Should Intentionally Attempting To Spread HIV To Partners Be Criminalized?

[wehavetostan]

HIV is a virus that has taken so many lives, especially within the gay community. Thankfully, there has been significant medical advances for those living with HIV, due to antiretroviral therapy (ART), and those with HIV can live long lives. There are people who enjoy purposefully giving someone HIV (“pozzing”), and some states criminalize this. Should those who intentionally give HIV to their s*xual partners be prosecuted?

 

*****Also, I understand U=U (undetectable = untransmittable), so I am referring to those who are detectable.

[Kim Petrat]

is this really not illegal everywhere in the us? who knew…

[jezebelvictoria]

It is. 

[wehavetostan]

7 minutes ago, Kim Petrat said:

is this really not illegal everywhere in the us? who knew…

 

3 minutes ago, jezebelvictoria said:

It is. 

It’s not in a few states

[KOMHStan13]

I mean I would imagine that the 'pozzing' community would get their feathers ruffled but who really cares. They should ban the practice, especially if they have the malicious intent to spread it without knowledge. 

[Richmond]

So by the map 6/50 states don’t have a law regarding it… so the consensus overall is yes, it is criminalized in the US

[xxxlamb]

i had no idea that in some states you have to register as a sex offender if you are HIV+...am i reading the map correctly?

[Power love]

I don’t know how anyone could purposely do that to someone else. It’s just evil especially knowing this person is innocent. 

[wehavetostan]

6 minutes ago, xxxlamb said:

i had no idea that in some states you have to register as a sex offender if you are HIV+...am i reading the map correctly?

 

It means that six states can require an individual living with HIV who is convicted under an HIV-specific criminal statute to register as a sex offender

[Danny789]

Can I say something controversial yet brave ?

 

if you’re out there not on PrEP and doing it raw, you’re accepting the risks. Rape would be the exception of course. 

[BYoncé]

Literally almost all states have it outlawed in some form or the other based on that chart, and putting HIV transmission near the level of sex offender is fear mongering against the vulnerable population of infected people unless that's a blanket law that's applied to all STIs equally (which is obviously a slippery slope). I can't support it without seeing a study on the hard number of people who intentionally infect and are found guilty in a court of law for infecting people, and it's revealed to be some sort of epidemic (which it most likely isn't), because you shouldn't be able to put people on a sex offender list for this as a blanket law rather than on a case by case basis. It just sounds like that's begging for a homophobic state court to start rubber stamping the HIV-positive population as offenders, which is dangerous for a group of people who tend to be lower income and have a disease which disproportionately affects a higher % of people of color.

 

Edit: Just realized I guess I didn't answer the original question directly, which is yes and no, it should be illegal if found guilty, but I don't think there's a way it could be made illegal without it being a really shaky precedent.

Edited December 31, 2022 by BYoncé

[Delirious]

14 minutes ago, BYoncé said:

Literally almost all states have it outlawed in some form or the other based on that chart, and putting HIV transmission near the level of sex offender is fear mongering against the vulnerable population of infected people unless that's a blanket law that's applied to all STIs equally (which is obviously a slippery slope). I can't support it without seeing a study on the hard number of people who intentionally infect and are found guilty in a court of law for infecting people, and it's revealed to be some sort of epidemic (which it most likely isn't), because you shouldn't be able to put people on a sex offender list for this as a blanket law rather than on a case by case basis. It just sounds like that's begging for a homophobic state court to start rubber stamping the HIV-positive population as offenders, which is dangerous for a group of people who tend to be lower income and have a disease which disproportionately affects a higher % of people of color.

 

Edit: Just realized I guess I didn't answer the original question directly, which is yes and no, it should be illegal if found guilty, but I don't think there's a way it could be made illegal without it being a really shaky precedent.

well if youre positive and dont disclose of it the person and they get it then that is intentional imo. but yea, they need to be proven guilty before anything happens because what if that persondidnt even know or what if they got it from someone else

[Sazare]

In theory? Sure. But good luck trying to prove they’re deliberately attempting to spread it (and no, having unprotected sex in and of itself doesn’t count)

[Thelightiscumin]

55 minutes ago, Danny789 said:

Can I say something controversial yet brave ?

 

if you’re out there not on PrEP and doing it raw, you’re accepting the risks. Rape would be the exception of course. 

With that Logic all crimes become the victim’s fault 

 

I heard stories of positive guys only doing oral and not telling people they have it so they wouldn’t get rejected. 

[Kavish]

There are also people who want to be "pozzed"/infected.  There is a whole community of fetishists who are into that.  They justify this practice as "consent" but I believe it should still be criminalised as it increases the risk of propagating the virus to those who might not be aware or consenting.  

[Mr. Mendes]

1 hour ago, xxxlamb said:

i had no idea that in some states you have to register as a sex offender if you are HIV+...am i reading the map correctly?

No, that isn't what it means. 

 

It means in some states, if you intentionally or knowingly spread HIV to a partner then you could be required to register as a sex offender. Having it is not the crime. Having sex with them and exposing them to it and them getting it without you having told them ahead of time you had it is the crime as that is an intentional withholding of information that relates to their safety and health. It makes consent hazy because they were not providing consent with full knowledge of the situation. 

[fauxtography]

This seems like one of those threads just to demonize people with HIV because a.) it’s already illegal and b.) ATRL is not going to be the judge and juror here.

[Saintlor]

This isn’t the website to be asking this question

 

ATRL thinks it’s wrong and prejudiced if someone doesn’t want to sleep with someone who has HIV

[sk8erfan]

1 hour ago, Kavish said:

There are also people who want to be "pozzed"/infected.  There is a whole community of fetishists who are into that.  They justify this practice as "consent" but I believe it should still be criminalised as it increases the risk of propagating the virus to those who might not be aware or consenting.  

The way this is making my skin crawl. Reading “all the young men” by Ruth Coker Burks, the amount of death and devastation experienced by so many people (and yes, they’re not going to die these days) I can’t fathom this is just chucked into a fetish category like that  

[Last Boy on Earth]

3 hours ago, Danny789 said:

Can I say something controversial yet brave ?

 

if you’re out there not on PrEP and doing it raw, you’re accepting the risks. Rape would be the exception of course. 

That’s not brave tho. It’s common knowledge, you’re really not adding anything to the conversation lol 

[Bloodflowers.]

Yes and you should register as sex offender for spreading other STDs as well 

[Bang Up]

5 hours ago, wehavetostan said:

 

It’s not in a few states

Having no specific law doesn't necessarily mean it's legal. In the states with no specific law, I'm sure purposely infecting someone could be considered assault, and could even go as far as being considered rape as the person who's having sex with most likely would not have consented had they known you were positive.

[ConceptD]

Is this legal to do? It definitely shouldn’t be but I thought it was already illegal. You also have ‘bug chasers’ and forums full of people who dedicate their entire lives to becoming infected. The world is full of weirdos. 

[A.R.L]

Look, given the fact that all medical reports are registered in the country where I live, I bet yes, in the case of hiv, if someone wants to take it this far against an intentional infection, they will be taken seriously..

 

It's true hiv+ people have access to more appropriate medicines now, thus they have the same, if not longer, life span than some hiv negatives, but some people can be affected a lot by this, not everyone thinks/sees things the same way as others for various reasons, or suppose when the patient already suffers from other long term illnesses that affect their immunity system, so giving them hiv, it will not be better news for them 

 

However, I have no idea how serious a trial could be, when in fact the other side, somehow, is also being responsible for their own safety for not engaging in protected sex by using a condom during both anal and oral sex - in the case of invisible oral problems that only a dentist can confirm btw - 

 

The bright side is u can order pep after potential exposure, yes both pep and prep don't always help, but pep can make a huge difference, luckily where I live they are offered to all and free of course, regardless of their legal status and what do I mean by that, illegal immigrants can get them, too