Is Louisiana's 'AIDS exposure' statute outdated? Advocates say it needs an update

Richard Covington of Baton Rouge was accused earlier this year of breaking into the house of someone who apparently owed him money and then fighting the resident. During the scuffle, Covington allegedly bit the man’s arm.

Coalition Pushes To Soften HIV Laws In California

A coalition including the American Civil Liberties Union and Equality California have joined together in an effort to change certain state laws they say criminalize people living with HIV. At a forum held in Fresno last week, a dozen activist and medical professionals talked about a number of goals including reducing the penalty for intentionally spreading HIV from a felony to a misdemeanor.

“We believe the punishment is not proportionate to the crime,” says Craig Pulsipher, with the AIDS Project Los Angeles.

“I would just point to similar offenses that are felony in California statutes. This puts intentional transmission of HIV on par with voluntary manslaughter and so we really believe a misdemeanor is sufficient consequence,” he says.

The group also wants to repeal a handful of laws including being charged with a felony for soliciting sex while knowingly having HIV. In this case, the law doesn’t require any sexual contact or transmission of HIV just the act of soliciting while being positive. Other laws make it a felony for HIV positive people to donate blood or breast milk. In many cases, people convicted under these laws could face jail time.

Dr. Simon Paul with Community Regional Medical Center specializes treating those with HIV and AIDS in the Central Valley. He says these laws aren’t up to date with modern science.

“A lot of these things are crime even if no harm was done,” Paul says. “The fact that if you have HIV, and if you sleep with someone you’re practically at zero risk if you’re on treatment. The way the laws are written now it’s just as bad as if the person had HIV in the 80’s and had no treatment. That’s the part to me seems the craziest.”

Today people living with HIV can take a pill on a daily basis to reduce the amount of the virus in their body to minimal levels. Paul says this makes the patient highly unlikely to pass the virus to someone else.

With the current state laws dealing with HIV, a person can only be convicted of charges if they are aware of their status. Paul says this creates unintended consequences.

“These laws make people less likely to get tested and into care which is the way you’ll actually get HIV to decrease. I think the laws are passed out of fear and not helpful at this point,” he says.

In Fresno County alone, only around half of those living with HIV are linked intro treatment. And there many that don’t know their status.

Many advocates like Pulsipher say these laws actually discourage people from getting tested.

“Some of these sites that specifically talk about HIV criminalization laws, one of the pieces of advice they give is: the best way to not be prosecuted under these statutes is to not know their HIV status. So that’s the exact opposite of what we would like to do. We want to encourage people to know their status.”

The coalition is hosting forums throughout the state and they’re working on a bill they plan to introduce next year in Sacramento.

Uganda: Community Health Alliance Uganda (CHAU) board chairman, Dr Stephen Watiti calls for repeal of clauses on disclosure, mandatory testing and transmission in HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act

Community Health Alliance Uganda (CHAU) board chairman, Dr Stephen Watiti, has called for an amendment of the 2014 HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act.

Watiti, who was speaking at the launch of CHAU’s 2016-2020 Strategic Plan last week in Kampala, wants clauses on disclosure, mandatory testing and intentional transmission repealed.

CHAU is one of the local non-governmental organizations (NGOs) involved in anti-HIV/Aids campaigns in the country. Enacted last year amidst protests from civil society and activists, the HIV and AIDS Prevention and Control Act criminalizes intentional transmission of HIV, enforces mandatory testing and requires spouses to disclose results to their partners, among others.

“In most of our communities if a woman tested positive and told her husband as stipulated in this law, it sparks domestic violence and stigmatization. So, my appeal is to review and scrap such clauses,” said Watiti, also plans to join elective politics in his bid to push for the aforesaid changes in parliament next year.

He also noted that it would be difficult to prove whether someone set out to intentionally infect their partners in a love affair.

“Preventing new infections should be a responsibility of both HIV positive and negative people,” Watiti argued, adding that testing should be voluntarily because making it mandatory is a violation of human rights.

His comments were directed to chief guest at the function, Dr Chris Baryomunsi, the state minister for health in charge of general duties and also MP for Kinkiizi East.

In response, Baryomunsi assured guests the parliamentary health committee would consider such appeals upon reviewing the HIV/Aids Act and also address concerns about the NGO Bill, which many civil society activists claim is intended to curtail their work.

Noting that some NGOs such as CHAU have done a good job as government partners in the battle against HIV/Aids, Baryomunsi said they would consider progressive provisions to ensure work is not stifled.

Baryomunsi explained that the law is intended to clamp down on NGOs that registered to health-related work but deviate from their mandate along the way.

Baryomunsi lauded the organization for its work of supporting people living with HIV in 20 districts including Kayunga, Luweero, Nakasongola, Mukono, Wakiso, Kamuli, Mayuge, Mityana, Gulu and Mbarara.

CHAU also provides family planning and sexual reproductive health education services.

US: Should we criminalize HIV? [Op-ed, St Louis American]

By Opal Jones and Theodore (Ted) Kerr | Posted: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 8:47 pm

Opal M. Jones

In the last month we saw Michael Johnson, a 23-year-old black college student, sentenced to 30-plus years in prison on HIV criminalization-related charges. David Magnum was also sentenced to 30-plus years in prison, and Robert Smith has been held on $50,000 bail for attempting to expose a person to HIV.

This is part of a disturbing trend: an ongoing criminalization of people living with HIV, at the same time as more people are living with HIV in Missouri. This prompts us to ask: Is criminalization how to deal with HIV?

As the president and CEO of Doorways, an interfaith organization providing housing and supportive services for people living with HIV/AIDS, and a Doorways volunteer, we say no.

Every day we see how support for people living with HIV is what is needed to end the epidemic, not criminalization, something echoed in a 1987 op-ed printed in this paper, “AIDS is a public health problem, not one that should be criminalized.” Written before MO. REV. STAT. § 191.677 was passed, the op-ed illustrates that even when less was known about the virus, it was understood that isolation and penalization were not answers to the crisis.

Yet, since 2008, we have seen more than 15 prosecutions and arrests for HIV exposure in Missouri. Meanwhile, the number of people living with HIV in the state is increasing. In 2008, 9,877 people in Missouri were living with HIV; by 2013, the number rose to 11,704. While this reflects the good work Doorways and other care providers are doing – people with HIV are living longer – it also indicates there has not been a significant drop in new cases.

Anecdotally, we see the majority of those charged for failure to disclose are black men, and an article in the Journal of AIDS Behavior reports “sentences of black individuals arrested for HIV exposure were significantly more severe than the sentences of their white counterparts.” Black people already bear a heavier burden of HIV. According to the Center of Disease Control, “the estimated rate of new HIV infections among blacks/African Americans (68.9) was 7.9 times as high as the rate in whites (8.7).”

Missouri’s HIV criminalization law – and similar ones existing in 33 other states – fly in the face of what has been learned about HIV in the last three decades. This exceptional dehumanization of people makes it harder for people with HIV to receive and maintain care, making criminalization a leading driver in the ongoing epidemic.

When entering into an intimate relationship, we believe that people should clearly communicate and disclose their status. However, people are being imprisoned based on a law that dictates it is 100 percent up to the person living with HIV to disclose their status and prove the disclosure, releasing other willing partners of responsibility. This may be unrealistic to prove and is not applicable for any other medical condition.

Medical advances have made it possible for people living with HIV to have an undetectable viral load, making it nearly impossible to transmit the virus. But to be undetectable, you need what for 27 years Doorways has been providing to people who need assistance: stable housing, access to care and hope.

But we can’t do our job if people living with HIV do not know their status. Reasons we hear for not getting tested: fear of a positive status being confirmed; not knowing where to go for care; not wanting to have to disclose “risky” behaviors and partners to authorities; and people often do not get tested because of the burden of knowing. The earlier someone knows their status, the sooner they are able to make treatment decisions and adapt to being someone with a communicable condition.

If we are worried about HIV, we need to come up with something better than criminalization.

Opal Jones is president and CEO of Doorways. Theodore (Ted) Kerr, a Masters student at Union Theological Seminary, is a Doorways volunteer.

Prison time for HIV?

Prison time for HIV? It’s possible in Veracruz

El Daily Post, August 6th 2015

New legislation passed by the Veracruz state Congress calls for up to five years in prison for “willfully” infecting another with HIV, which can lead to AIDS. The measure is fraught with legal, medical, public health and human rights problems, but supporters insist it will help protect vulnerable women.

 

The Veracruz state Congress has unanimously approved legislation that calls for prison time for anyone who intentionally infects another person with the HIV virus or other sexually transmitted diseases.

The amendment to the state penal code makes Veracruz the second Mexican state (after Guerrero) to criminalize the sexual transmission of illnesses. Another 11 states have sanctions in the books for infecting others with “venereal diseases,” a term and concept no longer used in the medical community.

But Veracruz has stipulated a more severe punishment than the other states — from six months to five years in prison. Guerrero also has a maximum of five years, but it’s minimum is three months.

The bill was promoted by Dep. Mónica Robles Barajas, a member of the Green Party, which is allied with the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party. She said the legislation is aimed at protecting women who can be infected by their husbands.

“It’s hard for a woman to tell her husband to use a condom,” she said in an interview with the Spanish-language online news site Animal Político.

The legislation, however, raises serious questions, both legal and medical, as well as concerns about human rights.

The most obvious problem is the notion of “intentional” infection. Robles emphasizes that the bill is based on a “willful” passing of the virus, which she defines as a carrier having sexual relations when he or she is aware of his or her HIV infection.

But the notion of intentionality in such cases is a complicated one for prosecutors, legal experts say. The he-said/she-said factor can be a sticking point, according to Luis González Plascencia, a former head of the Mexico City human rights commission, with the accusation likely to be based on one person’s testimony.

“There could be ways to show through testimony that there was an express intention to infect,” González told Animal Político. “But that’s always going to be circumstantial.”

A likely abuse of the law, he said, is attempted revenge or blackmail. An angry spouse or other partner can, with a simple declaration, create a legal nightmare.

Even if the issue of intentionality can be overcome, the very notion of criminalizing HIV infection is controversial. AIDs and human rights experts are against it.

One of them is Ricardo Hernández Forcada, who directs the HIV-AIDS program at Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission (CNDH). International experience, he says, indicates that punitive policies accomplish little besides government intrusion into private life. (Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia are regions where laws similar to the new one in Veracurz have existed.)

A Veracruz non-governmental organization called the Multisectoral HIV/AIDS Group issued a communiqué in response to the new legislation, declaring, “Scientific evidence shows that legislation and punishment do not prevent new infections, nor do they reduce female vulnerability. Instead, they negatively affect public health as well as human rights.”

González concurred. “The only thing that’s going to happen is that there will be another crime in the penal code that won’t accomplish anything except generate fear,” he said.

The Multisectoral Group also pointed out a disconnect between the law and medical science. It’s  virtually impossible, the group says, to determine with certainty who infected whom with a sexually transmitted disease.

“Phylogenetic analyses alone cannot determine the relationship between two HIV samples,” the group said in its release. “They cannot establish the origin of an infection beyond a reasonable doubt, or how it occurred, or when it occurred.”

Robles, for her part, objects to the notion that the legislation criminalizes HIV carriers, insisting that the target is the intentional infection of another through sex. She emphasized that the aim of the new law is to protect women, who are often in a vulnerable situation.

“It’s directed much more at protecting women than homosexual groups,” she said. “There is a high incidence among women because there is no awareness of the risk they run.”

Opponents, however, see the new law as a step backward for men and women, and for public health in general, insisting that penalization comes at the expense of prevention.

“Knowing that they could be at risk of prosecution, people won’t get tested,” the CNDH’s Hernández Forcada said. “These measures inhibit people’s will to know their diagnosis.”

US: ‘Turn It Up!’ an innovative resource for prisoners with HIV needs your help reaching Kickstarter goal

Sero is a national network of people with HIV and allies fighting HIV-related stigma, discrimination and criminalization by engaging and empowering ourselves and others with HIV to speak and advocate, conduct original research, document the experiences of those criminalized, educate communities and work in partnership with others to mobilize for change.

They particularly work to support and strengthen networks of people with HIV, especially those representing key populations, to bring their voice and insight to the discussion and development of policy, delivery of services and the media.

They have received many letters from people with HIV and/or hepatitis who are currently in prison, many on charges arising from their HIV or hepatitis status. Cindy Stine, Sero’s Prisoner’s Network co-ordinator, responds to these inquiries, provides research assistance and sometimes is able to help find legal counsel or other needed resources.

From this informal and growing network, it soon became clear that many people who are incarcerated have unique knowledge about effective strategies to maintain good health and access healthcare while behind bars.

Last September, Sero gathered a group of people who have been incarcerated or work with those who are, as well as HIV and hepatitis experts.

They spent time brainstorming how they could facilitate the sharing of advice, insights and tips from people who are in prisons or jails concerning how they stay as healthy as possible.

That led to the creation of Turn It Up! a new print resource guide for people with HIV and/or hepatitis who are incarcerated, as well as those newly-released from prison or jail and their friends and families.

Written and edited in large part by people who have themselves been incarcerated and/or have HIV and/or hepatitis, Turn It Up! will help those serving time navigate healthcare and stay as healthy as possible.

Laura Whitehorn and Suzy Martin, two longtime and prison reform activists, editors and HIV experts, are co-editing Turn It Up! They are both former editors at POZ magazine and Suzy works closely with Prison Health News.

To produce Turn It Up!, they worked with more than two dozen others, including contributors from prisons and jails in a dozen states, bringing an authentic, passionate and informed voice to the pages of Turn It Up!

The challenge now is to get it distributed to those who need it the most. Sero have launched a modest Kickstarter campaign, that includes this video explaining the project, which they hope will raise at least $5,000 to help with distribution costs.

Support the Kickstarter campaign here.

AFAO Policy Analyst Michael Frommer highlights the many types of anti-HIV criminalisation advocacy undertaken by the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network

The 8th IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis, Treatment and Prevention (IAS 2015) is on in Vancouver, Canada, this week. AFAO Policy Analyst Michael Frommer reports back on the pre-conference community forum. 

Key human rights challenges, such as criminalisation of HIV transmission, were centre stage at the IAS community forum on Saturday 18 July.

Alison Symington, co-director of Research and Policy at the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network (Legal Network), described the challenge of advocacy and policy work in Canada in the face of ongoing criminalisation.

Aside from the significant justice issues when charges are laid for HIV non-disclosure, exposure or transmission, she also identified the serious of issue of people threatening their partners with an allegation, when there is relationship conflict, and how this in particular affects women who may be in abusive relationships.

In Canada, as in Australia, most of the people charged to date have been male heterosexuals, with a strong racialised element – mainly Black men. Since the mid-1990s, there has been an increase in the proportion of gay men charged.

Despite the fact that men make up the majority of those charged, Alison has investigated the pernicious effects of criminalisation on women. She explained how the ‘informal’ criminalisation of HIV positive mothers works, with their sense that their parenting is being under surveillance.

She outlined a huge range of advocacy and policy activities being undertaken by the Legal Network in response.

1) Legal defence strategy and intervention

Tactics include contacting the defence lawyers of individuals who have been charged with criminalisation related offences. The Legal Network also intervenes in the formal court proceedings and provides relevant scientific evidence.

2) Campaigns and advocacy

This has involved the Legal Network’s participation in the ‘Stop the Witch Hunt’ campaign targeting prosecutors, undertaken in collaboration with the AIDS Action Now. Legal Network staff also sit in court during trials, to make clear to judges/prosecutors that the community is monitoring developments.

3) Raising awareness/education

This education work is targeted at raising understanding among judges and among the community.

4) Working with doctors/scientists

A key piece of work was the Canadian Scientist Statement on HIV transmission risk. The Legal Network organised for 70 leading scientists from across Canada to sign this document which explained clearly the actual levels of risk of HIV transmission.

5) Distinguishing between HIV non-disclosure and sexual assault

HIV non-disclosure/exposure/transmission charges in Canada are made under the Canadian criminal law as an aggravated charge using the sexual assault provisions. The Legal Network aims to work with domestic violence/feminist organisations to ensure that HIV-related jurisprudence does not circumvent the appropriate application of sexual assault laws.

6) Prosecutorial guidelines

This has been an ongoing area of work across Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia. Ontario most recently advocated for the adoption of guidelines, but without adequate community input the Government drafted guidelines were dropped. There is still a desire to pursue appropriately formulated guidelines in future.

Marama Pala (in the audience) highlighting Australia’s public

health response to MC Dazon Dixon Diallo.

The comprehensive advocacy and policy response taken by the Canadian Legal Network is extremely impressive.

With one of, if not the highest rates per capita of criminalisation in the world, it is obviously very necessary in the Canadian context.

While some circumstances differ, there are a great many ideas that may be drawn upon for responding to HIV criminalisation in the Australian context.

US: As college student, Michael Johnson, 23, is sentenced to 30 1/2 years for HIV exposure, advocates organise and condemn Missouri’s HIV-specific law as ‘barbaric’

Yesterday, Michael Johnson, 23, was sentenced to 30 1/2 years in prison after being found guilty on May 14th of five counts stemming from the accusations of three people who said he exposed them to the virus without their knowledge.

For the most serious charge, recklessly infecting another with HIV, Johnson will serve 30 years in prison. The remaining four charges, for HIV ‘exposure’, carried sentences of 5.5, 5.5, 5.5 and 14 years. Johnson will serve his sentences concurrently, meaning he will spend a total of 30 1/2 years in prison.

Mr Johnson’s case created considerable attention from HIV, gay and social justice advocates, such as this open letter from black gay men, and the press release from The Center for HIV Law and Policy below.

Tomorrow (Wednesday 15th July), the Counter Narrative Project, HIV Prevention Justice Alliance and Positive Women’s Network – USA will hold a webinar to provide an update on the current on-the-ground efforts to support his appeal and a discussion of advocacy strategy from a legal, media, intersectional and activism perspective.

Click on this link to register for Michael L. Johnson: Strategizing collectively for justice.

Sentencing of Missouri College Student in HIV “Exposure” Case Decried As “Barbaric”