US: LGBTQ groups share mixed feelings on bills that passed or failed through state legislatures in 2021

‘You gasp in relief, you don’t celebrate’

LGBTQ groups share mixed feelings on bills that passed, failed during the session

It’s easy to measure Nevada’s success in passing legislation that enhances LGBTQ protections when compared to the wave of anti-LGBTQ bills, specifically anti-trans proposals, that have been sweeping through state legislatures in 2021.

At least 17 bills were passed around the country that targeted trans youth seeking gender-affirming care and allowed for religious exemptions to providing services to the LGBTQ community — the Human Rights Campaign called 2021 the worst year for anti-LGBTQ legislation. 

Meanwhile, Nevada moved in the opposite direction and passed legislation modernizing HIV criminalization laws, enhancing data collection around hate crimes and promoting a more inclusive curriculum.

LGBTQ groups following the legislative process have mixed feelings about the measures lawmakers took. 

“So many of the bills are just to be able to gain basic dignity and we’re coming from such a deficit,” said Brooke Maylath, the president of Transgender Allies Group. 

Maylath called those victories, including HIV modernizing, “bittersweet,” adding that “you gasp in relief, you don’t celebrate.”

But the bills that failed, she added, hurt more. 

While general LGBTQ-inclusive legislation was able to advance, two bills specifically enhancing protections for the gender-diverse community, one to ensure insurance companies cover gender-affirming procedures and another to require the Nevada Department of Corrections to develop policies around protecting and housing transgender inmates, died. 

“I’m stunned and bitter. I feel locked out in the cold,” Maylath said. “Part of it is Covid. Not being in the building has hurt everybody equally. For public health reasons, it was very necessary. But there are certain elected officials who are very good about listening to their own interested lobbyists and pay no never mind to those they don’t have a vested interest in.”

Andre Wade, the Nevada state director for Silver State Equality, said while he was proud overall of the work done during the session, “there is still some disappointment” around the bills that failed. 

“There are huge implications to trans health and well-being and the treatment of trans people in the criminal justice system,” he said, adding the fact that the bills strengthening those protections “stalled is disheartening and upsetting.”

Nevada, he added, still made progress, which he attributes in part to having at least four openly LGBTQ lawmakers. 

“Having 20 LGBTQ specific or inclusive bills from the jump is amazing in and of itself,” he said. “The fact that 50 percent have passed is amazing. The thing that is important is we moved from core nondiscrimination protection bills around public accommodations and employment and were able to get into the nooks and crannies of things affecting people’s everyday lives.”

The biggest difference between Nevada and other states, he added, was that the state didn’t “have to play defense like some other states when it comes to gross anti-trans bills.” 

According to the Human Rights Campaign, there were more than 250 bills introduced in state legislatures in 2021 that target the LGBTQ community. 

The biggest clump of legislation were anti-trans, including: 

  • 35 bills that would ban transgender youth from accessing gender-affirming medical care;
  • 15 bills that would prohibit transgender people from accessing restrooms or lockerrooms consistent with their gender idenity;
  • 69 bills that would prevent transgender youth from participating in sports.

While Nevada didn’t embark on a similar path, groups agreed there is room for improvement.

“Are we better if we’re not looking after the most marginalized Americans?” Maylath asked. “Are we better if we’re denying human dignity to the people we’ve ostracized?”

‘Failed in some areas’

The death of Senate Bill 139, which would have required health insurance policies to cover “the treatment of conditions relating to gender dysphoria, gender incongruence and other disorders of sexual development,” hurts Maylath the most.

Trans and gender-nonconforming people share stories during the bill’s hearing about having to pay out of pocket for affirming procedures a health care provider deemed medically necessary. Procedures included “top surgery,” which includes breast reduction or removal, and voice therapy.

“I consider this common sense legislation,” said Sy Bernabei, the executive director for Gender Justice Nevada. “It makes sense that if there is a diagnosis of gender dysphoria and a doctor says, ‘here are these gender-affirming procedures,’ and (the diagnosis) is rooted in medical care and theory, then why wouldn’t we make it easier for insurance to cover these policies?” 

Both Bernabei and Maylath said the legislation could have saved lives. 

During testimony for the bill, Bernabei added when transgender and gender-nonconforming people don’t have procedures covered by insurance they are more likely to experience depression or be at-risk of suicide. 

Several fiscal notes were attached to the bill essentially dooming the bill’s fate. 

Clark County said if the bill expanded coverage for conditions related to gender dysphoria “assuming two reassignment surgeries per year, or one per 10,000 members,” it would cost $1.5 million over two years.

“In a $9 billion budget you can’t find money for gender-affirming procedures, which are actually life-saving procedures,?” Maylath asked, adding that trans people are already paying into insurance plans. 

“We pay the same benefits as everybody else yet the lifesaving procedures for us are denied administratively.”

After passing out of the Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor April 2, SB 139 was sent to the Senate Finance committee, chaired by state Sen. Chris Brooks, where it died without another hearing.

Maylath, who presented the legislation alongside bill sponsor state Sen. Melanie Scheible, said she reached out to Brooks multiple times but never received a response.

Senate Bill 258, which would have required NDOC to adopt regulations around housing, heath care and security for transgender inmates, also died. 

The hearing included letters from inmates and testimony for attorneys representing transgender inmates who detailed horrific allegations of abuse and sexual assault

“We’ve got this draconian system that preys on people of color and puts them into subhuman conditions and then denies basic human rights and access to health care and appropriate housing to keep them safe from rape,” Maylath said. 

The department attached a $1.3 million fiscal note to the bill. Maylath said the fiscal note was “inflated and unnecessary”  and called it “an administrative trick” to keep the bill from going forward.

NDOC also attached a nearly $4 million fiscal note to another one of Scheible’s bills, Senate Bill 22, that caps how much prison officials can deduct from inmate’s accounts. 

Brooks scheduled a hearing for the legislation in the Senate Finance Committee, lawmakers challenged the accuracy of the fiscal impact, and the Legislative Counsel Bureau concluded they couldn’t verify the accuracy of the amount. The bill then passed both houses unanimously. 

It’s unclear why the same level of scrutiny given to the fiscal note on SB 22 wasn’t given to SB 258.

Maylath said the bill “was about getting the Department of Corrections to properly write transgender and gender variant prisoner policy” so guidelines were consistent across prisons and clear for all corrections officers to understand.

“So for the 30, 40 prisoners they have who are gender variant, (NDOC) wants to continue to not have to change their ways so they can be able to do what they’ve always done, which is applying extrajudicial punishment for people who are different,” she said.

Bernabei wasn’t surprised that those bills didn’t pass, but was still disappointed. 

“Even though we have a progressive body right now and some really great lawmakers, we still couldn’t get through what we should have,” they added. “At least we didn’t pass anti-LGBTQ bills, but I feel like we still kind of failed in some areas.”

More voices, more political power

Wade said one of the more significant wins for the LGBTQ community was Senate Bill 275, which modernizes the state’s HIV laws. 

“It’s part of a broader movement across the nation with at least nine other states mulling similar legislation,” Wade said.

The legislation repeals a provision in Nevada law that makes it a category B felony for a person who tested positive for HIV from “knowingly or willfully engaging in a manner intended to transmit the disease.” 

Laws criminalizing HIV transmission that were put in place during the height of the HIV/AIDS pandemic targeted gay and trans people and don’t reflect the innovations in science and medicine around the disease. Former state Sen. David Parks had worked for years to change those laws.

Again, Maylath said the passage was bittersweet.

“How do you criminalize having a virus?” Maylath said. “It was bad they criminalized it in the first place… Is it room for celebration? I don’t know. How do you celebrate being able to get what’s owed to you on a human dignity basis after having it taken away from you for the past 30 years?”

Wade said it’s hard to undersell the importance of Assembly Bill 261, which creates inclusive curriculum standards that takes into consideration the perspectives and contributions of marginalized communities such as the LGBTQ community, Black, indigenous people of color and immigrants. 

“It will allow racial and ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities to see themselves in history books and civic books and for our cisgender, heterosexual peers to see us as well,” Wade said.

Bernabei noted the important step of passing AB 261 especially in contrast to other states that banned “critical race theory” from being taught in schools. While the bill is a good step, they added the implementation process is something to watch. 

“What is it going to look like when it’s implemented,” they said. “When we talk about LGBTQ history, are we only going to be celebrating Harvey Milk (the first openly gay elected official in California)? Are we celebrating trans folks who have contributed or people of color in our community? I’m glad it passed, but I’m interested to see what happens with it.” 

Other important bills, Wade said, include Senate Bill 237, which designates LGBTQ businesses as minority-owned businesses, and Senate Bill 148, which enhances how Nevada law enforcement tracks and reports hate crimes.  

“Our hate crime reporting data, in general, isn’t that great,” Wade said. “But this will allow us to have better data on sexual orientation and gender identity so we can know what the rise of hate crimes look like throughout the state and get reports so we can know how to address the situation.”

Assembly Bill 115 would allow more than two individuals to be legal parents and allows for all consenting parents to share in the duties and responsibilities of raising the child.

“This isn’t just an LGBTQ bill, this is also a step-parent bill. This is a bill for families who need legal protections for modern families,” Wade said.

While there wasn’t a concerted effort to advance anti-LGBTQ legislation in 2021, Bernabei wouldn’t be surprised if the progress made during the session prompted backlash in 2023, especially if Democrats lose seats. 

But LGBTQ groups will be ready. 

“The good thing about where we’re at is there are more people coming out not because there are more gay and trans people but because it’s safer and more affirming,” Bernabei said. “With more voices, we have more political power.”

US: It is time to review previous convictions under the former HIV law and issue pardons

HIV law has changed, but those prosecuted under former measure struggle to overcome convictions

Jeremy Merithew had a hook-up in 2012 that he will remember for the rest of his life. He met a man on the gay app Adam4Adam. The man came over for sex and left.

The next day, a deputy from the Kent County Sheriff’s Department was knocking on his door and he ended up behind bars.

The reason? Police and prosecutors said he broke Michigan’s felony law called AIDS — Sexual Penetration with Uninformed Partner. The law, passed in 1988, required a person who knows they are living with HIV to disclose their status to potential sexual partners before engaging in any sexual penetration “however slight.”

Critics of the law called it a stigmatizing remnant of a time when the science of HIV was not fixed and infection was considered a likely death sentence.

They went to work and got the Legislature to change the law in 2019. The new law created misdemeanors crimes requiring prosecutors to prove a person had an intent to transmit their infection and took actions likely to transmit it. The new law specifically creates protections for people living with HIV who use a risk reduction method to prevent passing the virus, including condoms or being on HIV medications that suppress the virus.

Merithew is fighting back after serving his sentence and is preparing to ask Gov. Gretchen Whitmer to pardon him. And he’s got some powerful allies in his actions: former state. Rep. Jon Hoadley (D-Kalamazoo), Jay Kaplan of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan, and HIV activist and political leader Sean Strub, executive director of the Pennsylvania-based Sero Project that works to help reform HIV-specific criminal laws, as well as working with those who have been prosecuted under these laws and are trying to re-enter society.

“How was this justice?” Hoadley said of the case against Merithew. “Jeremy posed no risk before the charges, and he posed no risk after his conviction. How did we help society by putting him in prison? We don’t.”

Kaplan, who is the staff attorney for the ACLU of Michigan LGBTQ Project, said the laws had “tragic consequences.”

“The whole idea that based on a medical status — that you tested positive, you are automatically considered a criminal — is wrong,” Kaplan said. He said it was often used as a political tool by elected prosecutors in order to appear “tough on crime.”

Hoadley believes Whitmer and her administration should review all convictions under the former felony law and issue pardons for those where a conviction would not be achieved under the new law.

Whitmer’s office did not respond to repeated requests for comment for this story. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel also didn’t respond.

There is a precedent to expunging criminal convictions after a law changes. After Michigan legalized personal possession of marijuana for recreational use in 2018, the state allows those convicted for possession and other non-violent marijuana crimes to seek and expungement of their records.

Hoadley, Kaplan and Strub agree it’s time to review those previous convictions under the former HIV law.

By the time Merithew was in court, science had shown the prescription drugs released in 1996 could not only stop HIV from replicating in the body and slow if not halt the virus’ relentless destruction of the immune system, but that it made that person unable to sexually transmit the virus. This discovery led to a prevention method called “undetectable = untransmittable.” It is also referred to as “treatment as prevention.”

Despite science clearly demonstrating that a person on medications with an undetectable viral load being unable to transmit HIV, Merithew was prohibited by Kent County Circuit Court Judge James Redford from bringing up the medical facts as a defense in his trial. Prosecutors offered Merithew an opportunity to plead guilty to one count of the disclosure law by having anal sex. But when he refused, they lodged a second charge for oral sex and a charge of using a computer to commit a crime.

“It doesn’t make sense to ignore the science,” said Strub. “When a person with HIV shows up in a courtroom there seems to be a presumption of guilt, rather than a presumption of innocence. It seems to be on the person with HIV to prove they disclosed their HIV status.”

Without the medical science to show he didn’t pose any threat, a sympathetic victim — a married Black man with two young children at home who worked raising money for homeless services in Grand Rapids — a deputy who expressed his unease with looking at same-sex sexual behavior and string of messages from the hook-up site that were ambiguous as to whether Merithew disclosed his HIV status, Merithew was convicted and sent to prison.

In addition to the prison sentence, Redford ordered Merithew to register as a sex offender for the next 15 years, which has prevented him from moving to certain areas or living in a home with children or getting most jobs. The former felony law was not among criminal convictions listed in the state’s sex offender registry requiring registration. However, Redford relied on a catch-all clause in the law intended for minors convicted of sex crimes to order Merithew on the sex offender registry.

Merithew is out of prison and living in a northern Michigan community with his mother. He said he hopes to complete a Ph.D in psychology focusing on the impact of trauma in people’s lives.

Merithew told the Advance he was offered a position in Lansing earlier this year. He attempted to move closer to the area, but he said officials in the county he was looking to move to threatened his relatives with child protective services involvement and removal of their children if he was allowed to live with them. He said had to decline the position as a result.

While Merithew is white, a study published by Trevor Hoppe in 2015 — then a doctoral student at the University of Michigan and now an assistant professor of sociology at University of North Carolina — found a racial disparity of who was being prosecuted. His study found that white women and Black men who had sex with women had a more likely potential of prosecution under the law in Michigan. He characterized this disparity as an “uneven application” of the felony law.

Strub said HIV criminalization laws across the country result in further shaming and stigmatization of people living with HIV by forcing them to register on sex offender lists.

“From a human rights perspective, these are egregious human rights violations often imposing draconian prison sentences of decades in situations not only where there was no transmission, but no risk of transmission,” Strub said.

Ukraine: New bill proposes expanding HIV-specific criminal law with harsher sentences for transmitting all serious communicable diseases

Avakov proposes harsh prison sentence

The Interior Ministry proposes to rewrite Article 130 in the Criminal Code, which deals with deliberate exposure to a dangerous communicable disease.

Now it mainly refers to HIV, but also mentions “other incurable infectious diseases. The new interpretation removes HIV and incurable diseases, i.e., if the bill is passed, the article can be applied to transmission of “a particularly dangerous infectious disease. It is not clear what infections we are talking about, but in theory, the coronavirus could be included in this list.

At the same time, it is proposed to increase responsibility for transmission. At present, it is possible to be arrested for up to three months or sentenced to 3-5 years in prison. The new draft stipulates imprisonment from 3 to 8 years, and if the perpetrator infects two or more people or minors, he will face from 5 to 10 years.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version), Scroll down for original article in Russian


Умышленное заражение коронавирусом: Аваков предлагает жесткое тюремное наказание

…Кроме того, в Уголовном кодексе МВД предлагает переписать и статью 130 – о намеренном заражении опасной инфекционной болезнью.

Сейчас речь в ней идет в основном о ВИЧ, также указаны “другие неизлечимые инфекционные болезни”. В новой интерпретации ВИЧ и неизлечимые болезни убрали, то есть, в случае принятия законопроекта под статью можно будет попасть за заражение “особо опасной инфекционной болезнью”. О каких именно инфекциях идет речь – неясно, но в теории к этому списку можно отнести и коронавирус.

При этом предлагается усилить ответственность за заражения. Сейчас предусмотрен арест на срок до трех месяцев или срок на 3-5 лет. В новом проекте прописали лишение свободы от 3 до 8 лет, а если виновник заразит двух или больше лиц или несовершеннолетних – ему будет грозить срок от 5 до 10 лет.

US: New Jersey Assemblywoman introduces legislation to modernise the state’s HIV-specific criminal law

Vainieri Huttle Introduces Bill to Decriminalize Transmission of HIV

(TRENTON) – Assemblywoman Valerie Vainieri Huttle has introduced legislation to decriminalize the transmission of HIV under certain circumstances.

Under current New Jersey law, it is a crime of the third degree if a person knows that he or she is infected with AIDS or HIV and commits an act of sexual penetration without the informed consent of their partner. A third-degree crime is punishable by three to five years in prison, a fine of up to $15,000, or both.

The legislation (A-5673) seeks to amend existing law to downgrade this penalty to a disorderly persons offense, and also have it only apply to people who act with specific intent to transmit an infectious or communicable disease like HIV, do not attempt to prevent transmission, and pass the disease to another person. A disorderly persons offense is punishable by six months in prison, a fine of up to $1,000, or both.

“For far too long, stigma around HIV/AIDS and the LGBTQ community has guided our laws. This legislation ensures that New Jersey moves forward guided by public health, not bigotry,” said Assemblywoman Valerie Vainieri Huttle (D-Bergen). “I am honored to be working alongside Garden State Equality, Hyacinth and the Harm Reduction Coalition to put forth this historic legislation.”

“The current law disproportionately impacts communities who are more likely to be living with the virus, including LGBTQ+ people, Black and Latinx people, transgender women, and sex workers. We are thrilled to partner with pro-equality champions, Senator Vitale and Assemblywoman Vainieri Huttle, on modernizing this outdated and harmful law,” said Christian Fuscarino, Executive Director, Garden State Equality.

Axel Torress Marrero, Senior Director of Public Policy and Prevention, Hyacinth AIDS Foundation said, “New Jersey’s HIV criminalization statute is based on stigma and fear, rather than modern science. It no longer reflects the current science of treatment and transmission of HIV. In 2021, a person living with HIV today can take medication to reduce their viral load that corresponds to the amount of virus present in their body, which means they will not transmit HIV to another individual.  This tremendous breakthrough is the science supporting the Undetectable Equals Untransmittable (U=U) reality.”

“This bill will make New Jersey more inclusive and less stigmatizing for people living with HIV. The criminal code is meant to punish actions that harm others, not discriminate against people living with a chronic health condition. We sincerely thank bill sponsors Senator Vitale and Assemblywoman Vainieri Huttle for championing this effort to decriminalize HIV and promote public health,” said Jenna Mellor, Executive Director, New Jersey Harm Reduction Coalition.

In addition to HIV, the measure would also apply to the transmission of chancroid, gonorrhea, syphilis, herpes virus, or any of the varieties or stages of such diseases. It now goes to the Assembly Speaker for further review.

New Zealand: Man sentenced to three years and nine months in prison for removing condom without consent during sex

New Zealand’s first successful ‘stealthing’ prosecution leads the way for law changes in Australia and elsewhere

Last week’s sentencing of a Wellington man for rape was legally significant for being New Zealand’s first successful prosecution for what is known as “stealthing”.

Stealthing occurs when a condom is removed without consent during sexual intercourse. In these cases, a person may have consented to sex but only under certain conditions — for example, with the use of a condom.

In this case, X was found guilty of raping a sex worker in a Lower Hutt brothel in late 2018, and sentenced to three years and nine months in prison. The court was told he was made aware on several occasions a condom was legally required and he agreed to use one.

The two had consensual sex with protection, but when they had sex again X removed the condom. The woman indicated he had acted inappropriately and made him put the condom back on. Without her knowledge, X again removed the condom and ejaculated inside her. The woman ran to her manager’s office and the police were called.

Judge Stephen Harrop said sex workers were no less victims than any other survivor. He also rejected the defence claim that the stealthing was not premeditated and that cultural factors were relevant to the sentencing (X arrived in New Zealand from the Philippines in 2016).

Judge Harrop said X was told multiple times that a condom was necessary, adding: “I can’t proceed on the basis that raping sex workers is any more acceptable [in the Philippines] than it is here.”

The judge also said the sexual assault had risked the woman’s physical health and had caused her ongoing mental harm. In her victim impact statement, she said her world view has changed, she has had to cease work and almost never leaves home alone.

Recognising stealthing as a crime

The conviction is significant because it recognises everyone has a right not only to choose to consent to sexual activity, but also to choose what conditions are placed on that consent.

This is also significant for the New Zealand police who have been accused of not taking reports of stealthing seriously in the past.

Furthermore, the landmark New Zealand judgment paves the way for other countries to reconsider their laws. There is currently a proposal to outlaw stealthing “as a factor that negates consent” before the Australian Capital Territory Legislative Assembly.

Last year, the New South Wales Law Reform Commission also suggested changes to the state’s legislative regime. These would mean sex with a condom is legally defined as a specific activity that can be consented to, without consenting to any other sexual activity, such as sex without a condom.

So far, only one Australian case has made it to court, with a Melbourne man charged with rape in 2018 after allegedly removing a condom without consent. The trial has been delayed by the pandemic.

Further afield, Switzerland, Canada and Germany have all seen convictions for stealthing.

Physical and psychological risk

While these proposed changes are a step in the right direction, it is clear stealthing is still not well understood. This is perhaps not surprising, as issues of consent in general remain a real problem in the community and the courts.

As the acclaimed TV drama series I May Destroy You powerfully depicted, stealthing is about dominance and power and can happen to anyone. While most people will agree that “no means no”, it’s less clear what “yes” can mean.

Specifically, what conditions have been placed on that “yes”? Situations where the agreed conditions have changed – such as when a condom has been removed – should require “fresh consent” from both partners.

Beyond the moral, ethical and legal considerations, stealthing poses real risks to the physical and psychological well-being of the survivor, including sexually transmitted infections, HIV, unplanned pregnancy, depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder.

Fundamentally, stealthing violates the dignity and autonomy of survivors and is a violation of a person’s right to self-determination. The apparent unwillingness of police to prosecute, combined with a lack of public awareness, has undoubtedly meant stealthing has been under-reported in the past.

It is to be hoped the recent New Zealand conviction increases community awareness and encourages other survivors to come forward and tell their stories. Ultimately, it should lead to other jurisdictions recognising stealthing as a sexual crime and changing their laws to reflect this.

US: The Coverage of a recent case of HIV criminalisation in Ohio shows why the law needs to change

Dayton Man’s Arrest Shines Light on Ohio’s Outdated Laws on HIV Criminalization

The February arrest of a Dayton man is highlighting Ohio’s laws on HIV criminalization and the need for reform.

The 50-year-old Dayton resident faces charges of felony assault after police say he offered an undercover detective oral sex during a sting and didn’t reveal he “tested positive for a virus that causes Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome.”

The man used adult websites and telephone apps to offer free sex at his home, according to a press release issued by Dayton Police.

“[He] did so without disclosing his status as a carrier of AIDS. Investigators are concerned that there may be other persons, over a period of years, whom have interacted sexually with [him]who may also be victims,” said Cara Zinksi-Neace, spokeswoman for Dayton Police, in the press release.

In addition to conflating HIV and AIDS in the press release, the Dayton Police also included a clear picture of the man’s house and the name of his less-than-a-mile long street.

The arrest, the police press release, and the nature of the charges the man faces are evidence of a climate in Ohio that advocates of HIV decriminalization say desperately need to change.

Eight states, including nearby Michigan and Illinois, have reformed or repealed one or more parts of their HIV-specific criminal laws, but Ohio is one of 32 states that have HIV-specific criminal laws and/or sentence enhancements applicable to people living with HIV.

From the Center for HIV Law & Policy

 

The Laws

Ohio  currently has 6 separate statutes on the books that criminalize living with HIV, most notably a felony assault charge that specifically calls out the virus. According to Ohio’s Revised Code § 2903.11, “No person, with knowledge that the person has tested positive as a carrier of a virus that causes acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, shall knowingly…engage in sexual conduct with another person without disclosing that knowledge to the other person prior to engaging in the sexual conduct.”

A conviction under the law can result in up to an 8-year prison sentence.

Additionally, people living with HIV face higher penalties if charged with crimes that involve sex work, including prostitution, solicitation, or loitering to engage in solicitation.

“Ohio’s has some of the most backwards and stigmatizing laws in the country,” says Dwayne Steward, Director of Prevention for Equitas Health, a regional nonprofit community healthcare system and one of the largest LGBTQ+ and HIV/AIDS serving healthcare organizations in the United States.

Steward said that these laws have been around for decades and feature outdated language stemming from the fear-based public opinion formed during the early part of the AIDS epidemic, as opposed to language derived from modern science.

“For instance, it still says in these laws that someone can be prosecuted for exchanging saliva with another person, even though we know that—scientifically—HIV can not be transmitted in this way,” explains Steward.

Kim Welter, Facilitator of the Ohio Health Modernization Movement (OHMM) working to reform the state’s statues HIV criminalization, is quick to point out one of the biggest misconceptions about the relationship between these laws and HIV transmission

“The current laws in no way require transmission,” says Welter. “You could have a situation where there is no actual harm done, but an individual with HIV could end up serving time, and actually even serve more time than someone who is arrested for the exact same offense who doesn’t have HIV.”

Dayton Arrest and Press Release

When Bryan C. Jones first heard about the Dayton arrest and read the local news coverage with the accompanying police statement—describing the arrested individual as a “carrier of AIDS”—he experienced a range of emotions. A founding member of OHMM, the news hit close to home for Jones.

“As a person who has been living with AIDS for 37 years, I was scared at first and then I was outraged,” says Jones. “A ‘carrier of AIDS’? Come on. That sounds like the language from the 80s. Those words shocked me.”

When reached by The Buckeye Flame, Zinski-Neace said the Dayton Police department does not issue press releases for every arrest, but did not explain why one was created for this arrest. The department declined to provide further comment for this story beyond what was in the press release.

Welter highlights that it compromises the man’s safety to include a photo of the man’s house on a short street the police identified and that there are details that were left out of the police report and media coverage that make a real difference with regard to outcomes. She points out that adding the Dayton man’s HIV status creates a sensationalized aspect to the story, but does not answer some key questions.

“We don’t know if he is on medication, if he is virally suppressed, if he is undetectable, or if he was engaging in activity that is likely to even have a chance of transmitting the virus,” says Welter. “We don’t know any of that. But then the coverage gives this idea that there are thousands of victims when the chance of transmitting HIV through oral sex is very, very low. It gets people to read a headline, but it’s not scientifically accurate.”

Jones agrees that the coverage does more harm than good.

“This misinformation goes counter to public health interests,” says Jones. “This exacerbates the stigma and perpetuates people living in fear.”

Reforming the Laws

The efforts to reform the laws in Ohio that criminalize HIV have been going on for years, with groups like OHMM leading the way. A critical step for their movement: raising awareness that these laws even exist.

“When I speak to people at gay pride, LGBTQ people don’t even know about these laws,” says Jones. “People living with HIV still have rights and it’s important to arm yourself with accurate information, and especially so if you are confronted with this situation.”

OHMM, in partnership in the Legal Clinic at Equality Ohio, have published materials to help educate individuals about their rights in the event of a police interaction. Tips include maintaining evidence (documents, screenshots, etc.) proving disclosure, not disclosing HIV status to law enforcement officers without a lawyer present, and not consenting to medical tests should police ask for the individual to submit to tests voluntarily.

For those individuals who may be aware of the statutes criminalizing HIV, the effects of these laws can have a direct relationship with those choosing not to get tested for HIV.

“There are people who believe if they don’t know, they can’t be prosecuted,” explains Steward. “It keeps people from engaging in healthcare and further creates health disparities.”

OHMM is hard at work partnering with other organizations hoping to introduce legislative language this Spring aimed at modernizing Ohio’s HIV criminalization statutes. All three counties participating in the national End the HIV Epidemic campaign—Cuyahoga, Franklin, and Hamilton—have included modernizing the criminal code as part of their plans. Lawmakers in Virginia recently approved legislation to modernize their HIV criminalization laws, one of 9 states actively engaging with the process of decriminalization.

Until the laws are reformed, advocates stress that knowledge about these statutes is critically important, particularly when a story like the arrest in Dayton grabs the headlines.

“Start a conversation. Tell someone else about these laws,” urges Jones. “Everyone needs to know more than they do, because the ignorance in this case can really cause serious damage.” 🔥

Ignite Action:

  • Learn more about Ohio Health Modernization Movement (OHMM) by visiting their website
  • Start a conversation with someone else about HIV decriminalization.

US: Bill in Pennsylvania would increase penalty for spitting on police officer to felony if HIV positive

Pennsylvania state House passes bill upping penalty for spitting on police officers

A central Pennsylvania lawmaker’s bill to potentially give prison time to anyone who intentionally spits on a cop is on its way to the state Senate.

The state House voted 146-56 earlier this week to approve the bill sponsored by Rep. Louis Schmitt (R-Blair) earlier this week.

Under existing law, spitting on a police officer is treated the same as spitting on any other person. The perpetrator could be charged with disorderly conduct, Schmitt told the Capital-Star.That currently could be charged as either a summary offense or a third degree misdemeanor, with penalties ranging from a fine of $25 to $1,000, and up to a year in prison.

Schmitt’s bill would bump up spitting, or knowingly throwing any other bodily substances, such as blood, urine, or feces, on a police officer to a first degree misdemeanor. That’s punishable with two-and-a-half to five years in prison, and a fine of up to $10,000.

Spitting, argued Schmitt — an attorney by trade — “is done in an effort to antagonize and perhaps provoke a response from the officer.”

“It’s so disrespectful and dehumanizing to do this, to bait the office into striking back,” he added.The Pennsylvania state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union opposed the legislation, arguing the bill “needlessly expand[ed] the crimes code.”

The bill “would add yet another offense for police to selectively enforce and for prosecutors to wield when charging a defendant,” the ACLU added.

Since 2010, the number of crimes that citizens can be charged with has more than doubled, from 636 to more than 1,500, according to the group.

During the House’s floor debate, lawmakers brought up an additional issue. As written, the bill elevated the misdemeanor to a felony if the spitter had a communicable disease. The bill also specifically notes Hepatitis-B and HIV-AIDS.

This matches the existing law for “bodily fluid assault,” Schmitt said.

Right now, the only specific statute covering spitting applies if the offender is a prisoner. In that case, spitting on anyone else, including a police officer or corrections officer, is automatically a felony if the prisoner is “infected by a communicable disease, including, but not limited to, [HIV] or hepatitis B.”

The language was written in the 1990s, Schmitt said. When he wrote his law adding police as a protected class, that language carried.

However, according to the federal government, saliva cannot spread the disease.

Rep. Brian Sims (D-Philadelphia) and one of the chamber’s two openly gay lawmakers, said the proposal is “bad medicine, it is bad science, and it is certainly bad policing.”

Democratic efforts to amend out HIV and Hepatitis out of the bill failed in floor votes. But Sims later tweeted that he personally called the state Fraternal Order of Police to get their support to axe the language. The influential police union confirmed it approved of the edit, and Schmitt has also agreed to the change.

Schmitt told the Capital-Star that he was only made aware of the language’s issues right before the final vote, and was convinced that removing it would improve his bill and all existing state law.

“Those statues probably need to be updated as well,” Schmitt told the Capital-Star. “It’s antiquated [and] I agree it stigmatizes.”

The bill now heads to the Senate. Schmitt called for the upper chamber to strip out the HIV language. He thought Gov. Tom Wolf might even veto his proposal if it wasn’t addressed.

Schmitt added he was interested in having a conversation about adopting stiffer penalties for all people who spit on others, regardless of their job.

Russia: The deportation of people living with HIV is outdated, bad for public health and economically ineffective

“He sees his children only by video link.” How the law to deport migrants with HIV turns foreigners into illegal immigrants and destroys families

Automatic Google translation, for original article in Russian, please scroll down.

Author: Ekaterina Ivaschenko

Russia is one of 19 countries in the world where HIV is the basis for deportation. In practice, when migrants find out about their positive status, they do not leave, but turn into illegal immigrants and are afraid to seek treatment. Those who report themselves can be expelled even if they have a family in Russia – although this has been banned since 2015.

We will tell you why the law on deportation harms not only the migrants themselves, but also the economy of Russia, as well as the health of all its inhabitants, regardless of citizenship.

Sardor is 24 years old. He came to work in Russia from Kyrgyzstan nine years ago, at the age of 15. His mother was the first to leave for Russia – after her husband and her three children were abandoned. Sardor did not get along with his father and stepmother, so after the eighth grade he came to his mother. The teenager was sent by bus through Kazakhstan, leaving the driver with a power of attorney.

“I dreamed of getting a good education, becoming a doctor, but in the end, when I came to Russia, I did not speak a word of Russian,” Sardor says. Until the age of 16, he worked at a brick factory in a village near Novosibirsk, then returned to his homeland, received a passport and returned to Russia.

Three years ago, Sardor moved to Moscow, where he worked in various fields, from a janitor to a cook. He found out about his HIV status last year when he got seriously ill in winter and was tested. A specialised NGO (nongovernmental organisation) helps him to receive antiretroviral therapy. The young man does not want to return to his homeland: he says that there is discrimination against HIV-infected people. He also does not tell his relatives about his status.

How deportation law turns migrants into illegal immigrants

For years, specialised NGOs and human rights activists have been fighting for the right of people like Sardor to live in Russia without the threat of deportation. But Russia remains one of 19 countries in the world from which HIV-positive foreigners are expelled . These restrictions are spelled out in the law “On Preventing the Spread of Disease Caused by the Human Immunodeficiency Virus in the Russian Federation”, adopted back in 1995 .

If a person takes an HIV test officially: for example, to obtain a patent or apply for citizenship, his data goes to Rospotrebnadzor, which makes a decision on the undesirability of a foreigner’s stay in Russia and sends the document to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Since in such cases people have to leave the country on their own, they often remain in Russia illegally. Those who know about this norm in advance take the test anonymously. In case of a positive result, they can cross the border to receive treatment at home, but do not draw up documents.

The coordinator for academic relations of the Regional Expert Group on the Health of Migrants Daniil Kashnitsky explains that in practice the rule on the deportation of HIV-infected foreigners does not work, because deportation itself is expensive even for Russia, the richest state in the region: “After Rospotrebnadzor decides on Deportation of a person is sent to the Ministry of Internal Affairs for execution, but it is impossible to find a person, because he often does not live at the place of registration, plus the deportation itself costs money, to which is added the cost of keeping people in TsVSIGs . And people with HIV-positive status, realising that, for example, they cannot get a patent for work and it is better not to leave the country, because they will never be able to return, they go into illegality. ”

The hidden HIV epidemic: statistics and causes

In 2021, the Financial Research Institute of the Ministry of Finance of Russia published a socio-economic study of state policy on HIV , which also mentions migrants.

The document says that “one of the components of the problem of high levels of HIV incidence among the population of Russia may be the growing scale of the latent epidemic, formed mostly by migrants from Moldova, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine. status”.

“As of 2018, foreign citizens accounted for only 2.1% of new cases of HIV infection, but the Ministry of Internal Affairs data on the number of illegal migrants does not allow us to say that official statistics reflect the true picture of the incidence and prevalence of HIV infection among foreign citizens, “the study says.

The authors of the document say directly that the underlying epidemic is based on the current legal status of HIV-infected migrants: “Under the conditions of Russian legislation, which imposes restrictions on entry and stay on the territory of the country for HIV-infected people, foreign citizens are forced to hide their status, which is a significant threat for the development of a latent epidemic “.

“I read this report, and I was confused by this quote,” says Daniil Kashnitsky, explaining that he means the authors of the report assertion that “one of the components of the problem of high levels of HIV incidence among the Russian population may be the growing scale of a hidden epidemic formed mostly by migrants from Moldova, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine “.

“It is wrong to say that migrants are contributing to the epidemic. If migration is well organised, then this is an extremely positive process from all sides. Not migration is a risk factor, but the circumstances in which migrants find themselves and the laws that are in force in the receiving country, in our case, in Russia, “emphasises Kashnitsky.

The available figures for migrants are really low, especially in comparison with the general data for Russia, where 1.2% of the adult population is infected with HIV . According to Rospotrebnadzor, 2.5 million foreigners were tested for HIV in Russia in 2017. Among the citizens of the neighbouring countries, 32,885 HIV cases were detected, 70% of the detected infected were from Ukraine, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. “In 2014-2015, 4000-4500 new cases of HIV infection were detected among foreign citizens, mainly from Ukraine, who traveled to Russia en masse. Now about 3500 cases are detected a year. But there are more migrants with HIV, because some of them are tested anonymously, and some avoid testing, knowing that they are infected, “the representative of Rospotrebnadzor said at the time.

An interesting situation is with Turkmenistan, which officially reported two cases of HIV infection in the country. At the same time, on the territory of Russia in 2017, Rospotrebnadzor recorded 136 cases of HIV infection among citizens of this country, although the flow of migrants from there is small.

A separate situation for the citizens of Kyrgyzstan. The fact is that the country is a member of the EAEU, therefore, unlike Uzbeks and Tajiks, its citizens do not receive a patent for which they need to take an HIV test.

Helping people with HIV is cheaper than treating AIDS. Who does it

The fact that foreigners with HIV remain in Russia is evidenced, for example, by the data of the Patient Control movement : “In 2020, thanks to the donations provided and the joint efforts of HIV activists, 449 people from 19 countries received ARVs on the territory of Russia, of them: Tajikistan – 88, Kyrgyzstan – 67, Uzbekistan – 33, Kazakhstan – 20 and Turkmenistan – 2 “.

Kirill Barskiy, program coordinator of the Steps Foundation, one of the few Russian nongovernmental organisations that helps HIV-positive migrants, says that foreigners have been turning to them for help since the foundation was founded in 2004. In 2020 alone, more than 2,000 people. People who contacted the fund wanted to anonymously take a test for HIV, hepatitis and even coronavirus, get advice on their health, and also sought help in finding therapy.

36-year-old Kemal is one of those who “Steps” literally helped to get back on their feet. Kemal ended up in Russia 10 years ago. I came from Turkmenistan to earn money under the pretext of studying – otherwise it was impossible to get here because of the visa regime between the countries. The young man really studied at the university, and at night he worked as a loader, cook, waiter to pay for his studies.

Kemal learned about his HIV status in 2014, when he updated his medical book and passed an HIV test. “I didn’t immediately understand what it was: they didn’t give me a medical book, well, okay. 2,000 rubles in cash, “says Kemal.

The man got worse every month. He dropped out of school but continued to work. At some point, it became very bad, and he went to the hospital. “As I later found out, HIV had already spilled over into AIDS and I had Kaposi’s sarcoma,” says Kemal. Thanks to the work of the foundation’s staff, he was able to recover and start taking antiretroviral drugs.

“Now I work in those jobs where a medical book and a contract are not needed. Every day I take therapy. It costs 10 thousand rubles a month – a significant amount for an illegal migrant. But I have HIV, with which I can live in Moscow, but in Turkmenistan is not, because they deny the presence of HIV-infected, “- explains the man.

The abolition of the deportation rule is beneficial even economically, says Daniil Kashnitsky: it will enable migrants to take therapy on time, and HIV will not turn into AIDS, which develops serious and costly diseases.

“When life is threatened, a person is subject to emergency treatment, which is provided to everyone in Russia free of charge. According to our data, inpatient treatment of a person with HIV-associated diseases will cost Russia three times more than if he buys the therapy himself or receives it for AIDS. -the center of his state, – explains the expert. – The principle itself is important here: a person takes therapy – and in three months his viral load drops to zero. He will not transmit HIV through unprotected sex, he can give birth to healthy children, work and pay taxes. not being treated, he develops one of the concomitant diseases – and the cost of treatment, already from the Russian budget, will be at least three times more expensive than a year’s course of therapy. ”

Kirill Barskiy, the coordinator of the Steps Foundation, emphasises that the authorities’ attempt to control does not work with any disease: “People will still hide. Do not forget that HIV infection has a window period of six months when the virus is not detected. that the authorities have to wait six months for a second test, at the same time prohibiting the migrant from any contacts. But this is impossible. Therefore, mechanisms are needed to control the process of treatment of foreigners. In fact, no one knows the real statistics of HIV-positive migrants in Russia. Accordingly, we do not know how many are taking treatment and controlling the disease, and how many are not. If a person is not expelled, he will not hide, and this will make it possible to build a system for monitoring his disease and preventing its spread. ”

Deportation of relatives with HIV: banned since 2015, but ongoing

NGOs and the community have long been fighting for the complete abolition of the deportation rule, says Daniil Kashnitsky. The first letter with such an initiative was sent to the government in May 2018, then they turned to relevant government agencies.

“We have received replies to all our letters, but these are polite enumerations of the norms of Russian legislation concerning foreigners with HIV. The letters invariably mention the norm that foreigners with HIV, whose relatives are Russian citizens, may remain in Russia. In practice, only a few have managed to achieve this. , therefore, the norm must be abolished entirely, because it is bad for migrants, for Russia and its budget. There is not a single plus in maintaining this norm, “Kashnitsky is sure.

The ruling of the Constitutional Court that if an HIV-positive foreigner has a spouse, children or parents who are Russian citizens, then he cannot be expelled from the country, was adopted in 2015. However, in reality, lawyers have been fighting for years for the rights of HIV-infected foreigners to live with their families in Russia.

Alisher, originally from Andijan, came to Russia in 2013 after his parents. His father already has Russian citizenship. At first, the man lived with his parents in one of the regions, and then moved to Moscow, where he met a Russian woman.

In 2015, they had a daughter with Alisher, and in 2016, a son. The marriage was not registered, but Alisher is listed as a father in the birth certificates of the children. In 2017, the man decided to apply for a temporary residence permit in Russia (RVP) for marriage. To do this, it was required to pass an HIV test, which turned out to be positive.

The man did not know that the entrance to the country was closed for HIV-positive migrants, and after another flight to his homeland, he was not allowed to enter Russia. It was in the spring of 2018. The wife appealed against the decision of Rospotrebnadzor in the district court of Khabarovsk, at the place of permanent registration of Alisher. But in December 2019, the judge left the decision of the migration authorities unchanged.

“I have been in charge of this case for several years,” says Olga Belousova, a lawyer who assists migrants in similar situations. “Now his wife has hired a lawyer who represents Alisher’s interests in Russian courts. …

Such cases last at least a year, notes Olga Belousova. And there are times when the deportation rule leads to sad consequences. The lawyer tells how she handled the case of an HIV-infected girl from Ukraine, who in Russia received a residence permit on her father’s side. At the stage of taking the tests, the girl was diagnosed with HIV, issued a document obliging her to leave Russia, and put a lifelong entry ban. In 2019 she returned to Ukraine.

“The girl had the right to be in Russia. She contacted us, we completed all the documents on time, but at the trial we were told that we were late and did not cancel the decision of Rospotrebnadzor. Against the background of this news, her father had a heart attack, and in August He died in 2019. My applicant was unable to bury him or visit her relatives, “Olga Belousova said.

But there are stories with happy endings. Now a lawyer is working on the case of a woman from Kazakhstan who, together with her husband and two children, applied for citizenship under the resettlement program.

“They were refused because the woman was diagnosed with HIV. She decided to divorce in order to give her husband and children an opportunity to obtain citizenship. She lived in Kazakhstan for a year and did not see her children, did not take part in their upbringing. After the husband and children received citizenship, the family decided to recover. We submitted a request to Rospotrebnadzor to find out about the woman’s position, and we received an answer that she was not on the lists of those who were denied entry to Russia, since during the pandemic the adoption of such decisions was suspended. She has Russian relatives, and the family will finally be reunited. ”

Why the deportation norm is not only outdated, but also economically unprofitable for Russia

The coordinator of the Regional Expert Group on the Health of Migrants Daniil Kashnitsky emphasises that the law on HIV adopted in 1995 was long out of date: “Then the deportation rule was prescribed, because there was no effective treatment for either foreigners or Russians, and people with HIV were quickly dying. Thanks to modern drugs, which, moreover, become cheaper every year, treating people is much more profitable than driving them out of the country. ”

Kirill Barsky from the Steps Foundation says that during negotiations with the community, the authorities operate with the fact that “foreigners are spreading the infection”, although no one can verify and prove this.

“However, the main counterargument comes not from the deputies, but from the economic departments, which believe that they will have to pay for the treatment of foreigners from the state budget,” says Barsky. for a start, it was possible to carry out surveillance of a real disease. And for this it is necessary to remove protective measures so that people are not afraid to go to hospitals. ”

“It is impossible to talk about building a system of assistance to HIV-positive foreigners at the expense of the countries of origin of migrants or the Global Fund, as long as there is a rule on deportation,” continues Kirill Barsky. “People are afraid to seek help. In principle, they do not want to talk to doctors, fearing, that at any moment they will be put in the CVDIG and sent home.Migrants are in a situation where they understand that they need help, and often they can pay for therapy themselves, but cannot tell about it, because they understand what the consequences could be. Often, even the citizens of the EAEU countries, who do not need to take an HIV test to obtain a patent, live well here and receive therapy from their homeland, but they are still afraid to get to the clinic, because they are at risk of being deported. ”

Daniil Kashnitsky, who works with representatives of AIDS centers in the countries of origin of migrants, notes that Russia should not be afraid that if the deportation rule is canceled, the costs of treating foreigners will fall on its budget: “Employees of AIDS centers in Central Asian countries are not only ready to share therapy, they They are already doing this. They send therapy to their migrants, regardless of their status of residence in Russia. For example, during the closed borders, Kyrgyzstan gave therapy to his hands for up to a year. so he knows what’s going on with his patient. ”

Kirill Barskiy confirms that the countries of origin (NGOs contacted the Ministry of Health of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova and other states) answered that they were ready to treat their citizens. Kyrgyzstan gave a detailed answer that it is ready to discuss these initiatives between the countries and, if necessary, to adopt appropriate changes to the legislation.

“In order for Russian officials to change their minds about HIV among foreigners, our experts are preparing an economic argument that the benefits of removing barriers are much higher than their existence. All civilised countries have removed barriers, and the countries of North America and Europe are even treating at their own expense foreigners, because they understand how it is economically beneficial for them. We are not opposing the state, but we are promoting a scientific justification for the need to revise the deportation rule, “Kirill Barsky concludes.


Екатерина Иващенко

“Видит своих детей только по видеосвязи”. Как закон о депортации мигрантов с ВИЧ превращает иностранцев в нелегалов и разрушает семьи

Россия – одна из 19 стран в мире, где ВИЧ – основание для депортации. На практике мигранты, узнавая о своем положительном статусе, не уезжают, а превращаются в нелегалов и боятся обращаться за лечением. Те, кто сообщает о себе, могут быть высланы, даже если в России у них есть семья, – хотя с 2015 года это запрещено.

Рассказываем, почему закон о депортации вредит не только самим мигрантам, но и экономике России, а также здоровью всех ее жителей, независимо от гражданства.

Сардору 24 года. Он приехал на заработки в Россию из Кыргызстана девять лет назад, 15-летним. Первой в Россию уехала его мать – после того как ее и троих детей бросил супруг. Сардор не ужился с отцом и мачехой, поэтому после восьмого класса приехал к матери. Подростка отправили автобусом через Казахстан, оставив водителю доверенность.

“Я мечтал получить хорошее образование, стать врачом, а в итоге, когда приехал в Россию, ни слова не говорил по-русски”, – говорит Сардор. До 16 лет он работал на кирпичном заводе в деревне под Новосибирском, потом вернулся на родину, получил паспорт и снова приехал в Россию.

Три года назад Сардор перебрался в Москву, где работал в самых разных сферах, начиная от дворника и заканчивая поваром. Про свой ВИЧ-статус он узнал в прошлом году, когда серьезно заболел зимой и сдавал анализы. Получать антиретровирусную терапию ему помогает профильная НПО (неправительственная организация). Возвращаться на родину молодой человек не хочет: говорит, что там по отношению к ВИЧ-инфицированным существует дискриминация. Родственникам о своем статусе он тоже не говорит.

Как закон о депортации превращает мигрантов в нелегалов

Профильные НПО и правозащитники годами бьются за право таких, как Сардор, жить в России без угрозы депортации. Но Россия остается одной из 19 стран мира, откуда выдворяют ВИЧ-положительных иностранцев. Эти ограничения прописаны в принятом еще в 1995 году законе “О предупреждении распространения в Российской Федерации заболевания, вызываемого вирусом иммунодефицита человека”.

Если человек сдает тест на ВИЧ официально: например, для получения патента или оформления документов на гражданство, – его данные попадают в Роспотребнадзор, который выносит решение о нежелательности пребывания иностранца на территории России и отправляет документ в МВД. Так как в таких случаях люди должны самостоятельно покинуть страну, они чаще всего остаются в России нелегально. Те, кто знает об этой норме заранее, сдают тест анонимно. В случае положительного результата они могут пересекать границу, чтобы получать лечение на родине, но не оформляют документы.

Координатор по академическим связям Региональной экспертной группы по здоровью мигрантов Даниил Кашницкий объясняет, что на практике норма о депортации ВИЧ-инфицированных иностранцев не работает, потому что сама депортация дорога даже для России – самого богатого государства в регионе: “После того как Роспотребнадзор принимает решение о выдворении человека, оно отправляется на выполнение в МВД. Но человека невозможно найти, потому что он чаще всего проживает не по месту регистрации, плюс сама депортация стоит денег, к которой добавляется стоимость содержания людей в ЦВСИГах. То есть из России их насильно не выдворяют. А люди с ВИЧ-положительным статусом, понимая, что им, например, не получить патент для работы и лучше не покидать страну, потому что они никогда не смогут вернуться, уходят в нелегальность”.

Скрытая эпидемия ВИЧ: статистика и причины

В 2021 году Научно-исследовательский финансовый институт Минфина России обнародовал социально-экономическое исследование государственной политики борьбы с ВИЧ, в котором в том числе упоминаются мигранты.

В документе сказано, что “одной из составляющих проблемы высоких уровней заболеваемости населения России ВИЧ-инфекцией могут являться растущие масштабы скрытой эпидемии, формируемой по большей части мигрантами из Молдовы, Таджикистана, Узбекистана, Украины. В условиях действующего законодательства представители подобной группы населения вынуждены скрывать свой статус”.

“По данным на 2018 год, на долю иностранных граждан приходилось только 2,1% новых случаев выявления ВИЧ-инфекции, но данные МВД по количеству нелегальных мигрантов не позволяют говорить о том, что официальная статистика отражает истинную картину заболеваемости и распространенности ВИЧ-инфекции среди иностранных граждан”, – говорится в исследовании.

Авторы документа прямо говорят, что в основе скрытой эпидемии лежит текущее правовое положение ВИЧ-инфицированных мигрантов: “В условиях российского законодательства, предполагающего ограничение на въезд и пребывание на территории страны для инфицированных ВИЧ, иностранные граждане вынуждены скрывать свой статус, что представляет собой существенную угрозу для развития скрытой эпидемии”.

“Я читал этот доклад, и меня смутила эта цитата”, – говорит Даниил Кашницкий, объясняя, что имеет в виду утверждение авторов доклада о том, что “одной из составляющих проблемы высоких уровней заболеваемости населения России ВИЧ-инфекцией могут являться растущие масштабы скрытой эпидемии, формируемой по большей части мигрантами из Молдовы, Таджикистана, Узбекистана, Украины”.

“Говорить, что мигранты вносят вклад в эпидемию, неправильно. Если миграция хорошо организована, то это со всех сторон исключительно положительный процесс. Не миграция фактор риска, а те обстоятельства, в которые попадают мигранты, и те законы, которые действуют в стране приема, в нашем случае в России”, – подчеркивает Кашницкий.

Имеющиеся цифры по мигрантам действительно невысокие, особенно в сравнении с общими данными по России, 1,2% взрослого населения которой инфицировано ВИЧ. По информации Роспотребнадзора, в 2017 году в России на ВИЧ было протестировано 2,5 миллиона иностранцев. Среди граждан стран ближнего зарубежья выявлено 32 885 случаев ВИЧ, 70% выявленных инфицированных – из Украины, Узбекистана и Таджикистана. “В 2014-2015 годы выявлялось по 4000-4500 новых случае ВИЧ-инфекции среди иностранных граждан, преимущественно Украины, которые массово ехали в Россию. Сейчас выявляется порядка 3500 случаев в год. Но мигрантов с ВИЧ больше, потому что часть из них сдает анализы анонимно, а часть избегает тестирования, зная, что они инфицированы”, – говорил тогда представитель Роспотребнадзора.

Интересна ситуация с Туркменистаном, который официально докладывал о двух случаях ВИЧ-инфекции на территории страны. При этом на территории России в 2017 году Роспотребнадзор зафиксировал 136 случаев ВИЧ-инфекции среди граждан этой страны, хотя поток мигрантов оттуда небольшой.

Отдельное положение у граждан Кыргызстана. Дело в том, что страна входит в ЕАЭС, поэтому, в отличие от узбекистанцев и таджикистанцев, ее граждане не получают патент, для которого нужно сдавать тест на ВИЧ.

Помогать людям с ВИЧ дешевле, чем лечить от СПИДа. Кто это делает

О том, что иностранцы с ВИЧ остаются в России, свидетельствуют, например, данные движения “Пациентский контроль”: “В 2020 году благодаря предоставленным пожертвованиям и объединенному усилию ВИЧ-активистов помощь на территории России с АРВ-препаратами получили 449 человек из 19 стран, из них: Таджикистана – 88, Кыргызстана – 67, Узбекистана – 33, Казахстана – 20 и Туркменистана – 2”.

Кирилл Барский, координатор программ фонда “Шаги” – одной из немногих российских неправительственных организаций, которые помогают ВИЧ-положительным мигрантам, – рассказывает, что иностранцы обращаются к ним за помощью с момента основания фонда в 2004 году. Только в 2020 году – более 2000 человек. Обратившиеся в фонд люди хотели анонимно сдать тест на ВИЧ, гепатит и даже коронавирус, получить консультацию на тему своего здоровья, а также искали помощи в поиске терапии.

36-летний Кемаль – один из тех, кому “Шаги” буквально помогли встать на ноги. Кемаль оказался в России 10 лет назад. Приехал из Туркменистана на заработки под предлогом учебы – по-другому сюда было не попасть из-за визового режима между странами. Молодой человек действительно учился в вузе, а по ночам работал грузчиком, поваром, официантом, чтобы оплачивать обучение.

Про свой ВИЧ-статус Кемаль узнал в 2014 году, когда обновлял медкнижку и сдал тест на ВИЧ. “Я не сразу понял, что это такое: не дали медкнижку, ну и ладно. Но без нее с работы уволили, еще и последнюю зарплату не выплатили. Я устроился работать уборщиком в ночной клуб. Работал без договора, зато каждый день получал 1500-2000 рублей наличными”, – рассказывает Кемаль.

С каждым месяцем мужчине становилось хуже. Он бросил учебу, но продолжал работать. В какой-то момент стало совсем плохо, и он обратился в больницу. “Как я потом узнал, ВИЧ уже перетекал в СПИД и у меня началась саркома Капоши”, – говорит Кемаль. Благодаря работе сотрудников фонда ему удалось вылечиться и начать принимать антиретровирусные препараты.

“Сейчас я работаю на тех работах, где не нужна медкнижка и договор. Каждый день принимаю терапию. На нее уходит 10 тысяч рублей в месяц – существенная сумма для нелегального мигранта. Но у меня ВИЧ, с которым в Москве я могу жить, а в Туркменистане нет, потому что там отрицают наличие ВИЧ-инфицированных”, – объясняет мужчина.

Отмена нормы о депортации выгодна даже экономически, считает Даниил Кашницкий: она даст возможность мигрантам вовремя принимать терапию, и ВИЧ не перейдет в СПИД, при котором развиваются тяжелые и дорогостоящие заболевания.

“При угрозе жизни человек подпадает под лечение по экстренной помощи, которая в России оказывается всем бесплатно. Согласно нашим данным, России обойдется в три раза дороже стационарное лечение человека с ВИЧ-ассоциированными заболеваниями, чем если он будет сам покупать терапию или получать ее от СПИД-центра своего государства, – объясняет эксперт. – Тут важен сам принцип: человек принимает терапию – и за три месяца его вирусная нагрузка снижается до нуля. Он не передаст ВИЧ при незащищенном сексе, может рожать здоровых детей, работать и платить налоги. Либо человек не лечится, у него развивается одно из сопутствующих заболеваний – и расходы на лечение, уже из российского бюджета, будут как минимум в три раза дороже годового курса терапии”.

Координатор фонда “Шаги” Кирилл Барский подчеркивает, что попытка контроля со стороны властей не работает ни с каким заболеванием: “Люди все равно будут прятаться. Не стоит забывать, что у ВИЧ-инфекции есть период окна в полгода, когда вирус не выявляется. Получается, что власти должны ждать полгода повторного теста, параллельно запрещая мигранту любые контакты. Но это невозможно. Поэтому нужны механизмы, которые будут контролировать процесс лечения иностранцев. На самом деле никто не знает реальную статистику ВИЧ-позитивных мигрантов в России. Соответственно, мы не знаем, сколько принимает лечение и контролирует заболевание, а сколько – нет. Если человека не будут выдворять, то он не будет прятаться, и это даст возможность выстроить систему наблюдения за его заболеванием и предотвращением ее распространения”.

Депортация родственников с ВИЧ: запрещена с 2015-го, но продолжается

НПО и сообщество давно борются за полную отмену нормы о депортации, рассказывает Даниил Кашницкий. Первое письмо с такой инициативой отправили в правительство в мае 2018 года, затем обратились и в профильные госорганы.

“На все свои письма мы получили ответы, но это вежливые перечисления норм российского законодательства, касающиеся иностранцев с ВИЧ. Неизменно в письмах упоминают норму, что в России могут остаться иностранцы с ВИЧ, родственники которых – граждане России. На практике лишь единицам удалось этого добиться, поэтому норму надо отменять целиком, потому что это плохо для мигрантов, для России и ее бюджета. В сохранении этой нормы нет ни одного плюса”, – уверен Кашницкий.

Постановление Конституционного суда о том, что если у ВИЧ-положительного иностранца есть супруг, дети или родители – граждане России, то его нельзя выдворять из страны, принято в 2015 году. Однако в реальности юристы годами борются за права ВИЧ-инфицированных иностранцев жить со своей семьей в России.

Алишер родом из Андижана, в Россию приехал в 2013 году вслед за своими родителями. У его отца уже есть гражданство России. Первое время мужчина жил с родителями в одном из регионов, а потом переехал в Москву, где познакомился с россиянкой.

В 2015 году у них с Алишером родилась дочь, а в 2016-м – сын. Брак не был зарегистрирован, но в свидетельствах о рождении детей Алишер указан как отец. В 2017 году мужчина решил подать документы на получение разрешения на временное проживание в России (РВП) по браку. Для этого требовалось сдать анализ на ВИЧ, который оказался положительным.

Мужчина не знал, что для ВИЧ-положительных мигрантов закрывают въезд в страну, и после очередного полета на родину в Россию его не впустили. Это было весной 2018 года. Супруга обжаловала решение Роспотребнадзора в районном суде Хабаровска, по месту постоянной регистрации Алишера. Но в декабре 2019 года судья оставила решение миграционных властей без изменений.

“Я курирую это дело уже несколько лет, – говорит юрист Ольга Белоусова, которая оказывает помощь мигрантам, попавшим в подобные ситуации. – Сейчас его жена наняла адвоката, который представляет интересы Алишера в российских судах. А пока он видит своих детей только по видеосвязи”.

Такие дела длятся минимум год, отмечает Ольга Белоусова. И бывают случаи, когда норма о депортации приводит к печальным последствиям. Юрист рассказывает, как вела дело ВИЧ-инфицированной девушки из Украины, которая в России получала вид на жительство по отцу. На этапе сдачи анализов у девушки обнаружили ВИЧ, выдали документ, обязывающий покинуть Россию, и поставили пожизненный запрет на въезд. В 2019 году она вернулась в Украину.

“Девушка имела право находиться в России. Она связалась с нами, все документы мы оформили в срок, но на суде нам сказали, что мы опоздали, и не отменили решение Роспотребнадзора. На фоне этих новостей у ее отца случился сердечный приступ, и в августе 2019 года он скончался. Моя заявительница не смогла ни похоронить его, ни приехать к родственникам”, – рассказала Ольга Белоусова.

Но есть истории и со счастливым концом. Сейчас юрист ведет дело женщины из Казахстана, которая вместе с мужем и двумя детьми подавала на гражданство по программе переселения.

“Им отказали, так как у женщины обнаружили ВИЧ. Она решила развестись, чтобы дать возможность мужу и детям получить гражданство. Год жила в Казахстане и не видела своих детей, не принимала участие в их воспитании. После получения гражданства мужем и детьми семья решила восстановиться. Мы подали запрос в Роспотребнадзор, чтобы узнать о положении женщины, и нам пришел ответ, что ее нет в списках тех, кому закрыт въезд в Россию, так как на время пандемии принятие таких решений было приостановлено. Теперь мы срочно готовим документы, что у нее есть родственники-россияне, и семья наконец-то воссоединится”.

Почему норма депортации не только устарела, но и экономически невыгодна России

Координатор Региональной экспертной группы по здоровью мигрантов Даниил Кашницкий подчеркивает, что принятый в 1995 году закон о ВИЧ давно устарел: “Тогда норма о депортации была прописана, потому что не было эффективного лечения ни для иностранцев, ни для россиян и люди с ВИЧ быстро умирали. Благодаря современным препаратам, которые к тому же с каждым годом становятся дешевле, лечить людей намного выгоднее, чем выгонять из страны”.

Кирилл Барский из фонда “Шаги” рассказывает, что во время переговоров с сообществом власти оперируют тем, что “иностранцы распространяют инфекцию”, хотя никто не может это проверить и доказать.

“Однако основная контраргументация идет со стороны не депутатов, а экономических ведомств, которые считают, что платить за лечение иностранцев придется из средств госбюджета, – говорит Барский. – Никто из этих ведомств не рассматривает возможность дать этим людям обнаружиться и быть в законном поле, чтобы для начала можно было осуществить надзор за реальным заболеванием. А для этого надо снять заградительные меры, чтобы люди не боялись обращаться в больницы”.

“Невозможно говорить о выстраивании оказания системы помощи ВИЧ-положительным иностранцам за счет стран исхода мигрантов или Глобального фонда, пока существует норма о депортации, – продолжает Кирилл Барский. – Люди боятся обращаться за помощью. Они в принципе не хотят разговаривать с врачами, боясь, что в любую секунду их посадят в ЦВСИГ и отправят на родину. Мигранты находятся в такой ситуации, когда понимают, что им нужна помощь, и зачастую сами могут оплачивать терапию, но не могут про это рассказать, потому что понимают, какие могут быть последствия. Нередко даже граждане стран ЕАЭС, которым не надо сдавать тест на ВИЧ для получения патента, прекрасно здесь живут и получают терапию с родины, но все равно боятся попасть в поликлинику, потому что подвержены риску быть депортированными”.

Сотрудничающий с представителями СПИД-центров стран исхода мигрантов Даниил Кашницкий отмечает, что Россия не должна бояться, что в случае отмены нормы о депортации расходы на лечение иностранцев лягут на ее бюджет: “Сотрудники СПИД-центров стран Центральной Азии не только готовы делиться терапией, они уже это делают. Они своим мигрантам, независимо от их статуса проживания в России, отправляют терапию через родственников. Например, во время закрытых границ Кыргызстан выдавал терапию на руки до года. Единственно, раз полгода человек должен отправлять лечащему врачу результаты своих тестов на ВИЧ, чтобы он знал, что происходит с его пациентом”.

Кирилл Барский подтверждает, что страны исхода (НКО обращались в Минздрав Узбекистана, Кыргызстана, Молдовы и других государств) ответили, что готовы лечить своих граждан. Кыргызстан дал развернутый ответ, что готов обсуждать эти инициативы между странами и, если потребуется, принять соответствующие изменения в законодательство.

“Чтобы российские чиновники могли изменить мнение о ВИЧ среди иностранцев, наши эксперты готовят экономическую аргументацию того, что выгода от снятия заградительных мер гораздо выше, чем их существование. Все цивилизованные страны сняли заградительные меры, а страны Северной Америки и Европы даже за свой счет лечат иностранцев, потому что понимают, как это экономически выгодно им. Мы не противостоим государству, а продвигаем научное обоснование необходимости пересмотра нормы о депортации”, – заключает Кирилл Барский.

US: Decriminalising HIV would protect disadvantaged communities from HIV infection and further marginalisation

HIV criminalization perpetuates intersecting forms of discrimination

Imagine you are a transgender Black woman in Florida. You are already facing housing and workplace discrimination, gender-based violence and social and institutional racism. One of your few options for financial support is sex work, but you do not plan to have intercourse with clients. Unfortunately, a sting operation leads you to be taken to the police station. You wonder why the cisgender white woman you work alongside was not caught. Upon arrival at the station, you are forced to get tested for HIV. You test positive. You are now a convicted felon and may have to register as a sex offender.

This fictional narrative illustrates the severity of the criminalization of HIV in the United States and is an accurate representation of the discrimination felt by LGBT, non-white individuals, sex workers and those who experience the intersectional disenfranchisement of multiple identities. According to Avert Global Information and Education on HIV and AIDS, transgender people are 49 times more likely to be affected by HIV than the general world population. Over half a million Americans have died since the beginning of the AIDS epidemic in the 1980s. A disproportionate number of these people were non-white, LGBT or both. By looking at the Movement Advancement Project’s maps of states with HIV laws, 34 states still discriminated against those with HIV in 2020, with transgender women being the most globally discriminated against. HIV should be nationally decriminalized since the penalties only further marginalize disadvantaged communities.

A 2017 article by the National LGBT Task Force and the Center for HIV Law & Policy states that transgender sex workers are “nearly six times as likely to be living with HIV than the general trans population, and 25 times as likely relative to the general population.” Transgender women, especially those who are non-white, are profiled significantly more for sex work.The data illustrates how transgender women are more at risk of being presumed HIV positive, which perpetuates transphobic, homophobic, sexist and racist discriminatory practices.

Some may argue that decriminalizing HIV will lead to an increase in cases. In fact, data has been shown that HIV criminalization laws disincentivize HIV testing. This is because in some states, it is mandatory that the arrestee be tested once entering the police station. A 2015 study by Yang, et al. found that the decriminalization of sex work could actually reduce 33-45% of new HIV infections, illustrating the counterproductive attributes of HIV criminalization. Data has also shown that HIV penalties are significantly based on one’s race and sex, which caused the state of California to change HIV charges of sex workers from felonies to misdemeanors. While this change in California is an improvement, officials can still discriminate based on race, sexual orientation and gender identity. Overall, this illustrates that the criminalization of HIV is maintained in order to keep a discriminatory social hierarchy that hurts transgender women’s social mobility, especially Black transgender women.

The differences of prosecution among states is important because data shows that transgender women can be prosecuted for even non-transmissible actions. Data by the Movement Advancement Project shows 17% of the American LGBT population lives in a state where there is an HIV criminalization law, HIV-specific sentencing and/or laws that may require individuals to register as sex offendes; 35% lives “in a state with a HIV criminalization law;” and 21% in a state without a HIV criminalization law but where a positive status does affect sentencing. Liberal states, such as Massachusetts, criminalize exposure to, as well as transmission of, HIV. Sex workers can be charged with a felony for spitting or biting — even though neither action spreads HIV. This further shows that states have multiple avenues to discriminate against marginalized groups through the criminalization of HIV. The evidence illustrates the need to decriminalize HIV on a national level to protect marginalized communities, especially  transgender women, transgender women of color and Black transgender women. By decriminalizing HIV, Americans are further protected from infection and forms of discrimination.

Nigeria: Jigawa State adopts law recommending death penalty in cases of rape resulting in HIV transmission

Jigawa Assembly passes law stipulating life sentence for rapist

The violence against persons prohibition law also stipulates death penalty for rape convicts who infect their victims with HIV/AIDS.

The Jigawa State House of Assembly on Wednesday passed a law that stipulates a life sentence for rape.

The violence against persons prohibition law also stipulates death penalty for rape convicts who infect their victims with HIV/AIDS.

The passage of the bill followed the adoption of the report of the House Committee on Justice and Judiciary.

The committee is chaired by Abubakar Jallo and has seven other members.

After deliberation and subsequent adoption of the report by the committee of the Whole House, the Speaker, Idris Garba, announced the passage of the bill into law.

The bill was unanimously agreed by the 30 House members representing the 27 council areas of the state.

The law, to be transmuted to Governor Muhammed Badaru for assent, has 58 recommendations, including life imprisonment for rape offenders and death sentence without an option of fine for infecting rape victim (s) with HIV/AIDS.

After the plenary, Mr Jallo told reporters that rape victim(s) would be compensated with not less than N500,000, while the court would order rape offender to be subjected to public shame through radio announcements and other means the court may deem fit.

Mr Jallo, representing Hadejia constituency, added that the use of chemical, biological or any harmful substance that causes lifetime deformity on the victim will attract life imprisonment without an option of fine.