Planned Parenthood Says Hiding HIV From Sex Partners Is A ‘Right’ -
- Thread starter putzpotus
- Start date
Aella_
non-english speaker
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2015
- Posts
- 6,604
I'm surprised that people missed this one.
1.I understand that in the past, All states within the US had partner-notification laws .
(Aka the HIV+ve person was legally obligated to notify his/her past or current sexual contacts. And that, should the health professionals believe that their patient failed to do so, they had the duty to warn the person at risk themselves about tge risks.)
- But that the laws have changed over the last decade and only a few States in the US still enact those older laws. And that in the rest of the states, disclosure should be "voluntary, without intervention or coercion from health professionals.
Nevertheless, the health professional still has a duty to counsel the patient and encourage him/her to inform their sexual partner. In a non-coercive manner, however.
2.Therefore, after reading PP's brochure, I was surprised to find myself 60% on BB's side.
- Because, while they counsel and advise the patient to disclose their status
- the way the writer explained the "voluntary versus under legal obligation" thing was quite unfortunate and misleading. Potential to plant the wrong idea in a young person's mind.
So I don't think that they intended to advise young people against disclosure. I think that they employed a rel. incompetent medical writer to create those brochures. No excuse for such gaffes in such critical matters.
1.I understand that in the past, All states within the US had partner-notification laws .
(Aka the HIV+ve person was legally obligated to notify his/her past or current sexual contacts. And that, should the health professionals believe that their patient failed to do so, they had the duty to warn the person at risk themselves about tge risks.)
- But that the laws have changed over the last decade and only a few States in the US still enact those older laws. And that in the rest of the states, disclosure should be "voluntary, without intervention or coercion from health professionals.
Nevertheless, the health professional still has a duty to counsel the patient and encourage him/her to inform their sexual partner. In a non-coercive manner, however.
2.Therefore, after reading PP's brochure, I was surprised to find myself 60% on BB's side.
- Because, while they counsel and advise the patient to disclose their status
- the way the writer explained the "voluntary versus under legal obligation" thing was quite unfortunate and misleading. Potential to plant the wrong idea in a young person's mind.
So I don't think that they intended to advise young people against disclosure. I think that they employed a rel. incompetent medical writer to create those brochures. No excuse for such gaffes in such critical matters.
Aella_
non-english speaker
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2015
- Posts
- 6,604
I'm quite conflicted in this matter too, tbh, because of the brain development thingy. (Aka when do thoughts or feelings -or smthng. like that- start?)
but in the end I'm with those who chose abortions.
If society made it easy or less stigmatising for them to carry a child, or if they ensured a good future for their offsprings,
don't you think that half of them would eventually change their minds?
But no, those who point fingers only do that: accuse. Instead of also gathering funds to help those women who are still uncertain.
Last edited:
