Skip to main content

My Public Statement on HIV Decriminalization in Support of SB 1183

My Public Comments on SB 1183: Repeal of HIV Criminalization Laws 



SUMMARY AS INTRODUCED:

Sexually transmitted infections; infected sexual battery; repeal. Repeals the crime of infected sexual battery. The bill also repeals the crime of donating or selling blood, body fluids, organs, and tissues by persons infected with human immunodeficiency virus and the provisions regarding the testing of certain persons for human immunodeficiency virus or hepatitis B or C viruses. The bill contains technical amendments.


The criminalization of HIV transmission, exposure and non-disclosure has become a critical preventive strategy to end the HIV epidemic, target interventions to reduce HIV-specific health disparities, ameliorate the effects of stigma and racial inequity in VA law, and thus advance the interests of public health, the Commonwealth  targeted interventions in public health aimed at reducing stigma and racial inequity in VA law. Those working in disease prevention within the HIV milieu have become increasingly attentive to the complex and varied consequences and impact of HIV criminalization, and disruptive innovation needed to turn things around.

Because criminal liability generally only applies to those who know their positive status, and can therefore be held morally responsible, it is incapable of being an effective prevention tool against transmission in this context. (Conversely, although there is relatively little empirical evidence to suggest that people are dissuaded from testing as a result of criminalization, there is the possibility that people may assume that PLHA will necessarily disclose their status or insist on safer sex (in order to avoid liability), when this may not be the case, thus creating a false sense of security.)

Secondly, overly broad criminalization reproduces and reinforces negative stereotypes about PLHA through (frequently inaccurate and sensationalist) press coverage of trials and convictions. This contributes to the stigma associated with HIV, which in turn creates obstacles to prevention and treatment and undermines the right of PLHA to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health and wellbeing. Sexual health physicians, nurses, and advisers may feel conflicted—to the detriment of their patients, their own professional identity, and public health more generally—if they feel obliged to raise the question of criminalization with those have been diagnosed positive, and there is the risk that the relationship of trust critical to patient care is compromised.

In the era of biomedical interventions that can suppress an individual’s viral load, that is the number of copies of HIV virus in single mL/blood, to such small quantities it can no longer be detected in standard diagnostics; achieving viral suppression through antiretroviral treatment adherence means HIV can no longer be sexually transmitted, making early diagnosis and access to treatment a powerful weapon in the fight against further infection.

A willingness to get tested, to initiate treatment and adhere to prophylaxis, or cope with unique challenges facing communities at-risk of HIV, depend on public health efforts to reduce stigma. Stigma has the power to undermine any progress made in ending the HIV epidemic and reducing stigma to improve HIV prevention, treatment and care is an integral part of public health practice; be it advocating HIV testing or adherence to treatment as prevention, measures to control the burden of HIV depend on governing bodies to intervene on behalf of the most vulnerable and stimulate the development of stigma reduction interventions.  

The science is clear. Undetectable equals untransmittable. If you adhere to ARV treatment, achieve viral suppression, then you can no longer transmit HIV through sex. In fact, these same drugs are also used for prophylaxis to prevent HIV exposure and acquisition. PrEP is a pill taken once-daily to prevent HIV and PEP is a drug regime prescribed within 72 hours of exposure to HIV as a preventive measure. Together, these tools have the power to end the HIV epidemic in Virginia, reduce HIV-related health disparities, and improve the lives of those living with the virus and its human toll on the diverse communities of the Commonwealth.

SB1138 boldly answers this call to action by identifying section of the code that reference the criminalization of HIV and STI exposure, infection, and transmissibility, and the ethical and empirical implications of counterproductivity in public health and health policy.

This bill says ‘Yes!’ to science, ‘Yes!’ to advances in biomedical technologies, disease surveillance and control, and ‘Yes!’ to the social determinants of health governing disease disparities and systemic inequity in VA law; and rejects a priori assumptions made about HIV and other STIs that do not align with contemporary public health practices or scholarship on disease prevention. Repealing these sections will stimulate novel developments in preventive strategies for ending the HIV epidemic and ameliorate the effects of syndemic stigma, shame, and self-denialism which coalesce around health disparity and systemic inequity in the governance of public health and disproportionality of outcomes across diverse populations.

Accepting SB1183 into law strengthens capabilities for addressing critical health issues by removing unjustifiable limits on public health practice and any references that empower stigma and reduce the capacity for public health to work with diverse communities to improve population health outcomes for all of the Commonwealth.

The following comments target specific issues in each of the sections legislated for repeal and reinforces our support for comprehensive legislative action to decriminalization HIV and other STIs in Virginia.

Together, these sections represent the power of antiquated public health policy in undermining contemporary disease prevention. While each code initializes its own set of issues, as a whole their repeal will be an interventional strategy for reducing stigma and help realign the medico-legal structures government public health in Virginia. 

Infected Sexual Battery

This law was established over a decade after an early onslaught of the HIV epidemic to acknowledge the moral-political values, anxieties and aspirations of contituents concerned about being intentionally infected with HIV, by forced-sexual transmission or through the crime of not knowing, or not disclosing you are living with HIV in situations where transmissibility is probable. The law was designed to reduce risky behaviors and unknowingly spreading HIV to others. Instead, it established a foundation for public fear, HIV stigma, shame, and self-denial that….and it counterproductive to disease prevention as the greatest non-budgetary barrier to ending the HIV epidemic.

 

Forced testing

Health workers are essential because they heal us. The testing of individuals without their consent is a violation of human rights that defies bioethical responsibilities of health departments and community organizations to carry out their duty of care to harm none; and that includes physical, structural, and interpretive acts of violence, be it HIV diagnostic testing performed on persons without their consent in the aftermath of a  vehicular accident involving bodily fluids,  the nonvolitional testing of individuals arrested for crimes associated with addiction and IV drug use, or the forcible discovery that you are living with HIV while being criminalized for exposing, and accused of infecting, another. Also, the vagueness of bodily fluids as a term used to describe any evidence of transmissibility that warrants the testing of persons against their will is an ineffective strategy.

 

Penalizing persons who don’t know they’re living with HIV (1:7 virginians)

In the same vein of irrationality as infected sexual battery targeting only HIV and no other infectious diseases, the forced testing of vulnerable populations already devasted by the HIV epidemic, and subsequent ostracization of those seen as the sources of scourge in this epidemic, were attempts to stymie fears; but instead, it socialized stigma and shame as acceptable prevention practices and tacitly  encouraged succumbing to self-denial in the anxious consumption of racist, homophobic, and anti-science hostilities being peddled from atop the highest pillars of public health and medico-legal structures.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Community Practicum Project: Part 1-3

As a scholar with specific subject matter expertise in anthropology and public health, and as an individual living with HIV, a first generation college student, and queer man with history of substance abuse whose work and life are deeply intertwined, I have derived a lot of comfort and hope in bearing witness to the power of community coalitions while accompanying community leaders and advocates in mobilizing to take care of one another, to act, and to engage in necessary fights around issues that have long been in existence: universal and meaningful healthcare, abolition, housing rights, equal employment, gender equality, environmental justice, and rights of marginalized communities, displaced populations, migrants and immigrants. I have worked alongside community leaders, activists, and health and social providers in the field of HIV and disease prevention who have long refused to accept the status quo, and have instead, created their own forms of care or reimagined the existing sy

The War on Sex: Some Notes

  The War on Sex Sex is an important site of social control, adjudication, and- ultimately -oppression. Many social movement organizations have focused on sexual health and do not generally frame their work in terms of social justice or civil rights. The failed attempts to decriminalize HIV in the Virginia legislature, both within and outside the General Assembly, are both troubling and deserving of critical examination, and yet they are just pieces of a much larger puzzle comprising legal, social, and economic systems that do not readily seem to fit together. Institutional ethnography: Interrelationships among the General Assembly, Virginia Department of Health, and community organizations working to repeal the laws criminalizing HIV in the Commonwealth are each a subject of analysis here… The Problems of Prospective: “Thinking Sex”                 From the beginning, this issue was not seen for what it truly was and is: a war on sex.                 By only problematizin

The Economic Burden of AIDS in America: Increasing Access to HIV Medicines

The Economic Burden of AIDS in America: Increasing Access to HIV Medicines Clay Porter Eastern Virginia Medical School Abstract This paper examines the cost of the HIV epidemic in America and surmises the economic benefits of an early targeted roll out of treatment for minority communities. By assessing the literature on health disparities in accessing HIV/AIDS medicines and the financial toll of medical costs associated with HIV-related complications, it is determined that increased access will reduce the economic burden of the virus on both at risk communities and the health services systems they rely on. The Economic Burden of AIDS in America: Increasing Access to HIV Medicines There are an estimated 1.1 million individuals living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in the United States, and about 66% of this population are not engaged in medical care (CDC, 2014). This disparity is extreme, with black and Hispanic communities, specifical