US: Indiana Law on HIV non-disclosure criminalises people who have no intention of harming another person

Travis Spoor sits in the Kosciusko County Jail, accused, again, of failing to tell his sexual partner that he is HIV-positive.

The 37-year-old is facing malicious mischief charges in three counties for leaving his partners exposed to the disease without their knowledge. He faces up to two and a half years in prison on each charge.

According to court documents, at least two of his sexual partners found out about Spoor’s HIV status through a news article.

Spoor’s mother, Lisa Holderman, broke down in tears as she said her son isn’t a criminal.

“He’s lost his children. He’s lost his job. He’s lost insurance. He’s lost his home. He’s lost his car,” Holderman told the crowd attending HIV Advocacy Day last month at the Statehouse. “We’re losing everything just to try to get my son out of jail.”

Indiana has several laws that impact the lives of people infected with HIV. In addition to being required to inform sexual partners, they can face penalties for exposing people to any bodily fluid, even those that do not transmit HIV.

Carrie Foote, IUPUI professor and co-chair of HIV Modernization Movement, argues these state laws are outdated and research shows they don’t prevent the spread of the disease. Instead, they can discourage people from getting tested.

In Spoor’s case, Foote doesn’t believe he intended to harm his partners. She compared Spoor’s actions to contraceptive fraud.

“There are things that can cause life changing events in adult sexual decision making that we don’t criminalize in that way,” Foote said.

Foote, along with the HIV Modernization Movement, is working to modernize or repeal a few of the current HIV laws that she argues turns the disease into a crime.

But to describe it as criminalizing is completely inaccurate in the eyes of Terre Haute based Vigo County Prosecutor Rob Roberts.

“It doesn’t do the criminal justice system any service and it certainly doesn’t do HIV people any service to try and scare them to think that they might be prosecuted just for having HIV,” Roberts said.

During his career, Roberts has prosecuted only one HIV case to completion. He said bringing charges against an HIV-positive person for their actions is rare.

Roberts argued the state punishes other behaviors that put people at risk.

“Criminal Recklessness — where you may be reckless in your actions in driving a vehicle or in discharging a firearm and you have put other people at risk in those situations,” Roberts said. “We criminalize those actions because it’s the action that we’re talking about, not the status of someone being behind the wheel of the vehicle or possessing a firearm.”

However, Roberts thinks it’s a possibility that disclosure laws are one of the reasons why people don’t get tested in the first place.

Conquering Stigma

At the Damien Center in Indianapolis, more than 4,000 infected individuals receive care and services from Indiana’s oldest and largest AIDS service organization. For years, Jeremy Turner, director of development and communication at the center, has helped get people tested for HIV.

“Disclosure is the right thing to do, but unfortunately HIV is so heavily stigmatized because of things like duty to warn and because of legislation that might not be fair to them, but also because of the social implications of being HIV positive,” Turner said. “Disclosure is a hard thing to do.”

Stigma is one of the biggest hurdles in ending the HIV epidemic, Turner said, and that’s exactly what the current HIV laws do, according to Foote.

The HIV Modernization Movement’s main goal is to modernize the duty to warn and battery by bodily waste HIV laws. Duty to warn is the law that requires HIV-positive people to reveal their condition to sexual partners and needle-sharing partners. The battery by bodily waste law applies to a range of acts and bodily fluids, including spitting or throwing feces.

For Foote, the main problem with the duty to warn law is that it charges people who have no intention of harming another person. She wants the law revised to require proof that the person had intent to harm.

“The way these laws are worded, if I was sexually assaulted, I would have to disclose to my rapist that I was HIV positive,” Foote said. “There’s nothing in the law that tells that I don’t have to do that.”

The movement is also pushing to repeal the laws that prevent HIV positive people from donating blood or semen altogether. Foote said there’s no risk of transmission if a man with HIV was to seek fertility services. Additionally, the Food and Drug Administration screens blood donations for the disease.

 Understanding the laws

Results of a recent survey of health care providers about HIV disclosure showed that the majority of respondents had little understanding of the law or the consequences. Only 58 percent of the more than 170 respondents said they read the full Indiana duty to warn code and only 43 percent knew the punishment for law breakers.

Those health care providers are the ones to make sure patients sign a form acknowledging that they have a duty to disclose their condition to partners past and present.

John Coberg II, an IUPUI research assistant who worked on the survey along with Foote, said he saw a common theme in the results — that the laws are harmful.

In the survey one anonymous provider wrote, “It often makes the client feel like a criminal, or they’re dirty or wrong when they’re in my office for help. As a care coordination person, you should never want your client to feel any of these things when they walk in your office.”

Changing the laws

When changing a law, Roberts said two questions need to be considered: How is the statute being used, and is it being used in an unfair fashion? In Roberts’ opinion, these laws haven’t been around long enough to answer these questions just yet.

Roberts said it’s the job of the legislature to look at the current laws to see if they need tweaking.

“We can take a look,” Sen. Greg Taylor, D-Indianapolis, said.

Taylor’s focus is the current battery by bodily waste law, since research shows HIV is not transferrable by saliva. He wants to change the law so that HIV positive people aren’t charged differently for having the disease.

“If the chairman of the health committee is willing to go along with it, we can hopefully put some modern legislation in place to protect the public but also not make a criminal out of people because they contracted HIV,” Taylor said

Published in NUVO on May 12, 2017

Canada: Top Canadian scientists release statement calling for measures to address the overly broad use of criminal charges in HIV non-disclosure cases

Canada’s top HIV researchers urge federal, provincial and territorial governments to act now to limit the use of the criminal law in HIV non-disclosure cases

MONTRÉAL, QC, April 6, 2017 — As the country’s premier national HIV research conference gets underway, the original co-signatories of the Canadian consensus statement on HIV and its transmission in the context of criminal law (2014) are releasing a statement expressing their deep concern about the ongoing, overly broad use of the criminal law in HIV non-disclosure cases, irrespective of the possibility of transmission or whether transmission actually occurred.

Used correctly, an unbroken condom offers 100% protection against HIV transmission. Several recent, large clinical trials have also found that effective antiretroviral therapy (ART) prevented HIV transmission to HIV-negative partners in both male same-sex and heterosexual sero-discordant couples.

“Now that we have data that clearly demonstrates people with HIV with undetectable viral loads are at basically zero risk of infecting their partners, it’s past time for the law to catch up with the science,” says Dr. Mona Loutfy, Women’s College Hospital, who is presenting at the annual Canadian Conference on HIV/AIDS Research.

“When taken and monitored consistently, the ability of ART to prevent HIV transmission has been repeatedly demonstrated. It is time that the criminal law recognizes this,” adds Dr. Rupert Kaul from the University of Toronto.

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in 2012 that disclosure is required before sex that poses a “realistic possibility” of HIV transmission. However, since that ruling, individuals have been prosecuted regardless of whether transmission occurred and even in cases posing no realistic possibility of transmission. This has led to further fear and uncertainty in the HIV community regarding disclosure obligations. The federal Department of Justice is consulting with senior officials from provincial and territorial governments to review how HIV non-disclosure cases are prosecuted.

At the 2014 annual Canadian Conference on HIV/AIDS Research, nearly 80 scientific experts on HIV released a peer-reviewed consensus statement about the then-available science regarding HIV transmission possibilities associated with various acts, noting their concern that the criminal justice system was out of step with the science. Additional research results since then have further confirmed the conclusions in that statement. Last December, on World AIDS Day, the federal Minister of Justice acknowledged the need to take action to address the overly broad use of criminal charges.

The Board of Directors of the Canadian Association for HIV Research (CAHR), the host of CAHR 2017, supports the call for measures to limit the overly broad use of the criminal law, including developing prosecutorial guidelines that are informed by human rights and public health principles, and based on current scientific evidence regarding HIV transmission.

“In consultation with people living with HIV, public health and human rights experts, we urge the federal Minister of Justice and the provincial and territorial Attorneys General to develop prosecutorial guidelines that eliminate the serious adverse individual and public health impacts caused by the inappropriate use of the criminal law,” says Dr. Mark Tyndall, Executive Director of the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control.

 

About the British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS

The BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS (BC-CfE—http://cfenet.ubc.ca) is Canada’s largest HIV/AIDS research, treatment and education facility and is internationally recognized as an innovative world leader in combating HIV/AIDS and related diseases. BC-CfE is based at St. Paul’s Hospital, Providence Health Care, a teaching hospital of the University of British Columbia. The BC-CfE works in close collaboration with key provincial stakeholders, including government, health authorities, health care providers, academics from other institutions, and the community to decrease the health burden of HIV and AIDS. By developing, monitoring and disseminating comprehensive research and treatment programs for HIV and related illnesses, the BC-CfE helps improve the health of British Columbians.

Published on BC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS website on April 6, 2017

US: Positive Project Update – March 2017

CHLP Authors Articles on HIV Criminalization for Special Issue of APA’s Psychology and Exchange Newsletter 

CHLP staff recently authored two articles for the March edition of the Psychology and AIDS Exchange newsletter from the American Psychological Association. This issue is dedicated to exploring the issue of criminalization of HIV exposure and transmission, and highlights the APA’s commitment to decriminalizing HIV. Executive Director Catherine Hanssens and Staff Attorney Kate Boulton wrote, “When Sex is a Crime and Spit is a Dangerous Weapon: The origins, impact and advocacy response to HIV criminal laws,” which can be read here. Deputy Director Mayo Schreiber penned “An Update on the Prosecution, Conviction and Appeal of Michael Johnson,” which can be read here.

State Advocacy Working Group Updates

CALIFORNIA

On February 6, Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblymember Todd Gloria (D-San Diego) introduced SB 239, a bill to modernize California laws that criminalize and stigmatize people living with HIV. The bill is co-sponsored by the ACLU of California, APLA Health, Black AIDS Institute, Equality California, Lambda Legal, and Positive Women’s Network–USA. The organizations are members of Californians for HIV Criminalization Reform, a broad coalition of people living with HIV, health service providers, civil rights organizations, and public health professionals dedicated to ending the criminalization of HIV in California. The full text of the bill can be found here. On March 1, The Center for HIV Law and Policy submitted a letter in support of the bill. A hearing on the bill was held on March 28.

On March 8, Californians for HIV Criminalization Reform and the LGBT Caucus held a legislative briefing about HIV Criminalization at the State Capitol in Sacramento.

If your organization is interested in supporting modernization of California’s HIV criminal laws, we invite you to join Californians for HIV Criminalization Reform (eqca.org/chcr). Please contact brad@eqca.org or 323-848-9801 for additional information.

GEORGIA

On February 14, Representative Sharon Cooper (R-Marietta) introduced House Resolution 240, which proposed the creation of a Joint Study Committee on Reforming HIV Related Criminal Laws. However, Cooper presented a substitute on March 24 to the Special Rules committee that significantly weakened the resolution’s initial intent, shifting its focus to health care barriers for a range of chronic conditions, inclusive of HIV, rather than the stark barrier of HIV criminalization. The full text of the current resolution can be found here. On March 20, Senator Fort (D-Atlanta) introduced a parallel resolution in the Senate that proposes the creation of a Senate Study Committee to examine reform of Georgia’s HIV-specific criminal law. In addition to five state senators, that committee would include a representative from the Department of Public Health, as well as a criminal defense attorney, and a community-based HIV service provider. The full text of that resolution can be found here.

Members of the Georgia Coalition to End HIV Criminalization also engaged in advocacy at the state capitol on February 16, educating legislators about HIV criminalization and building support for HR 240.

Next Meeting: Thursday, March 23 from 4:00-6:00pm (ET)

If you are interested in joining the Georgia Coalition to End HIV Criminalization, please contact Nina Martinez (nina.i.martinez@gmail.com) or Emily Brown (emily@georgiaequality.org) for additional information.

INDIANA

HMM-Indiana is participating in Indiana HIV Advocacy Day on April 12 and will present on HIV criminalization. You can register to attend here. The Steering Committee continues to meet monthly and expand its network. HIV Advocacy Day will be on April 12 at the Indiana Statehouse from 10:00am-3:00pm.  You can register here.

Next Steering Committee Meeting: Monday, April 17

If you are interested in information about HIV criminalization in Indiana or in participating, supporting or endorsing HMM-Indiana, visit our get involved page or contact us at hmm.indiana@gmail.com

MISSOURI

On December 20, 2016, the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Eastern District overturned Michael Johnson’s conviction and remanded the case for retrial. On February 14, 2017, the State of Missouri filed an application for transfer of Michael Johnson’s case to the Missouri Supreme Court. The court’s decision on whether or not to take the case is expected in early April. Follow this link to contribute to Johnson’s legal defense fund: https://www.fundedjustice.com/freemichaeljohnson.

The Missouri HIV Justice Coalition (MO HIV JC) drafted a letter to the prosecuting attorney in Michael Johnson’s case requesting that charges not be re-filed. The plan is to submit the letter again in April —organizations that would like to sign on can still do so by contacting Ashley Quinn at ashley@empowermissouri.org .

MO HIV JC will be hosting a Train-the-Trainer event this summer, contact Ashley if you’re interested in receiving training to be equipped to educate your community about HIV criminalization in order to grow grassroots support. We need representatives from across the state and all demographics, prioritizing people living with HIV.

The St. Louis chapter of Empower Missouri is hosting an April 21 forum on the Criminalization of Poverty that will include a panelist speaking about HIV criminalization. The forum runs from 12:00pm-1:30pm at The Highlands Golf Course Inside Forest Park, and 1.5 hours of CEU credits are available. For more info or to RSVP, contact: christine@empowermissouri.org

Meetings are held on the fourth Friday of the month at 1:00pm (CT) via conference call.

If you are interested in becoming an advocate with the Missouri HIV Justice Coalition, please contact Ashley Quinn at ashley@empowermissouri.org.

OHIO

On February 8, CHLP hosted a webinar on Ohio’s HIV felonious assault statute and advocacy strategies to modernize the law. Advocates will use the presentation as a helpful starting point to develop targeted educational materials for different audiences in the state. Planning is also in progress for an in-person convening of Ohio advocates develop an advocacy strategy and focus on expansion of the coalition.

On February 21, advocate Steve Arrington organized a presentation on HIV criminalization for the Ohio Black Women’s Leadership Caucus. The AIDS Taskforce of Greater Cleveland organized a March 10 legislative luncheon to introduce policymakers to the issue of HIV criminalization in the state of Ohio. Ohio advocates and PJP are also in the process of planning a May forum on HIV criminalization that will take place in Columbus, Ohio. More details will be available soon.

The Ohio Recodification Committee reconvened and examined proposed amendments to Ohio’s HIV criminal law on March 2. The Committee will vote on the amendments at a later date.

Next meeting: Wednesday, April 12 at 5:00pm (ET)

If you would like information on HIV Criminalization or are interested in becoming an advocate with the Ohio HIV Criminalization Working Group, contact Kate Boulton at kboulton@hivlawandpolicy.org.

SOUTH CAROLINA

The South Carolina HIV Task Force (SCHTF) held its first 2017 quarterly meeting on February 7 at the Lions Street Student Center in Columbia. The event focused on priority areas of advocacy over the next year and also included a presentation on HIV criminalization in the state. SCHTF also reached out to some legislators to start identifying allies who can support modernization efforts.

The working group is currently in the early stages of planning an in-person meeting so that key stakeholders can come together and develop an advocacy strategy and focus on expansion of the coalition.

Meetings are held on the second Thursday of the month at 2:00pm (ET).

If you would like information on HIV Criminalization or are interested in becoming an advocate with the PJP SC Law Modernization Group, please contact Kate Boulton at kboulton@hivlawandpolicy.org.

TENNESSEE

The Working Group learned in early January that the prospective legislative sponsor for their modernization bill did not want to move forward with the bill this year, but has assured advocates he will support the bill next year. The Working Group will be focusing its energy on outreach and education over the next year to further strengthen its coalition and build support for modernization. Members of the Working Group attended Day on the Hill at the state capitol in February and reported that several legislators are receptive to the idea of supporting a modernization bill next year.

Next Meeting: Thursday, April 27 at 12:00pm (ET)

If you would like information on HIV criminalization or are interested in becoming an advocate with the PJP TN Working Group, please contact Kate Boulton at kboulton@hivlawandpolicy.org.

TEXAS

Advocates convened monthly through March and participated in HIV Advocacy Day at the state capitol on February 28. In mid-December, a bill was proposed to create a new offense of Indecent Assault. Although bill sponsors emphasized that the bill is merely an anti-groping law, advocates had concerns about how language in the proposed bill could have unintended consequences for PLHIV. Advocates were able to meet with legislators, who agreed to include language clarifying the bill’s legislative intent.

Lacresha Craig remains in the Dallas County jail and there is has been no response from the Dallas District Attorney (DA) to a letter sent by advocates at the end of last year. Advocates agreed during their last call to draft an op-ed highlighting the injustice of Craig’s case, and will continue reaching out to the DA.

Meetings are held on the third Friday of the month at 1:00pm (CT).

If you are interested in information about HIV criminalization or actively participating in the Texas HIV Working Group, please contact Kate Boulton at kboulton@hivlawandpolicy.org
CHLP’s assistance in criminal cases includes counseling defendants and their families, referring defendants to attorneys, providing legal and trial strategy support to criminal defense attorneys, identifying and assisting with preparation of medical and scientific experts, drafting sections of court submissions, and submitting friend-of-the-court briefs.

MISSOURI

On December 20, 2016, the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Eastern District overturned Michael Johnson’s conviction and remanded the case for retrial. On February 14, 2017, the State of Missouri filed an application for transfer of Johnson’s case to the Missouri Supreme Court. If the court rejects the case, then it will be remanded for retrial, as decided by the Court of Appeals last year, meaning the prosecution can pursue a new trial or drop the case. If the court accepts the case, there will be an opportunity for briefing, oral argument, and then a decision after that, which could take several months. Stay informed on developments in this case with our newly updated fact sheet and case timeline, which can be found here.

OHIO

Orlando Batista was indicted for felonious assault in July 2014 for allegedly engaging in sexual conduct with his girlfriend without first disclosing his HIV status. After the trial court rejected his motion to dismiss, Batista pleaded no contest and the court sentenced him to the maximum term of eight years. In October 2016, the Supreme Court of Ohio accepted his appeal for review. In December 2016, CHLP, with support from the Gibbons P.C. law firm and the Ohio Public Defender, along with seven Ohio-based and national HIV, LGBT, health professional and criminal justice organizations, submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in support of Batista to the Supreme Court of Ohio, challenging the Ohio felonious assault statute on the grounds that it violated the Constitutional Guarantee of Equal Protection and federal prohibitions against discrimination on the basis of disabilities. The ACLU of Ohio Foundation and Center for Constitutional Rights submitted a separate friend-of-the-court brief based on First Amendment grounds. Both Batista and the State of Ohio have submitted merit briefs for the court’s consideration. The Ohio Attorney General submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the State of Ohio. A decision from the court is expected in 2017.

If you are aware of anyone charged in an HIV exposure or transmission case, please refer them to our website, www.hivlawandpolicy.org, and/or have them or their lawyer contact CHLP for assistance at 212-430-6733 or pjp@hivlawandpolicy.org.

India: HIV/AIDS (Prevention & Control) Bill strongly criticised for not guaranteeing universal access to HIV treatment

Delhi, Gaborone, New York – The International Treatment Preparedness Coalition (ITPC) and its global coalition partners are outraged following a decision by the Indian Parliament to absolve itself from responsibility of providing treatment for people living with HIV in India. The HIV/AIDS (Prevention & Control) Bill was passed in the upper house of the Indian Parliament yesterday, 21 March 2017. The Bill states that the government will provide treatment for people living with HIV ‘as far as possible’ (see full text below) absolving the government from its responsibility to protect the right to life.

“This is a step backwards for human rights, and a tremendous blow for all people living with HIV in India,” said Gregg Gonsalves, Chair of ITPC-Global. “It is extremely concerning that the India government has given itself this loophole at a time when the government program is in disarray, with the worst period of antiretroviral drug stock outs.”

Networks of people living with HIV and other civil society organizations lobbied Members of Parliament to amend the draft Bill that was first tabled in February 2014. In response to civil society concerns, senior Members of Parliament urged the Union Minister JP Nadda to make the amendment. HIV treatment activists were stunned when these parliamentarians withdrew their amendment at the last minute, thus giving way to the Bill passing into legislation.

“As the biggest supplier of generic medicines to the developing world, India could be the leading light in HIV treatment, an example to the rest of the world,” said Solange Baptiste, ITPC-Global’s Executive Director. “Instead this new Bill fails to enshrine the rights of its own people. I fear it’s an omen of things to come. We, HIV treatment activists, will be watching and monitoring to make sure the Indian government upholds its responsibility to all its citizens living with HIV.”

“Nothing in the world is more important than securing treatment for me, and my community of people living with HIV,” said Loon Gangte Regional Coordinator ITPC-South Asia. “I earnestly appeal to the government to delete the loophole ‘as far as possible’ and assure our right to life”.

Editor’s Note:

HIV/AIDS Bill Final Text

The provision for HIV treatment in Section 14 of the HIV/AIDS Bill, reads as follows:

1. The measures to be taken by the Central Government or State Government under section 13 shall include the measure for providing, as far as possible, Anti-Retroviral and Opportunistic Infection Management to people living with HIV or AIDS.

2. The Central Government shall issue necessary guidelines in respect of protocols for HIV and AIDS relating to Anti-Retroviral Therapy and Opportunistic Infection Management which shall be applicable to all persons and shall ensure their wide dissemination.

About International Treatment Preparedness Coalition

International Treatment Preparedness Coalition (ITPC) is a global coalition of HIV treatment activists formed in 2003 to respond to the needs of communities worldwide. The global network is driven by individual activists, peer support groups, grassroots networks, community-based organizations, and non-governmental organizations. Each of our partners share our values and vision and come together to address issues around access to treatment issues in their countries, regions and at the global level.

US: Florida State Senate Committee Supports Public Health Measure To Modernize HIV Laws (Press Release)

Press release from the Sero Project

Tallahassee March 22, 2017

The Florida HIV Justice Coalition today applauded members of the Florida State Senate’s Criminal Justice Committee for voting unanimously yesterday in favor of Senate Bill 628.

SB 628 will modernize Florida statutes regarding sexually transmissible infections (STIs) to reflect advances in scientific knowledge and medical treatment, particularly as they concern prevention and treatment of HIV.

The Florida HIV Justice Coalition, comprised of physicians, healthcare workers, legal, public health and policy professionals, people living with HIV and other allies, has led a statewide effort to raise awareness and mobilize support for reform.

Senator Rene Garcia (R-Hialeah), the SB 628’s chief sponsor, said, “Florida doesn’t want to be first in new HIV cases; we want to be first in the effort to end the HIV epidemic. With the support of public health leaders, prosecutors, major HIV service providers in Florida, like the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the Sero Project (a national network of people living with HIV) and others, we are going to get there. Today’s unanimous vote by the Senate Criminal Justice Committee is an important step.”

Leaders in providing services for people with HIV in Florida, as well as nationally, agree that early testing and ongoing adherence to treatment can stop the spread of HIV.

“Virtually all HIV transmission in Florida is from people who have HIV but do not know it, because they have not been tested, or are not on treatment,” said David Poole, Director of Legislative Affairs at AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Florida’s leading HIV service provider. “Getting tested, treated and virally suppressed prevents HIV transmission. That’s why updating these statutes is a vital HIV prevention strategy for Florida.”

“Public health policies and criminal statutes should be aligned to incentivize HIV testing and treatment. Any criminal act concerning transmission of sexually transmitted infections should be based on an intent to harm, a significant risk of harm and actual infliction of harm,” said Mrs. Kamaria Laffrey, a Winter Haven resident who has led the Florida HIV Justice Coalition and is a woman living with HIV. “We will continue to work with Senator Garcia and other legislators to improve SB 628 as it continues through the legislative process.”

“We commend and thank Senator Garcia for his leadership. We look forward to working with the legislature and our allies to improve public health and ensure equality and justice for all Floridians,” said Tami Haught, a woman living with HIV who coordinates state organizing for the Sero Project, a national organization working to modernize HIV-specific criminal statutes in 32 states.

The bill next moves to the Senate Health Policy Committee. Similar legislation, HB 605, has been filed in the House and will be heard first by that chamber’s Criminal Justice Committee.

Further information:

Kamaria Laffrey, Coordinator, Florida HIV Justice Coalition Kamaria.laffrey(at)seroproject.com

David Poole, Director of Legislative Affairs, AIDS Healthcare Foundation david.poole(at)aidshealth.org

[Update]Mexico: Legislation to criminalise HIV transmission withdrawn in San Luis Potosi State Congress

A House Representative withdraws opinion/ruling that would criminalize HIV transmission in San Luis Potosi

The opinion/ruling with draft decree that was intended to add the crime of risk of contagion to the penal criminal code of the State of San Luis Potosi was withdraw The document established penalties and sanctions to whom or who put someone else at risk of contagion of  “a venereal disease or other serious infective period”.

A Member of San Luis Potosí friends fight against AIDS  /, Andrés Costilla Castro denounced than this initiative was an attempt against the dignity  of PLHIV and promoted stigma towards PLHIV in San Luis Potosí and  because of that, they demanded for such decree to be eliminated.

The document was presented by Esther Angelica Martinez Cardenas of the PRI and approved by justice committees; Health and Social Welfare.

Costilla Castro reiterated that this initiative would put people with HIV under a status of potential criminals, and that it opposed their dignity as persons, attempting to take away human rights and stigmatising them because of a health condition.

The opinion/ruling read as follows:

The offence of contagion is committed if a person puts someone in danger of contagion, knowing they are suffering from a venereal disease or other serious illness during an infectious period, putting in danger of contagion the health of another person, by sexual intercourse, or other transmissible method; shall be sentenced from one month to three years in prison, and up to forty days of the value of the unit of measurement and valid update. If the condition or disease was incurable, a sentence of six months to five years in prison shall be imposed. In  the case of spouses, boyfriends or concubines, only the case could proceed following a complaint by the offended party.

The opinion/ruling was removed during the session on Thursday to be analyzed again by the committees involved in the issue.

Diputada retira dictamen para penalizar el contagio de VIH en SLP

Fue retirado el dictamen con proyecto de decreto que planteaba  la adición del delito de Peligro de Contagio al Código Penal del Estado de San Luis Potosí. El documento establecía penas y sanciones a quien o quienes pongan a otra persona en riesgo del contagio de “una enfermedad venérea u otra grave en período infectante”.

Por su parte el integrante de la organización Amigos Potosinos en Lucha Contra el Sida, Andrés Costilla Castro denunció que esta iniciativa  atenta contra la dignidad y promueve el estigma hacia las personas con VIH en San Luis Potosí por lo que solicitaron fuera bajado este dictamen.

El documento, fue presentado por la priista Esther Angélica Martínez Cárdenas y aprobado por las Comisiones de Justicia; y Salud y Asistencia Social.

Costilla Castro reiteró que esta iniciativa colocaría a las personas con VIH bajo un estatus de posibles criminales, contraviniendo a su dignidad como personas, a tentando a sus derechos humanos y estigmatizándolos por su condición de salud,

El dictamen marcaba lo siguiente:

Comete el delito de peligro de contagio quien, a sabiendas de que padece una enfermedad venérea u otra grave en período infectante, ponga en peligro de contagio la salud de otra persona, por relaciones sexuales, u otro medio transmisible; será sancionado de un mes a tres años de prisión, y hasta cuarenta días del valor de la unidad de medida y actualización vigente

Si la enfermedad padecida fuera incurable se impondrá la pena de seis meses a cinco años de prisión. Cuando se trate de cónyuges, concubinarios o concubinas, sólo podrá procederse por querella de parte ofendida

El dictamen fue retirado durante la sesión de este jueves para ser analizado nuevamente por las comisiones involucradas en el tema.

Published in La Orquesta on March 17, 2017

__________________________________________________________

First article published on March 16, 2017 (English google translation, scroll down for Spanish article)

Congress a step away from criminalising HIV transmission…Again

The Secretary of health, international treaties and activists are against the proposal.

By María José Puente

This Thursday, in a plenary session, the State Congress will vote on a draft decree that adds the crime of Danger of Contagion to the Penal Code of the State of San Luis Potosí. If approved, the new legislation establishes penalties and sanctions to those who put someone else at risk of contagion of “a venereal or other serious illness when being infectious.”

The document, already approved by the Justice Commissions; and Health and Social Services , was presented to the Congress by Esther Angélica Martínez Cárdenas, from the PRI group. There, the deputy says that it is necessary for the Potosino penal code to adopt the federal standard, where the crime is mentioned and allows for a penalty of up to 5 years in prison, equal to the one raised in the State decision.

The text reads:

“The offense of contagion is committed by a person who, knowing that he suffers from a venereal or other serious illness in an infectious period, endangers the health of another person by sexual intercourse or other transmissible means; Will be sanctioned from one month to three years in prison, and up to forty days of the value of the current unit of measurement and update.

If the illness suffered is incurable, a sentence of six months to five years’ imprisonment shall be imposed. In the case of spouses, or concubines, the case may only proceed following a complaint by the offended party “.

For the organizations that defend the rights of the LGBT population and the Ministry of Health at the national and even state level, this homologation is not only anachronistic, but it  also puts at risk the population suffering from ilnesses such as those mentioned there and particularly those who have been or may be diagnosed with HIV or AIDS.

REPEATED ERROR

In October of 2016, Juan Manuel Carreras, governor of San Luis; In conjunction with the Women’s Institute, attempted a similar legislative move, presenting a package of initiatives aimed at preventing violence against women.

The argument, said in an interview Jeús Paul Ibarra Collazo , head of Red Diversificadores Sociale was directed in such a way because the rate of contagion of women by way of their spouses could increase because part of the male population, openly heterosexual, actually had sexual relations with other homosexual men, contracted the disease and then, continued at the same time with their female partner, which resulted in her being infected as well.

Ibarra Collazo recognizes that the male homosexual population leads the statistics of HIV or AIDS, because by keeping alive what he calls internalized homophobia, the spread of the disease through sexual contact between men increases the number of cases.

Regardless of this, the Ministry of Health sent a press release specifically addressed to Juan Manuel Carreras, who asked him to take a second look at the initiative because, according to international treaties to which Mexico is a signatory, the measure that the governor and the IMES intended to boost is useless.

” The National Center for Prevention and Control of HIV / AIDS of the Ministry of Health calls for an analysis of this proposal in the framework of international and national recommendations in this area, since criminalization or criminalization of people with HIV is not a public policy that helps to reduce and control the epidemic, quite the contrary, it has been shown that the establishment of restrictions, indications or penalties for people with HIV does not prevent them from spreading the virus and there is little evidence that Criminal sanctions will ‘rehabilitate’ a person so as to avoid future risk behavior of HIV transmission, “the statement said.

After reception of the document and after a dialogue between the state agencies, Red Diversificadores Sociales and the pressure of the group Amigos Potosinos in Fight against Aids, the initiative seemed to have been withdrawn; However, this March 16, again and after already having been approved by the aforementioned committees, the article will be voted on by the 27 deputies that make up the Congress, without it being clear whether Congresswoman Esther Angélica Martínez Cárdenas is aware or not of the previous initiative.

STIGMA, DISCRIMINATION AND LACK OF PREVENTION POLICY

  Although the Ministry of Health points out that “imposing penalties can only be justified in case of conduct that is legally condemnable, so that criminal law based on this objective can only legitimately be applied to a subset of cases of HIV transmission” it also highlights that “this does not have anything to do with the primary goal of preventing HIV transmission. “

This can also be seen as presented by APELCS : “It is very difficult to determine causality, deceit, intentionality and various factors involved in the transmission of HIV”, and also, as stated by Paul Ibarra, and reaffirmed by the Ministry of Health, establishing punitive measures for the contagion of HIV or any other disease could inhibit the will of the key subjects to undergo the screening tests that finally have proven to be a palliative way to avoid transmission.

That is, when there is a penalty for contagion, it automatically pose a warning sign on the carriers, whether men, women, children or girls, which can facilitate discrimination and stigma on a disease that, with the advance of science and effective public policies of prevention, has ceased to be a death sentence for a large part of the population.

APELCS , on the other hand, exhorts “the members of the Health Commissions; Justice and social services; In particular to Congresswoman Esther Angélica Martínez Cárdenas to reconsider the criminalization of HIV and to lower this initiative, as they would put people with HIV under the status of potential criminals, in contravention to their dignity as persons, undermining their human rights and stigmatizing them for their Health condition “.

Paul Ibarra , on the other hand, points out what seems to be obvious and that is that there is a dislocation between the powers of the state, since the return of this attempt to change the Criminal Code, denotes that the deputy who is promoting it did not take into account the antecedent in October, nor was aware of the pronouncement against by the Ministry of Health, RDS and APELCS scarcely 5 months ago.

Published in La Orquesta on March 16, 2017

___________________________________________________

Congreso, a un paso de penalizar el contagio de VIH… Otra vez

Secretaría de Salud, tratados internacionales y activistas están en contra de la propuesta.

Por María José Puente

Este jueves, en el Pleno del Congreso del Estado será votado un dictamen con proyecto de decreto que plantea la adición del delito de Peligro de Contagio al Código Penal del Estado de San Luis Potosí. De aprobarse, la nueva normativa establece penas y sanciones a quien o quienes pongan a otra persona en riesgo del contagio de “una enfermedad venérea u otra grave en período infectante”.

El documento, ya aprobado por las Comisiones de Justicia; y Salud y Asistencia Social, fue presentado en el Congreso por Esther Angélica Martínez Cárdenas, de la bancada priista. Ahí, la diputada expone que es necesario que el código penal potosino tome de molde la norma federal, donde el delito mencionado sí se contempla y establece una pena que puede llegar a los 5 años de prisión, igual que lo plantea el dictamen estatal.

Textualmente, en el dictamen se lee:

“Comete el delito de peligro de contagio quien, a sabiendas de que padece una enfermedad venérea u otra grave en período infectante, ponga en peligro de contagio la salud de otra persona, por relaciones sexuales, u otro medio transmisible; será sancionado de un mes a tres años de prisión, y hasta cuarenta días del valor de la unidad de medida y actualización vigente.

Si la enfermedad padecida fuera incurable se impondrá la pena de seis meses a cinco años de prisión. Cuando se trate de cónyuges, concubinarios o concubinas, sólo podrá procederse por querella de parte ofendida”.

Para las organizaciones de defensa de los derechos de la población LGBT y la propia Secretaría de Salud a nivel nacional y hasta estatal, dicha homologación es no solo anacrónica, sino que pone en riesgo a la población portadora de enfermedades como las que ahí se señalan y particularmente a quienes han sido diagnosticados o podrían serlo con VIH o Sida.

ERROR REPETIDO

En octubre de 2016, Juan Manuel Carreras, gobernador de San Luis; en conjunto con el Instituto de las Mujeres intentó una movida legislativa similar, presentando un paquete de iniciativas que tenían como objetivo prevenir la violencia contra las mujeres.

El argumento, dice en entrevista Jeús Paul Ibarra Collazo, titular de Red Diversificadores Sociales; se dirigía en el sentido de que el índice de contagio de mujeres por la vía de sus cónyuges podría ir en aumento porque parte de la población masculina, abiertamente heterosexual, en realidad mantiene relaciones sexuales con otros hombres homosexuales, contrae la enfermedad y luego, al continuar con su pareja mujer, ella también resultaba contagiada.

Ibarra Collazo reconoce que la población homosexual masculina lidera la estadística de contagio de VIH o Sida, pues al mantenerse vivo lo que él llama homofobia interiorizada, el contagio y diseminación de la enfermedad por contacto sexual entre hombres incrementa el número de casos.

Independientemente de ello, la Secretaría de Salud envió un comunicado de prensa específicamente dirigido a Juan Manuel Carreras, a quien le pidió echar un segundo vistazo sobre la iniciativa pues, según tratados internacionales a los que México está suscrito, la medida que el gobernador y el IMES pretendían impulsar es inservible.

“El Centro Nacional para la Prevención y Control del VIH/Sida de la Secretaría de Salud hace un llamado para que se analice esta propuesta en el marco de las recomendaciones internacionales y nacionales en la materia, ya que la penalización o criminalización de las personas con VIH no es una política pública que ayude a la disminución y el control de la epidemia, muy por el contrario está demostrado que el establecimiento de restricciones, señalamientos o penas a personas con VIH no impide que propague el virus y existe poca evidencia de que las sanciones penales ‘rehabilitarán’ a una persona de modo que evite un comportamiento futuro de riesgo de transmisión del VIH” sentencia el comunicado.

Recibido el documento y tras un diálogo entre las dependencias estatales, Red Diversificadores Sociales y la presión del grupo Amigos Potosinos en Lucha contra el Sida, la iniciativa parece haber sido retirada; sin embargo, este 16 de marzo, nuevamente y ya aprobado incluso por las comisiones mencionadas, el dictamen será votado por los 27 diputados que integran el Congreso, sin que quede claro si la diputada Esther Angélica Martínez Cárdenas tiene conocimiento de la iniciativa anterior.

ESTIGMA, DISCRIMINACIÓN Y ESCASA POLÍTICA DE PREVENCIÓN

 Aunque la Secretaría de Salud apunta que “imponer penas solo puede justificarse en conductas que sean jurídicamente condenables, de modo que el derecho penal basado en este objetivo solo puede aplicarse legítimamente a un subconjunto de casos de transmisión del VIH” también remata que “esto no tiene nada que ver con el objetivo principal de prevenir la transmisión del VIH”.

Eso puede también verse como lo plantea APELCS: “Es muy difícil determinar la causalidad, el dolo, la intencionalidad ya que intervienen diversos factores en la trasmisión del VIH” además, como también secunda Paul Ibarra y reafirma la Secretaría de Salud, establecer medidas punitivas por el contagio de VIH o cualquier otra enfermedad podría inhibir la voluntad de los sujetos clave para someterse a las pruebas que finalmente sí han demostrado ser un paliativo para evitar el contagio.

Es decir, que al existir una pena por el contagio, automáticamente se establece una señal de alerta sobre los sujetos portadores, sean hombres, mujeres, niños o niñas, lo que puede favorecer la discriminación y el estigma sobre una enfermedad que, con el avance de la ciencia y las políticas públicas efectivas de prevención, ha dejado de ser, para una buena parte de la población, una sentencia de muerte.

APELCS, por su parte, exhorta “a las y los integrantes de las Comisiones de Salud; Justicia y asistencia social; en particular a la Diputada Esther Angélica Martínez Cárdenas a reconsiderar la penalización del VIH y a bajar esta iniciativa, pues colocarían a las personas con VIH bajo un estatus de posibles criminales, contraviniendo a su dignidad como personas, atentando a sus derechos humanos y estigmatizándoles por su condición de salud”.

Paúl Ibarra, por otro lado, señala lo que a ojos vistas parece saltar y es que existe una desarticulación entre los poderes del estado, pues el regreso de este intento de modificación al Código Penal, denota que la diputada que la promueve no tomó en cuenta el antecedente de octubre, ni tuvo conocimiento del pronunciamiento en contra hecho por la Secretaría de Salud, RDS y APELCS hace escasos 5 meses.

Published in La Orquesta on March 17, 2017

US: PWN-USA publishes framework to assert and celebrate the bodily autonomy of all women and girls, including the right to enjoy sex free from fear of HIV Criminalisation

Bodily Autonomy: A Framework to Guide Our Future

Download the printer-friendly PDF version.

Watch the recorded webinar here.

Bodily autonomy is the simple but radical concept that individuals have the right to control what does and does not happen to our bodies. When we have full bodily autonomy, not only are we empowered to make decisions about our health and future – without coercion or control by others – we also have the support and resources needed to meaningfully carry out these decisions.

The concept of bodily autonomy is central to Positive Women’s Network – USA’s vision of a world where all women and girls living with HIV can lead long, healthy, dignified and productive lives, free from stigma, discrimination, and violence in all forms. In this era of increasing surveillance and political repression, hate-fueled violence, and attempts to further restrict reproductive rights and freedom of movement, we assert the fundamental rights of all people, and in particular for women and folks of trans experience living with HIV, to control our bodies and futures. When women and girls living with HIV are free, all of us will be free.

In the U.S. context, the bodies, sexuality, reproduction, and movement of women of color have been controlled and policedfor hundreds of years, often violently and at a great cost to our rights. Today, for women and girls living with HIV, who areprimarily from communities of color, HIV stigma, misogyny, transphobia, and racism intersect to magnify attacks on our rights from all fronts. Yet we know that our human rights should never be conditioned on HIV status, race, ethnicity, sex, gender expression or identity, or any other aspect of who we are.

Bodily Autonomy Means:

Freedom from all forms of state violence.

Women and girls living with HIV deserve a world where our bodies are not threatened by state violence and brutality, and where our physical safety is protected.

This includes:

Ability to control our labor without exploitation, harassment, or policing.

All women and girls living with HIV deserve to control and be compensated fairly for our labor.

This includes:

  • Earning a living wage and receiving equal pay, without discrimination or coercion.
  • The ability to take time off from work without fear of retaliation or losing our jobs, including paid sick leave, family leave, and disability leave.
  • The right to organize in our workplaces to leverage better wages, benefits and working conditions, including forming or joining a union.
  • Those of us who engage in sex work, which is a form of labor, should be able to do so safely and without criminalization, with access to the support and resources we need to stay healthy, and without fear of violence, stigma, or harassment.
  • The ability to work without losing benefits, like health care coverage and supplemental income, that may be needed to maintain a decent quality of life.

Freedom to migrate and move within and across borders.

All women and girls living with HIV deserve to travel and live in a place that is safe and welcoming, regardless of immigration status or religion.

This includes:

  • The right to seek refuge and asylum from conditions that are physically, economically, or otherwise insecure or unsafe.
  • Staying together as a family without fear of losing a parent, child, or loved one to deportation.
  • The right to return to our country of origin if we choose.
  • The right to move around freely, without fear of profiling, detention, or harassment based on perceived immigration status.
  • The ability to enjoy the same legal rights and protections as other members of society, without regard to immigration status or previous contact with the criminal justice system.
  • The ability to access education, employment, healthcare and other opportunities in our country of residence, regardless of legal status.
  • The right to accessible, culturally and linguistically relevant public services and benefits without discrimination or government reprisal.

Freedom to express our gender and sexual orientation in a way that affirms who we are.

Women and girls living with HIV deserve to live authentically, and to express our gender and sexual orientation freely.

This includes:

  • The ability for our bodies to exist in public in a way that is comfortable for us, without being subject to homophobic or transphobic harassment, threats, or violence.
  • Recognition of our gender identity by the state and all social, political, economic, and community institutions with which we interact.
  • Health care responsive to people of all genders, and the employment opportunities, public benefits, and services necessary to thrive with dignity.
  • Support, respect and protection for the relationships and families we form.

    Freedom to choose whether or not, when, and how to form families and raise children.

    All women and girls living with HIV deserve to decide for ourselves whether or not, when, and how we will form families and raise children, regardless of age, income, disability, gender identity or expression, or sexual orientation.

    This includes:

Resources, tools, and ability to make empowered and informed decisions about sex and relationships.

All women and girls living with HIV deserve to control our sexual lives, and should have the resources we need to support pleasurable and healthy sex and relationships.

This includes:

Access to the care and services necessary to keep our bodies, minds and spirits healthy and whole.

All women and girls living with HIV deserve to receive care and services that support holistic wellness – emotionally, physically, psychologically and spiritually.

This includes:

  • Affordable, accessible, trauma-informed and culturally-competent health care, including gender-affirming health care and hormones.
  • The right to refuse medical care that does not affirm us or make us feel whole.
  • Adequate nutrition and food security.
  • Freedom to practice our faith without fear of harassment, discrimination, or violence.
  • Safe, affordable, and stable housing.
  • Mental, emotional, and spiritual support services.
  • Access to harm reduction programs, safe injection sites and equipment, and overdose prevention resources for people who use drugs.

Download the printer-friendly PDF version of this framework here.

US: Article (including quotes from Sero's Sean Strub) highlights how movement against HIV criminalisation is growing stronger in 2017

HIV Criminalization Is Detrimental to Public Health. It’s Time for the Law to Catch Up. By Matt Baume. Outward: Expanding the LGBTQ Conversation on Slate.com

It was in the summer of 2015 that then-23-year-old Michael Johnson was sentenced to thirty 30 years in prison for transmitting HIV. Since 1988, his home state of Missouri has imposed harsh penalties for what prosecutors call “reckless infection,” and it’s hardly alone: Most states have, at some time, prosecuted people for transmitting the virus. But those prosecutions may soon come to an end.

Laws that establish HIV-specific crimes date back to the dark years of the epidemic: “Everyone detected with AIDS should be tattooed in the upper forearm, to protect common-needle users,” wrote William F. Buckley Jr. in the New York Times in 1986, “and on the buttocks, to prevent the victimization of other homosexuals.” At the time, hysteria over AIDS produced a national wave of stigmatizing laws—laws that have now been shown to have worsened the epidemic.

“If people are so concerned with HIV transmission, then perhaps the Missouri legislature and Governor Nixon should start by repealing this law,” wrote Kenyon Farrow, the U.S. and global health policy director for the Treatment Action Group, in response to Michael Johnson’s prosecution.

Though it may seem appropriate to discourage HIV transmission, laws that create HIV-specific crimes “are unjust and harmful to public health around the world,” according to the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Rather than discouraging transmission, the laws actually discourage patients from seeking testing and care, which in turn leads to more transmissions. Numerous other public health experts and political leaders have called for an end to HIV prosecutions, including the American Medical Association, the National Association of County and City Health Officials, the U.S Conference of Mayors, and the Obama administration’s Department of Justice.

But reform comes slowly, and advocates for repeal have found themselves toiling for years to overturn the harmful statutes. Now, at last, a coordinated nationwide effort is taking shape, and 2017 is likely to see significant advances in the decriminalization of HIV.

“There’s two big shifts over the last five or six years,” said Sean Strub, executive director of the Sero Project, a group that advocates for repeal. “One, the people in the LGBT community … have an understanding of what HIV criminalization is. It’s a general awareness of the phenomenon in the communities most directly affected.” He estimates that his organization has had over a thousand speaking engagements in the last half-decade.

“Second: The issue is increasingly seen in public health terms,” he said. “To be fair, there wasn’t a lot of hard evidence [until recently]. We now know that 25 percent of people with HIV in the U.S. know one or more individuals who are afraid to get tested for HIV for fear of getting criminalized.” That statistic is based on a Sero Project survey of over 2,000 people, designed to determine how the partners of people with HIV access health care. Their findings indicate that criminalization has a public health impact beyond people who already have HIV.

Organizations like Sero Project have learned some valuable lessons over the last few years about harm reduction, and they’re now leveraging those best-practices in communities and legislatures around the country. Those strategies include coordinated educational efforts that simultaneously hit multiple communities: Faith, LGBTQ, public health, and legal. In addition, advocates are establishing local coalitions so that legislative pressure comes from constituents, rather than national groups. And they’re engaging with individual prosecutions around the country.

This year will see particularly intense focus in midwestern and southern states: Mississippi, Tennessee, Georgia, the Carolinas, Ohio, and Indiana will see intensive outreach efforts. California is making great strides, with a bill announced earlier this month to modernize the state’s laws. That effort has included a detailed study of prosecutions, with an analysis of demographic data that could become a model for modernization in other states.

Customized approaches are key to the approach in each state. In Florida, for example, advocates have reached out to members of the criminal justice system, from police officers all the way up to judges. Iowa’s decriminalization effort included a collaboration between hepatitis and HIV groups.

Another important evolution is how closely reform advocates are working with advocates for other forms of social change. “Whether it’s trans activists or drug policy people or sex work activists or Black Lives Matter or penal system reform, HIV decriminalization seems to be a nexus for those efforts,” said Strub. “It’s so closely tied to the criminalization of bodies. … Five or six years ago, other organizations were not involved in this work.”

At the national level, advocates are sponsoring a Congressional lobbying campaign in March. Top priorities include reforms to Army policy, as well as the creation of incentives for states to modernize their laws. (An old provision in the Ryan White CARE Act, a 1990 law that provided funding for HIV programs, prompted many states to impose criminalization in the first place.) The Repeal HIV Discrimination Act, sponsored by Barbara Lee (D-CA) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), would provide a framework for state-by-state repeal—and although it’s languished since 2013, it will see a renewed push next month.

Among the states to watch: Missouri, home of Michael Johnson. The state is in the midst of an organizing effort that Strub estimates could take two or three years. Johnson’s conviction was recently overturned due to prosecutorial misconduct, and he’s been remanded for a retrial likely to happen sometime this year. That’s encouraging news, though Missouri Court of Appeals refused to rule on the constitutionality of the law under which Johnson was convicted.

As a result, Johnson and many others like him will remain tangled in a maze of trials, legislation, and lobbying efforts, trapped by misguided laws that impose preventable harm—for now.

US: HIV Criminalisation laws will feature heavily in AIDSWatch 2017 conversations with Members of Congress

Every year, AIDSWatch brings together hundreds of people living with HIV and their allies to meet with Members of Congress with the aim of educating them about important issues involving HIV-positive people in the country.

Presented by The Elizabeth Taylor AIDS Foundation, it is the nation’s largest annual constituent-based national HIV advocacy event, and is implemented as a partnership between AIDS United, the Treatment Access Expansion Project, and the US People Living With HIV Caucus.

In order to continue the efforts towards a cure, we must also try and mend social stigma around those living with HIV. But in order to stop new infections and successfully treat those living with the virus, we need compromise and collaboration across all sectors. One of the biggest conversations organizers plan to have at AIDSWatch 2017 centers around HIV criminalization laws.

Last month, a bill was introduced to the California state legislature by Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and assembly members Todd Gloria (D-San Diego) and David Chiu (D-San Francisco) aiming to modernize these laws, which criminalize and stigmatize those living with HIV.

The bill was co-sponsored by Equality California, the ACLU California, APLA Health, Black AIDS Institute, Lambda Legal, and Positive Women’s Network. It’s purpose is to repeal all HIV specific laws that criminalize otherwise legal behavior, turning misdemeanors into felonies that put innocent people (like Michael Johnson) in prison simply for being HIV-positive.

“ETAF is putting our hearts into encouraging every state to overturn its criminalization laws,” Laela Wilding, Elizabeth Taylor’s eldest granddaughter and ambassador to ETAF, says to Plus. “Generally speaking it’s about disclosure. The problem with that is in many cases, it becomes a ‘he said, she said’ type of situation where one person may say, ‘yes I disclosed my positive status’ and eventually there’s a possibility that person could come back and accuse them of having not disclosed their status after some kind of sexual encounter or relationship, and then it’s sort of a push and pull. Usually the person who is HIV-positive is the person who is marginalized and often ends up going to jail or prison.”

There are well over 30 states in the United States with laws that discriminate against people with HIV in one form or another, and many of them are written in vague terms so they’re interpreted in different ways. That being said, it becomes incredibly important to monitor the way these laws are written and try to overturn them — much like how Colorado did last year.

Wilding says a major reason for Colorado’s victory was because people in the state were educated on the facts and medical realities of what it means to be living with HIV: that undetectable means uninfectious, yet poz people are stigmatized and marginalized in the criminalization system to almost no mercy.

“[Colorado] overturned those laws by letting people know the facts,” Wilding adds. “Then, almost everyone was behind it. Of course we don’t want to criminalize these people who are living with a disease that is considered treatable to a certain degree. If we can talk about it with our friends, talk about it in the media, I think that state-by-state we can start breaking the stigma down and change these laws. I think once people know about it, they want to help.”

HIV criminalization laws also have an invisible effect on HIV testing. For people who live in a state with these laws, it’s easy for them to brush off an opportunity to get tested. After all, why risk knowing you’re positive if you’re only going to get punished for it? As a result of people being left untested, the number of people living with HIV who don’t know it (and who aren’t getting treated) are left at risk.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, one in eight people have the virus and don’t know it. And while a new report shows that annual HIV infections in the U.S. dropped 18 percent between 2008 and 2014, it is still evident that Black men are not only disproportionately effected, but are also the most targeted when it comes to criminalization laws.

“The trans community and women, people of color, these people particularly in California, women in California, are being marginalized and criminalized to an even greater degree and I don’t think people have any idea that this is going on,” Wilding adds. “Once we hear about it, we get fire up. We think, ‘Why is our government spending money criminalizing these people?’ We need to protect them, and support them in the right ways. That would reduce the transmission of HIV, which is the point.”

Elizabeth Taylor’s great-grandson, Wilding’s son, Finn McMurray, spoke to Congressional members last year at AIDSWatch about the importance of sexual health education in schools. According to him, there is still very little conversation about treatment and prevention, especially around PrEP. He hopes that will change.

“Most of my peers unfortunately don’t know about these new, or do not talk about, or haven’t considered for themselves, these new breakthroughs,” the 18-year old activist says. “That’s something to work on, actually informing youth and getting youth to talk about it — not only the issues that have been around for a long time, which are still quite prevalent, but the breakthroughs that are happening now and how those can be utilized.”

McMurray will again ask for a cosponsor of the Real Education for Healthy Youth Act, which aims to fund teacher training on sex education and provide grants for comprehensive sex education. “I think that sexual health education is extremely important to not only the fight against HIV, but all STIs,” he reiterates.”The age group of 15-24 make up half of the new infections each year. I think it’s essential for the next generation to make healthy decisions for themselves. I’d really like to see a shift in the conversation that my generation is having. There’s a lot of potential, but we aren’t as a whole being exposed to enough and being pushed and supported to have these conversations.”

AIDSWatch 2017 will take place from March 27 – 28, 2017 in Washington, D.C.

Canada: Advocacy groups hope law criminalising HIV non-disclosure will change soon

Advocates hope for change in HIV non-disclosure law after Ottawa meeting with provinces

Law criminalizing HIV non-disclosure needs to catch up with science, advocates say.

Advocacy groups are hoping the law criminalizing HIV non-disclosure in Canada will change after a meeting between Ottawa and the provinces in the spring.

Under Canadian law, people with HIV are required to disclose their health status to their partner before engaging in sexual activity. Those who don’t can be charged with aggravated sexual assault, whether or not HIV is actually transmitted, and face a maximum sentence of life in prison as well as permanent status as a registered sex offender.

Criminalizing non-disclosure only compounds the marginalization and fear in the lives of people living with HIV, advocacy groups say.

“This is a really important issue. The federal government has made a commitment to review the way our justice system handles HIV-related cases. And that’s something that we fully support and welcome,” Emilie Smith, a spokesperson with the Ministry of the Attorney General, told the Star in an email.

“Ontario is currently working with the federal government on this review — so that work has already started.”

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that a person with HIV can only keep their condition from a partner if they have a low viral load — the number of HIV virus particles in a millilitre of blood — and use a condom.

Advocates argue the law does not take into account science that says that as long as a person has an undetectable viral load, risk of transmission is practically zero, even if the person did not use a condom.

The Canadian medical community has also weighed in. In 2014, more than 70 national AIDS doctors and HIV researchers released a statement expressing concern for the Supreme Court’s approach to nondisclosure as “a poor appreciation of the science related to HIV contribut(ing) to an overly broad use of the criminal law.”

Internationally, the United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) and the Global Commission on HIV and the Law both urged governments to limit the use of criminal law to cases of intentional transmission of the virus.

For advocates calling on lawmakers to catch up with science and reconsider its laws on HIV criminalization, the meeting between the federal government and the provinces cannot come soon enough.

In a 2013 report on the criminalization of non-disclosure and recommendations for police, the HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario underlined the “significant scientific consensus on certain key issues” as it relates to the virus.

“For over a decade, HIV has been medically understood as a chronic, manageable infection,” it reads, noting a low or undetectable viral load — usually the result of effective antiretroviral drug treatment — reduces the risks of HIV transmission through sex “to a point where the risk of transmission is negligible.”

The prosecutions are unfortunately having an impact on the most vulnerable people living with HIV, said Ryan Peck, the legal clinic’s executive director.

“There’s also the issue that the current approach to criminal law is impacting people’s decisions to test for HIV in the first place — the current use providing a disincentive to get tested.

“There is a deep fear that what people say to their health-care providers and public health authorities will end up in a court case against them.”

Last month, a protest was held outside the ministry’s office to protest the “overly broad and unjust” charges relative to HIV disclosure.

Ontario leads in the number of people charged with HIV status non-disclosure and 180 people have been charged across the country, Jonathan Valelly of Queers Crash the Beat said at the protest.

The protesters were calling for a moratorium on all HIV non-disclosure cases currently before the courts.

“This issue is just not that cut-and-dry. These cases are highly complex, and no two cases are exactly alike,” said Smith, the attorney-general spokesperson.

“What needs to happen and what is happening, is a conversation that looks at the law, how it is being applied as well as our understanding of HIV. We agree that a review is needed and the federal government has committed to look at the current law critically to see if there are changes to the Criminal Code that need to be made.”

Published in the Star on March 5, 2017