Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

Did you know about the growth of criminalization of HIV patients?

Yes   0 votes - 0 %
No   11 votes - 100 %
11 Total Votes
the already existing legal framework is sufficient to cover all cases of malevolent transmission of HIV/AIDS, and an additional, HIV specific law is unnecessary.

As I was reading, that is what I was wondering - was it HIV specific laws or general laws being used to prosecute?  I too don't see the need for specific legislation on the transmission of HIV for that reason, any deliberate act of harm to another person is already covered by criminal law.

To further stigmatise HIV with separate legislation is as you say so counterproductive.  People can't seek help and advice when they are afraid to be checked or to discuss the issue with anyone.

Thanks for the diary, Nomad - it is always good to raise the profile of issues like this.

by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Apr 30th, 2009 at 06:05:22 AM EST
Have you heard of an internet rumour of spreading "infected needle attacks"?

For your information, a couple of weeks ago, in a Dallas movie theater, a person sat on something sharp in one of the seats. When she stood up to see what it was, a needle was found poking through the seat with an attached note saying, "you have been infected with HIV". The Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta reports similar events have taken place in several other cities recently. All of the needles tested HAVE been positive for HIV. The CDC also reports that needles have been found in the coin return areas of pay phones and soda machines.
Other versions talk of ATM machines, market places... It's quite an old rumor, but it still causes waves of scare in Asia or Eastern Europe...
by das monde on Thu Apr 30th, 2009 at 06:18:02 AM EST
That's a nasty practice.  I'd heard of it but always assumed it was an urban legend.
by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Apr 30th, 2009 at 06:33:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And now I've read the link, I see it is!  But still, nasty to start such a rumour in the first place.
by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Thu Apr 30th, 2009 at 06:36:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
A woman, told by her doctor she has AIDS, breast-feeds her newly born - who gets HIV as result.

In countries where breast feeding is the overwhelming norm this may well be virtually incomprehensible to most mothers, certainly if they do not have at least the equivalent of a western high school education.  Even if they do, they might not have the ability to feed their child by any other means.

The self-protecting delusion for lawmakers and health givers alike would be that by passing such a law they have actually done anything useful or humane.  It is, in effect, a status crime: by virtue of her status as HIV positive and a mother with a new-born without adequate resources, she is a criminal.  Either let the child get HIV, let it starve or immediately give it up, if there are even provisions for legally surrendering a new-born in that society.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Fri May 1st, 2009 at 12:49:39 AM EST
From a lecture by a doctor specialised in this sort of thing I learnt that the order of least risk for transmission between mother and child is:

  1. No breast-milk.
  2. Only breast-milk.
  3. Mixed.

The order of 2 and 3 was the relevant point. If you give exclusively breastmilk the risk for transmission is less then if you generally use other food stuffs and sometimes gives brest milk. I do not remember the specifics of why this was the case. A law against breastfeeding might mean that someone who does not have HIV - a stigma in many socities. Thus with this law in place mothers might feel compelled to breastfeed in public in order to prevent stigma from attaching itself to them, while trying their best to give other foodstuffs in private. Thus creating greater risk for transmission.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Mon May 4th, 2009 at 09:36:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That is really interesting.  Maybe being fed only breast milk boosts the immune system and makes it a little more likely that the baby can fight the virus, whereas a diet of mostly other food is less likely to boost natural immunity so when breast fed infrequently, the baby can't fight off the virus and becomes more likely to contract HIV.
by In Wales (inwales aaat eurotrib.com) on Mon May 4th, 2009 at 01:32:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That would be my guess to, but unfortunately it has slipped my memory wheter she said this or it is just a conclusion based on breast milk boostering the immune system in general.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by A swedish kind of death on Mon May 4th, 2009 at 04:12:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It is also possible that it is a purely empirical result that has yet to be incorporated into a coherent theory.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon May 4th, 2009 at 04:52:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Top Diaries

Occasional Series