An interesting take on HIV-as-terrorism charge in Macomb county
Sunday, December 27th, 2009The folks over at Reproductive Health Reality Check ran a fascinating column by Ellen Roelofs, Vanessa Johnson, Brook Kelly, and Naina Khanna all of the Positive Women’s Network. The piece explored the case of 44-year-old Daniel Allen of Clinton Township Michigan and the charged levied by Eric Smith, the prosecutor down there because Allen is HIV-positive.
From the column:
The misuse of the bio-terrorism law in the Allen case begs the question: Does the state support the idea that having HIV automatically imbues you with criminal or terrorist intent when engaging in the same behavior as people who do not have HIV, or do not know their status? If so, this would be a flagrant violation of HIV-positive people’s right to non-discrimination.
(snip)
The use of prosecutorial tactics that lead to fear of knowing one’s HIV status only serve to create a greater public health hazard. As HIV-positive women and those working directly with the HIV community, we can say with certainty that people will be reluctant to get tested if a HIV positive diagnosis can expose them to government condoned discrimination.
Knowing we can be stigmatized and discriminated against as a result of our HIV status is enough to keep us silent; but terrorism charges? That’s enough to keep a person from ever getting tested in the first place.
For World AIDS Day, Michigan Messenger published the results of an intensive investigation into the application of the 2005 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) protocols for the administration of nonoccupational post exposure prophylaxis (nPEP). The result seems to indicate a lack of “written-in-stone” policies from the Michigan Department of Community Health could be leading to a mishmash of policies and applications, leading some who may need access to nPEP