Activists Want to Repeal Missouri HIV Law

Pinkie-Dawn

Pinkie-Dawn

Vampire Waifu
    • 9,525
    Posts
    12
    Years
    JEFFERSON CITY ??December 1 was World Aids Day and Missouri activists want legislators to change a law concerning those living with HIV.

    In the state of Missouri, any person who exposes someone to HIV could go to prison. If a person contracts HIV the person who gave it to them could go to prison for life. This law has put 82 people in prison since 1997. Activists explained this law is discriminatory and based on outdated science.

    Activists launched the Missouri HIV Justice Coalition Wednesday. The group said it plans to lobby policy makers to repeal the law.

    Empower Missouri Executive Director Jeanette Mott Oxford said the laws should be based on accurate science.

    She said the current law makes assumptions about HIV transmission that we now know are incorrect.

    "We hope that Missouri will modernize their law making it medically accurate and taking away the stigma of people with HIV by taking the HIV specific part out of our criminal code," she said. "Certainly there should be laws about doing things such as biting people, but you shouldn't have a higher penalty for being a person with HIV."

    "About two-thirds of the United States have "HIV-specific" statues that result in prosecutions of those living with HIV for having sexual contact without being able to prove they disclosed their HIV positive status in advance," according to activist group The Sero Project.

    State Senator Rob Schaaf (R-St. Joseph) said he could see the laws changing in the future.
    "The law is based upon a false premise," Schaaf said. "I doubt that there's a big urgency in changing it, but I think it would eventually be changed to fit our understanding of the true situation."

    Mott Oxford said the Missouri HIV Justice Coalition plans to hold upcoming events to educate more people about the current law. If you are interested in joining the group, you can contact Mott Oxford at Empower Missouri at (573)-634-2901.

    Currently there is no legislation to repeal this law.
    Click to expand...

    Source: https://krcgtv.com/news/local/activists-want-to-repeal-missouri-hiv-law

    I've seen this guy expressing his thoughts on how this news is terrible and why he shares no sympathy towards these activists, but what are your thoughts? Do you think people who know they have HIV should have the right to have sex with people who aren't infected by it?
     
    People who have HIV/AIDS and don't tell their sexual partners are putting them at risk and that shouldn't be ignored. I don't know really if that should involve the criminal justice system though. Certainly if there is a case that someone tried to infect someone intentionally that shouldn't be ignored and might be considered some degree of assault or some other crime. Acting to specifically infect someone with HIV/AIDS should definitely be a criminal offense. When it's just two people, I dunno. There's a level of personal responsibility at play, and I don't want the law to be so up in people's personal sexual lives, but that's not to say that there isn't some murky grey area that might involve issues of consent or coercion that might necessitate the law getting involved.

    I guess a lot of it comes down to whether you believe that having HIV/AIDS makes you dangerous enough to be stigmatized specifically by law. I mean, there are plenty of other diseases a person can pass on that I don't believe have laws about them so if that's the case then why single out this disease?
     
    I agree with the sentiments above. Having HIV puts others at risk when you dont tell them and have sex with them. However, I dont think jail time is a proper punishment. I think something like paying for healthcare bills is more fair. what percentage, I dont know. I would like to say 100%, but healthcare is expensive as heck.
     
    This is tricky, we shouldn't penalise victims of an illness but at the same time they have a moral responsibility to inform others who are at risk. I mean it needs to be a case by case basis because if the initial person doesn't know they have HIV then it would be insane to punish them for accidentally spreading it
     
    CUTIEFLY!!! said:
    What if you don't know you have it? If you get regularly tested, but get it and pass it on between tests there should be a lesser punishment IMO.
    Click to expand...

    Hands said:
    it needs to be a case by case basis because if the initial person doesn't know they have HIV then it would be insane to punish them for accidentally spreading it
    Click to expand...

    Making testing available to people and making it something that's affordable and/or covered by insurance would be essential for this. But just as important is not stigmatizing people for having HIV/AIDS which I think is still a problem. If you're made to feel ashamed for having the disease you'd be less likely to tell someone and/or seek treatment. You'd also be less likely to get tested on the (flawed) idea that it's better not to know, which is something people do all the time.
     
    Esper said:
    Making testing available to people and making it something that's affordable and/or covered by insurance would be essential for this. But just as important is not stigmatizing people for having HIV/AIDS which I think is still a problem. If you're made to feel ashamed for having the disease you'd be less likely to tell someone and/or seek treatment. You'd also be less likely to get tested on the (flawed) idea that it's better not to know, which is something people do all the time.
    Click to expand...

    Yeah I completely agree with this, we need to stop demonising the ill whilst limiting the spread.
     
    CUTIEFLY!!! said:
    Why not a law that requires testing?
    Click to expand...
    You also have questions about who would pay for it and who would be asked to get tested.

    Medical stuff isn't cheap, and if you're poor it could be a big burden on you to pay for some medical examination (from the exam itself to getting time away from work to go to a hospital or clinic). Or you'd ask your city/county/province/state/country to pay for it. And then who would you test? Everyone? Pretty much anyone can contract HIV so you can't know why might have it just by looking at them.

    I mean, I think it wouldn't be bad for everyone to have themselves tested for HIV just to be safe, but there are practical considerations.
     
    Hands said:
    This is tricky, we shouldn't penalise victims of an illness but at the same time they have a moral responsibility to inform others who are at risk. I mean it needs to be a case by case basis because if the initial person doesn't know they have HIV then it would be insane to punish them for accidentally spreading it
    Click to expand...

    True. But punishment should still be handed down to those who intentionally seek to spread the illness. I can see the argument of "outdated" science, wherein it was once believed that HIV/AIDS was a gay man's disease, which was proven wrong so many times since. But the law does still have quite the merit. Not entirely sure what can be done after this law's repealed and such a case stemming from this subject matter comes to light...
     
    If they don't inform a person they're having sex with that they have HIV, intentional or not, they should get in trouble for it. At the very least it is negligence.
     
    HIV is no longer a death sentence, there are the drugs that can keep you alive, if you can afford it or access it. The key is treatment as early as possible to prevent your immune system from deteriorating. The drugs are so powerful now that an HIV-positive person's viral load can become undetectable after a short time on treatment.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top