Should HIV testing be a private issue?

Should people be forced be tested for the HIV virus? If tested positive, must sexual partners be informed?

If not, should it be legal to misinform a sexual partner about one's condition? Or to play ignorant about the obvious?

While this applies to most STD's, AIDs is the best for discussion as it is almost 100% fatal and uncurable.

 

it's against the law if you have a partner and there not informed.

 

if i dont mistake that is attempt for murder if u dont inform your partner

 

STI's, applies to most STI's, they are no longer called Diseases but now Infections as there properties do not match typical diseases as much as they match Infections.

Testing for HIV should be kept private, but if you test positive you should definetly inform anyone you are/are going to sleep with.

That's the reason there is protection, don't have unprotected sexual interactions with people you don't know and you should be fine, as long as your careful enough. Although mistakes do happen.

Personally if I had and STI I wouldn't tell someone I'm having a fling with, I'll just make sure protection is used.

I agree they deserve to know, as I would like to know myself, hypocrisy at it's finest. =D


As I was talking about this AIDS was just mentioned in a joke on Family Guy. xD

 

Aids should be told to your partner through a honest and mature discussion and use a condom.

 

It's selfish and morally wrong to not tell someone your about to sleep with you have HIV.

Please tell them before you do the deed>_<

 

Yes, I believe someone should be sued or arrested for spreading the virus. To me, I consider it a crime because the other person has to suffer.

 

No and no. While I think it is a good thing to be tested if you are at risk, I certainly wouldn't require it by law.

You shouldn't have to tell them, but if you infect them I don't see how it is different than assaulting them.

 

Which law?

Would this not discourage testing for it? If you test positive, and you make the crime assault, than why test? If it's private, than does it really apply?

 

in some cases people don't know if they have STD's or STI's.

 

Exactly, and if laws were enacted to punish people who knowlingly had sex with STD's, people may consider avoiding tests altogether (or using "private" tests).

 

It's a breach of privacy in every meaning of the three words.

HIV testing should not be compulsory, as it infringes upon a conscious willing being's freedom.

 

You should have to tell them. It's just like if a guy walks up to you and tells you i'm about to hit you with a bat. It gives the person a chance to leave the situation.

It should be required by law, because even if the person is singled out, if they stop having sexual interations with people without the disease, the disease in the future will become extinct.

Privacy/Freedom < Life.

 

if I were infected, I would most certainly inform everyone

actually, I'd probably never have sex again regardless.

maybe we should castrate everyone with AIDZ

 

That's not a bad idea.

 

Oh, you're one of those pro-life nuts.

People have the right to do whatever they want to their own body. Nobody has any decision in telling them what they can't do to themselves.

 

ah, but does harming the life of others come into effect here?

 

It's not like every person with AIDS goes around infecting others. You're violating the privacy/freedom of everybody to safeguard against those who might harm others.

Except that it's not actually your responsibility to go around making sure that person A doesn't harm person B. Again, you would be violating the rights of innocents to protect against those who might do wrong.

 

Yes, but if you keep it from happening on accident, it will stop it as a whole. I find it for the betterment.
Privacy < Life.

I was being sarcastic to his sarcasm, if his was sarcasm in the first place.

 

ofc it should be :S its your own body why shouldnt it be :S?