they think STD's and HIV can be transmitted. These diseases are spreading among groups you wouldn't "traditionally" expect, but you won't know about it unless you read the health statistics. The general public is not getting the idea about how bad and how widespread these diseases are. "Nice girls don't get pregnant unless they are married," and "Nice people don't get STD's" didn't work in the 50's, so what makes anyone think it'll work now? Maybe there are really that many "nice people" around, or maybe they really aren't so nice after all.

People of all ages still assume that unless you are homosexual, you cannot contract HIV. They also assume that only intercourse can cause the spread of STD's. They assume that you cannot get pregnant unless you have sex many, many times. There are many people who view themselves as virgins and non-sexual even though they practice many types of sex. Few, if any think it can happen to them. Want to see someone with a blank, deer-caught-in-the-headlights look? All you have to do is then ask 'em, "Why not you? Are you someone special with a huge medical freebie pass?"

Almost no one knows for 100% certain that their partner isn't cheating, hasn't used IV drugs, hasn't practiced risky sex (and, really, it's all potentially risky), or whatever? Very, very few people do, but many think that they do. That means a lot of people willingly trust others who lie to them or would otherwise say anything, with their health and well being.

No law or rule will stop these diseases. Ignorance and assumptions will continue to allow the spread of infection. Until people start to respect each other and themselves a whole lot more, the health of the world ain't gonna improve all that much. The only hope to stem the spread of these diseases seems to be education and respect. No laws will prevent anyone from doing what they want to do, and worse, what they think someone else wants them to do to keep them in the relationship. So, Sex Ed might not prevent kids from having sex, but it might keep them from becoming pregnant, getting sick, or even dying. So can just taling to your kids.

[END RANT MODE]

Look up the CDC and various state health departments' statistics on the spread of STD's and HIV/AIDS and really see who's getting sick.

Yes, if someone has a disease they should tell their partner -- before, preferally than after. No law will make that happen. Only respect and caring will work. Since people still think that wrestling is for real, we could be in trouble.

 

[Greta]

Assault with a deadly weapon?

He even told one of his partners that he intended to "take as many with him as possible". IMO, this would escalate any legal charges to murder, or at least attempted murder.

Actually... there ARE laws like this! Depending on the circumstances, charges of attemped murder and/or aggravated assault CAN be made and will hold up in court.