Supreme Court, HIV folks no longer have to allways disclose the fact they have HIV

[S.C. Joe]

Does this mean SP's with HIV are free to legally work as escorts without disclosing they have HIV ? Just demand you wear a condom to prevent STI ?
.......................

OTTAWA—The Supreme Court of Canada has absolved HIV carriers of the legal obligation to inform sex partners about their condition as long as they have a low level of the virus and wear a condom.

In a major 9-0 ruling Friday, the high court specified those two key conditions, clarifying the rules on whether it is a crime for people with extremely low levels of HIV to withhold their condition from their sex partners.

The court said it was reflecting the medical advances in treating the virus that causes AIDS since it first ruled on the issue in 1998 and left open the possibility of adapting to future changes in science in medicine.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...sclose-hiv-to-sex-partners-in-landmark-ruling

 

[lenny2]

Does this mean SP's with HIV are free to legally work as escorts without disclosing they have HIV ? Just demand you wear a condom to prevent STI ?

I guess so, "as long as they have a low level of the virus..."

Perhaps, in the not too distant future, clients seeing a SP's recent STI results will become common:

http://www.ehealthontario.on.ca/en/about

http://www.myehealth.ca/

http://www.aidsmeds.com/articles/hiv_otc_test_1667_22643.shtml

 

[Klute]

The soccer Mom story was kind of nuts. I can't believe the guy ends up living with someone who did him bareback and had HIV. But the vindictive ass reports her over 4 years after they did it without her disclosing the HIV. They both sound like a pair of losers who should not be in the dating pool.

Klute

 

[Anynym]

I haven't had a chance to review the SCC decision.

How do they define what constitutes a "low level" of the virus?

 

[GameBoy27]

HIV is almost impossible to catch if you use a condom. So, use a condom and you won't have to worry.

 

[Moviefan-2]

I agree with this decision (and, controversial as my position is, would have gone further). Treating every HIV-positive person as someone with a high risk to transmit the disease is factually wrong.

While we might feel that a person not disclosing his/her status is being unethical, it shouldn't always be treated as a crime.

 

[lenny2]

HIV is almost impossible to catch if you use a condom. So, use a condom and you won't have to worry.

I'd say it's very unlikely. Why? Because it is also & similarly very unlikely to catch w/o the condom.

Some people will worry no matter what, even wearing full body armour.

Others won't worry, even if skydiving w/o a parachute.

 

[fuji]

Low viral load, condom, should be safe, but I agree with attempted murder charges if an HIV positive person barebacks.