To keep quiet about HIV/AIDs

[sixtyandaquarter]

Someone probably knows your friend has an STD though, if your health department is doing their job...

The health department is doing their job.

They are doing nothing.
It's against the law to do otherwise. You can't do anything. It's "invasion of privacy". If I had any other STD except the biggest killer, my privacy is walked all over, but this... ha!

 

[Lene]

Well I guess someone should tell that to my mother because apparently she's being paid by the government to invade people's privacy...

How is something like that an invasion of privacy?

It's not like the information is out there for everyone to see and there isn't a bulletin with Who got HIV This Month! circulated, but if you have been tested in a clinic/hospital for a STD (including HIV/AIDS!)...then the Health Department knows it because said clinic/hospital readily gives that information to them.

It's not illegal if you're the person with HIV to refrain from reporting you have HIV/AIDS but it doesn't mean the disease isn't monitored for epidemiological purposes.

The only way you can truly be anonymous is if you choose to have an anonymous test. Your name doesn't get recorded, but you're still a statistic. However, in that situation where your friend saw a doctor and got the test? That's usually not anonymous. There are specific places one can go to get a anon. test. Otherwise, once again the Health Department is perfect within bounds to know you have HIV.

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

AIDS Action Council
AIDS National InterFaith Network
American Civil Liberties Union
Americans with Disabilities Act
National Council on Disability
The United States Department of Health

Look up any of these and search for HIV/AIDs. You'll see that you can not legally inform anyone - under ANY circumstances - that someone else has HIV/AIDs. It is illegal.

You can not disclose it if they are an employee of yours, nor if you are a former sexual partner. You can not do it if you are a doctor - you can't do it EVER. EVER. They could be purposely going around spreading the disease best they can - you can not tell their name, don't believe me? Look at The Cincinnati Enquirer, here's a link: http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2003/09/29/loc_wwwloc2aids.html. A guy prostituting himself with AIDs can't have his name told - whoever he was with has to figure it out on their own.
YOU can NOT tell anyone that someone else has HIV or AIDs. Ever. Never-ever-ever-never-ever!

Don't believe me? Look 'em up.
Your mother may be getting paid by the government to collect this information - but if she's going around informing people of someone else's illness , yes, she's breaking the law - and multiple laws at that.

You can do so for every other STD. You can do so for TB and other non sexual based illnesses - but not HIV or AIDs.
I can, if I am informed, that a pass or current partner of a friend that they need to be tested for an exact disease, I can name it, I can even give the dates and all information - everything, but I am not -by penalty of law- allowed to do so when that person has HIV or AIDs.

If I was a doctor, I couldn't even tell my sister her partner has it. Of course I would... but if it was found out my entire career and freedom could easily be challenged and I could find myself out of a job - no, forget just a job, I'll never work medical again in this country. Here I come Mexico, I'd say, for the chance at saving my sister I'd lose everything.

Minkoff is rubbing off on me... I'm CAPPING like crazy instead of my preferred italics...

 

[Lene]

The Health Department is an exception to all of these rules. So is the police, and firefighters and judges and etc. etc. There are a lot of exceptions to that rule. And yes this is for HIV.

The Health Department will contact the person w/ HIV and ASK "Hey? Do you want us to tell your sexual parters about this?" And proceed to do their to convince the person to say yes. Once they have permission then they can start calling people. Think about it, how do you think the health department gets a list of someone's sexual partners?

Hell, if the person dies, then they don't even need to ask! Also if the kid is less than 14 their parents are told they got the test, I think. They still need the child's consent to say the results, but saying one thing usually leads to the other (and that's why it's done that way).

The only people the Health Department tell (WITH PERMISSION) are the people who were at risk of getting the disease from the person in question. But truly, unless you go through the trouble of going to a place that provides anonymous testing, and you actually ASK for it, you are on record. Also, the person themselves can fill out all sort of forms that say basically "I intend to tell so-and-so I have HIV/AIDS, if they start blabbing it out I can sue them!"

They could be purposely going around spreading the disease best they can - you can not tell their name, don't believe me?

Are you serious? Hell no I don't believe you, that information will be handed to the police, the courts and then the public so fast you will not even believe it. If the person is under investigation as a Sex Offender (and running around GIVING people HIV is an offense), then the police can get and spread information and once again it's PERFECTLY LEGAL.

You had better read that article again, because um...I now know that Charles Woodgeard has HIV. Quoting the article.

Like all criminal cases, Woodgeard's case immediately became public record. And like such cases, the details - including his HIV status - were posted online after his Aug. 20 arrest.

So once again, I'm sure if you continue to read those places where you got the information you just posted, you'll see all the EXCEPTIONS to the rule. The rule was created to ensure that only people who truly needed to know that information, know the information.

 

[sixtyandaquarter]

Wrong article... how embarrasing.
I had three articles open, and I meant to take one, but sent the wrong one. I concede my point on that, though. I didn't read fully the other two, because I saw what I needed after reading the first one - I just never checked to see if I was copying the headline from the right article or the url. I'll do better to look threw next time.
My apologies for that one.

But...
You just said it yourself, the health department will call them up and ask. What if the answer is no?
Do they do anything? Because I said no for a non-killing STD and I got harassed, and threatened with legal actions.

 

[craybest]

I forgot to say, most people around here that have HIV and are aware of it, are pretty responsible with it and actually tell their sexual partners, the people who go around infecting others for no reason are not really a big number. Maybe it's not enforced because that reason, while people who get random STD's might not be so responsible about it with others.
being aware that you' re HIV+ really changes your life, you're ultimately forced to take responsability for your acts, and your health, wich is usually something that young people don't do much. So most people who discover they have it, know how bad is to have it, and really don't want to infect others. therefore they usually warn others about their state. the problem is that there's a LOAD of people who don't want to get tested, because they are either scared or trying to escape from reality and the responsability it carries. and usually those people are the ones that go around infecting others, because they're not fully aware of their state (even if in some cases it's pretty obvious).
What I'm trying to say is that usually the people who get tested, are the ones who take care of themselves and others. and they usually warn others, therefore no need to be enforced(that's how things work around here at last). while people who get maytbe gonorrea, don't have their lives changed as much as those with HIV, therefore continue with being irresponsible, and therefore needs to be enforced.

 

[Lene]

60.25- HIV is not necessarily a killing disease. But honestly, I wonder about people who would refuse not to tell pertinent people. That's seriously low.

craybest- I tend to agree with you on the matter of people who actually manage to take the test being pretty responsible. Although I still claim discrimination as the reason why HIV is not one of those STDs that must be reported (anymore).