Disease Prevention
Internship in Law, Policy, and Regulation Modernization with Virginia
Department of Health
I am an intern at the
Virginia Department of Health in the Division of Disease Prevention and am
working on a project to identify, catalog, and cultivate a system of essential
relationships with key stakeholders invested in the maintenance and modernization
of the Code of Virginia and Virginia
Legislative Code (Regulations). There is no state-level position created, thus
far, for public health agencies in Virginia to formally work with, and advocate
for, laws and policies affecting agency outcomes and public; and, at the same
time, there are no official responsibilities designated for departmental
leadership to engage in this kind of work, be it research, advocacy, or
administration. So, I am in charge of developing a way forward in these
circumstances, using the skills I've gained in the course of my education and
employment experience to create a new way of organizing the legislative agenda
for public health advocacy, especially those which involve HIV, STIs, and other
infectious diseases in Virginia's law and policy apparatus.
My work focuses on HB
864 which was set to pass and became law in Virginia but was referred to
committee for the next legislative session. The proposal would change the Code
of Virginia in the specific context of HIV criminalization; and would have
modernized the law to include recent insights on treatment as prevention
efforts and undetectable viral loads in the transmission of HIV, as well as how
pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP, can be used to protect from HIV infection. However,
despite having the support of several political leaders and public health
advocates, the bill received push back from community groups concerned about
the way it new law would be written. Specifically, how HB 864 was coded to
concern White gay males at-risk of HIV and not Black women, notwithstanding
sexual orientation, who are the most vulnerable population at-risk for this
disease.
Many legislators, namely
woman who are involved in reproductive justice work, are concerned the proposed
legislation did not address the unique concerns of woman living with HIV or
woman at-risk of HIV infection, be it through intimate partner violence,
inequities in the trans community, or vertical transmission and health literacy
in communities where English is not the primary language used to navigate
health care delivery.
At this point in the
"discussion," that is, the public discourse surrounding HIV, there
should be little doubt that the law and policy governing individuals living
with HIV in Virginia is in need of modernization; and such an update would
benefit community health in the Commonwealth by protecting vulnerable
populations and communities at-risk of HIV, as much as the stigma, shame, and
self-denial associated with HIV disclosure norms and values, practices and
politics. There is enough support in the General Assembly to make meaningful
changes to the Code of Virginia and Virginia Administrative Code, wherever HIV
is mentioned and identified as having a negative impact on the lives of others.
However, how we come to consensus on the laws and policies set to replace them
is still up for debate; and individuals and agencies alike must involve
themselves in the discussion to ensure their specific concerns are coded into
future proposals.
I was tasked with making
the connections between political actors, community organizations, public
health officials and contemporary research on the topic of HIV criminalization
in the context of the General Assembly's decision to table the vote for HB 864.
Why did this happen? What can be done now to ensure the bill, or another bill
with the same goal to modernize, will pass in the upcoming 2021 session? Over
the past several months, I have cultivated relationships with stakeholders
involved with HB 864, as well as community members and agencies interested in
having their voices heard in advocating for HIV decriminalization. In addition,
my research on the topic has expanded to include theoretical as much as
practical and historical examples of the limited extent of criminal law in
preventing HIV transmission, or any other public health outcome as a function
of governmentality. All that is left now is to develop a way to bring these
folks together in a meaningful way such that the development of new law and
policy is engendered with the experiences and expertise of the community for
whom the legislation is written.... stay tuned!
HB 864 Infected sexual battery; knowledge of convicted
person.
Introduced
by: Mark
H. Levine | all
patrons ... notes | add to
my profiles
Disease Prevention
Internship in Law, Policy, and Regulation Modernization with Virginia
Department of Health
HB 864 Infected sexual battery; knowledge of convicted
person.
SUMMARY AS INTRODUCED:
Infected sexual battery. Provides
that, in order for a person to be convicted of infected sexual battery, such
person (i) knew that he was infected at the time of the offense with HIV,
syphilis, or hepatitis B and (ii) knew that his infection was currently
detectable and transmittable, and committed the offense without using a
prophylactic barrier, including a condom or dental dam.
10 reasons to oppose the criminalization of
HIV exposure or transmission
1. Criminalizing
HIV transmission is justified only when individuals purposely or maliciously
transmit HIV with the intent to harm others. In these rare cases, existing
criminal laws can and should be used, rather than passing HIV-specific laws.
2. Applying
criminal law to HIV exposure or transmission does not reduce the spread of HIV.
3. Applying
criminal law to HIV exposure or transmission undermines HIV prevention efforts.
4. Applying
criminal law to HIV exposure or transmission promotes fear and stigma.
5. Instead
of providing justice to women, applying criminal law to HIV exposure or transmission
endangers and further oppresses them.
6. Laws
criminalizing HIV exposure and transmission are drafted and applied too
broadly, and often punish behavior that is not blameworthy.
7. Laws
criminalizing HIV exposure and transmission are often applied unfairly,
selectively and ineffectively.
8. Laws
criminalizing HIV exposure and transmission ignore the real challenges of HIV
prevention.
9. Rather
than introducing laws criminalizing HIV exposure and transmission, legislators
must reform laws that stand in the way of HIV prevention and treatment.
10. Human
rights-based responses to HIV are most effective.
Comments
Post a Comment