When do i say?

[Red23]

hey everyone, i am in need of some advice

ive recently started dating again and have found a new potential girlfriend at the moment we have agreed to take things slow and said that we are "exclusively dating" while we let things pan out over the next few weeks but as yet she doesnt know of my status, she knows that i have a health condition but not what it is specifically

now im left in the situation of telling her about it, we have already had safe sex a few times i already feel bad about going as far as we have already but really my question is, do i tell her now before things go for too long and let her decide what to do now before its too late? or do i let it go a few more weeks to let us settle in then tell her?

[initforlife]

I'm not one to judge. but I will say this. what would you think of someone having sex with you protected or not and not telling you their status and finding out later? Don't you think you should let her decide first if she was ok with it? I mean trusting someone is a big issue for me and I'm sure with a lot of others. I would have already told her but that's just me. Good Luck with whatever you decide.

[mecch]

now im left in the situation of telling her about it, we have already had safe sex a few times i already feel bad about going as far as we have already but really my question is, do i tell her now before things go for too long and let her decide what to do now before its too late? or do i let it go a few more weeks to let us settle in then tell her?

You protected her physically. But you didn't respect her mind.
You protected yourself from the risk of rejection.  So now its time to stop protecting yourself.  In another way of looking at it, telling sooner rather than later does serve your own interests as well. Because in the off chance you are rejected, it will hurt yourself less.

[tednlou2]

I agree the time to tell was before sex happened.  But, what's done is done.  You're on meds, but I think not UD yet?  Telling many that the odds of you transmitting the virus is so close to zero, if the condom broke, may not satisfy them.

I obviously don't know her.  She may be very understanding.  I can only imagine how hard it is to disclose to a date or potential partner.  But, there would come a point where I would feel you were being selfish and just wanted the vajayjay.  So, I would tell right away and not wait. 

Criminalization is something you have to keep in mind.  I am not sure where you live.  If you admit you had sex without disclosing, you could be in legal trouble, whether transmission happened or not.  If she happened to already be poz, it would be easy to say she was infected by you.  I mean, if she didn't know she was already infected.  Could get messy.  Criminalization is something that would terrify me in this situation.

Wishin ya the best.  Let us know how it goes. 

[Miss Philicia]

You protected her physically.

I don't see where he actually said whether or not they had protected sex.

[Joe K]

Any relationship that is worth having requires respect and honesty.  You need to tell her the truth now, to show her that you respect her ability to decide on if she wants to stay.

Joe

[Red23]

thanks for the help guys

i told her straight away about it and sad to say she had the reaction that i expected, she freaked even after i had reassured her multiple times that she was safe, that im on medication which brings it right down, that transmission was low risk and none of the condoms broke

i do feel really really bad for not saying anything before we had got this far, we'd only been seeing each other for a few weeks and i had to be sure i could trust her with this information and find out if our relationship was going to work before i could say anything so i can understand why she freaked out and feels hurt and lied too but at least i still told her before things got too serious and she went and got checked the next day

[Dan0]

i do feel really really bad for not saying anything before we had got this far, we'd only been seeing each other for a few weeks and i had to be sure i could trust her with this information and find out if our relationship was going to work before i could say anything so i can understand why she freaked out and feels hurt and lied too but at least i still told her before things got too serious and she went and got checked the next day

I'm not even certain where to start. But this: she doesn't feel hurt and lied to.  SHE WAS HURT AND LIED TO. Plain and simple.

[Almost2late]

 I believe the OP was saying that he understands she was hurt.. This is why being poz has its problems in dating..its a sad situation.

[Red23]

I believe the OP was saying that he understands she was hurt.. This is why being poz has its problems in dating..its a sad situation.

exactly, i know what i did was wrong and i accept it, i know i should of said something earlier and regret leaving it for this long but you have to kind of put yourself in my shoes because what if i told her straight out and she runs off telling everyone about it when no one else knows about it? its not something i want people to know about and want to keep as private as possible.

[Almost2late]

Red, I am in your shoes and pretty much we all are in this forum.. but think about this, by not disclosing before sex you proved to her that you can't be trusted.. just food for thought.

[Zohar]

I'm not even certain where to start. But this: she doesn't feel hurt and lied to.  SHE WAS HURT AND LIED TO. Plain and simple.

If he'd  told her he was negative, then that would have been a lie. She's hurt, yes, but from what the OP has said, no lie was actually told.

[Zohar]

Red, I am in your shoes and pretty much we all are in this forum.. but think about this, by not disclosing before sex you proved to her that you can't be trusted.. just food for thought.

I don't buy this. Disclosing one's status is a huge thing and due to the stigma around the condition, many people feel unable to do so. It's private medical information and there's no way of knowing what someone who is all but a stranger will do with it. Judgemental blanket statements like 'If you don't disclose, you can't be trusted' simply feed the prejudice around the condition rather than helping create a climate of understanding that everyone - positive and negative - should be striving for.

[mecch]

exactly, i know what i did was wrong and i accept it, i know i should of said something earlier and regret leaving it for this long but you have to kind of put yourself in my shoes because what if i told her straight out and she runs off telling everyone about it when no one else knows about it? its not something i want people to know about and want to keep as private as possible.

OK first of all the good stuff:
Congratulations on telling her, and on having the courage to tell.
Her reaction is her own, regrettable for you, but you didn't say she told you to piss off so maybe eventually the contact isn't broken and will continue when composure returns.

Now for the bad stuff.

1) Not just you, Red - for everyone - its always going to be a risk disclosing, there is no particular strategy that is going to make a silk purse out of his sow's ear....

Yes, part of disclosing means the information is out there. THERE IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO CHANGE THAT.   We disclose, and the information is out there. Deal with it.

2) Red - your logic about the strategy of holding off a bit before disclosing, AND YET screwing... in order to judge if you can trust someone with the private info, does not muster.  DOES NOT MAKE SENSE OVER TIME.

You see, with your recently tried strategy, you now have a sex partner who is ANGRY and maybe you know - angry lovers can seek revenge.  Hmmmm,  now what would I do if someone burned me with a withheld piece of info. I might very well blab that info to the world.   Great strategy. Not....

Go back to Observation 1 -   When you disclose to someone, the information goes out there.  You have to deal with the fact that your HIV+ status is going to be known by people.  You can't control the people. You can't control the flow of info.  All you can control is how you react to your status being known.

The alternative is - don't screw anyone, and therefore don't disclose.

Soon as you decide to have a sex life, and soon as you decide the parameters of your sex life are something on the "up and up" with disclosure - that's it - the info goes out there.

Many people have hashed this conundrum over and over and the common wisdom seems to be the action presenting the least risk of shittiness is disclosing right away.

Other people, gay people for example, some at least, divide their playing fields into those where disclosure is mandatory and those where it is not.  This may not be legal depending on the location. It may not be moral, depending on the 2 people.   

Works like this - a hookup, anonymous sex, etc, where nobody asks, if you have safe sex, maybe thats what everyone wants - low risk sex and no talk about HIV and STDS.   I'm not advocating that.

I don't know how hookups work i the hetero world.

Anyway, the "non-disclosure" scenario - may backfire anyway if you end up liking your hookup, you'll end up wanting to disclose...    Also - who really knows who wants to know what beforehand in any specific situation. Its a bunch of assumptions. Maybe the moral thing is to always disclose.

Etc
etc

Clearly you were with someone who would have wanted to know. So going forward, it may be best, simplest to assume every potential parter will want to know before the first sex...   And take it from there.

Or, become a monk.

[Zohar]

Mecch said: ''So going forward, it may be best, simplest to assume every potential parter will want to know before the first sex...''

Years ago, before I was positive I met a guy and we had safer sex on a few  occasions, and then when it looked like we might get serious, he told me he was HIV+. And that was fine. I don't get where this 'freaking out' response comes from. People know HIV exists and everyone should assume that anyone you have sex with might be infected.

And, is it goes, when the guy told me he was positive, my immediate reaction was to ask if he was OK, which is the usual response when someone tells you they have a serious health condition.

[Jeff G]

Agree or disagree its the law in some places that you must disclose before you have sex .

People should disclose before having sex ... its another reason why having HIV is a burden but its the right thing to do . If you fear violence or you may loose your job then perhaps its not a good time in your life to be hooking up any way until those issues are addressed . 

I am not singling any one person out but most times when people do not disclose its because they have not come to terms with their diagnosis or they simply want what they want and that trumps the needs of others . 

[mecch]

Mecch said: ''So going forward, it may be best, simplest to assume every potential parter will want to know before the first sex...''

Years ago, before I was positive I met a guy and we had safer sex on a few  occasions, and then when it looked like we might get serious, he told me he was HIV+. And that was fine. I don't get where this 'freaking out' response comes from. People know HIV exists and everyone should assume that anyone you have sex with might be infected.

And, is it goes, when the guy told me he was positive, my immediate reaction was to ask if he was OK, which is the usual response when someone tells you they have a serious health condition.

Yeah you are a bit in the "cool" and informed group. Are you a guy?  Lots of us gays operate like this. I fucked around decades with protected sex and asking about HIV was only sometimes the M.O. before any contact.

It does't negate the fact that if you are serious about meeting a partner, boyfriend girlfriend, the rules shift a bit for many people, and the rules shift quite a lot for some people. 

And in some locations there are laws about what to do.

Why do people insist that their own M.O. or their own morality applies to all.

I'm willing to bet if you got a bunch of trained ethicists and throw in a few spiritual leaders, to ponder the problem, the recommendation would be the best solution is to always disclose beforehand.

Im fairly certain the "spiritual" answer is you don't want to be screwing with someone who doesn't want to be screwing with you but the reality is a lot messier isn't it.

[Zohar]

To hell with the law. Homosexuality used to be illegal in the UK and in some countries it still is. People should take a stand against laws which are oppressive and discriminatory, as the ones concerning HIV disclosure/transmission are.

[Jeff G]

To hell with the law. Homosexuality used to be illegal in the UK and in some countries it still is. People should take a stand against laws which are oppressive and discriminatory, as the ones concerning HIV disclosure/transmission are.

I agree to a point ... people should disclose because its the right thing to do and not because its illegal in some places .

[Irish Eyes]

To hell with the law. Homosexuality used to be illegal in the UK and in some countries it still is. People should take a stand against laws which are oppressive and discriminatory, as the ones concerning HIV disclosure/transmission are.

If you don't disclose to sexual partner, arn't you are oppressing them and discriminately placing him/her in a life or death situation?

[Almost2late]

I don't buy this. Disclosing one's status is a huge thing and due to the stigma around the condition, many people feel unable to do so. It's private medical information and there's no way of knowing what someone who is all but a stranger will do with it. Judgemental blanket statements like 'If you don't disclose, you can't be trusted' simply feed the prejudice around the condition rather than helping create a climate of understanding that everyone - positive and negative - should be striving for.

If you read the OP's post, they were dating "exclusively" so they are not strangers that met in some fuck house.. The OP stated he did not disclose bc of fears about "trust" and she may out his status, that fear is understandable.. Now that he disclosed after sex, do you actually think she trust him now? Really?.. That statement is not a blanket statement which you've taken out of context, politicians do it all the time.. I actually feel bad for him, but also for her.. Disclosing is hard, no one said it wasn't.. doing the right thing is usually hard.

"Trust- Reliance on the integrity, strength, ability, surety, etc., of a person or thing; confidence"

[Jeff G]

For you new members ... Zohar likes to pop in a couple of times a year and post provocative things ... if you are into drama he can bring it .

 

[Almost2late]

LOL.. It's not like he's gonna pop out of my smart phone and slap me.. Thanks for the warning though 

[Jeff G]

LOL.. It's not like he's gonna pop out of my smart phone and slap me.. Thanks for the warning though 

Just wanted people to know he is only here to get negative responses and its mostly never ended well when he pops in . We wouldn't want to spend allot of time in Reds thread just to amuse Zohar . So enough about this .

[tednlou2]

I get the waiting to see if you can trust her or whether there is chemistry there anyway.  But, you had sex and more than once.  You could have held off on the sex part, in order to achieve that goal.  It does seem like you wanted your cake and eat it, too.

It does seem like you feel bad, but still feel like you didn't have many options.  I don't think you're some horrible person.  If I were single, I could easily find myself in this situation.  I hope I would tell before sex.  I believe I would.  But, I don't want to act all high and mighty, when I cannot say I would totally 100% do what I think I would do.  The big thing is to learn from the experience and do things differently next time, and hope you won't see legal repercussions.  Besides doing the right thing, being on the news as some "AIDS monster" would scare me.  You could have just kept this secret and not told us or her, so I think you do really feel like you did things wrong-- even if a part of you still wants to believe you didn't have much choice. 

All the best forward! 

[Zohar]

Just wanted people to know he is only here to get negative responses and its mostly never ended well when he pops in . We wouldn't want to spend allot of time in Reds thread just to amuse Zohar . So enough about this .

I'm aware my views aren't popular, but I don't post to deliberately provoke negative responses. HIV affects all sorts of people and that's going to  be expressed in a diversity of opinions.

On the matter of disclosure I don't view it as a black and white issue and I don't see how it can be fair that people with HIV should shoulder 100% of the responsibility. If it's vitally important to someone - to the point of it being a potential deal-breaker - to know if the person they are about to have sex with is HIV+ then they need to ask that question.  One would do that in any other area of life that one deemed critical so the same standard should also apply to sex, rather than  leaving it to chance.

[Zohar]

If you don't disclose to sexual partner, arn't you are oppressing them and discriminately placing him/her in a life or death situation?

Having sex with someone using condoms, which has been the cornerstone of safer sex for three decades,  is not 'oppressing' someone, no. I also don't see how sex with condoms with an undetectable viral load is placing someone in 'a life or death situation', and I doubt you'd find any HIV specialist who would agree with that.

[bocker3]

On the matter of disclosure I don't view it as a black and white issue and I don't see how it can be fair that people with HIV should shoulder 100% of the responsibility.

Please -- no one is saying that the poz person has 100% of THE COUPLE's responsibility -- but they do own 100% of THEIR responsibility.  yes, the neg partner is responsible for their actions, but that doesn't give license to the poz person to say, "well, you didn't ask, so I'm just moving forward".

If it's vitally important to someone - to the point of it being a potential deal-breaker - to know if the person they are about to have sex with is HIV+ then they need to ask that question.  One would do that in any other area of life that one deemed critical so the same standard should also apply to sex, rather than  leaving it to chance.

This is some of the most contorted rationalization I've heard since my daughter was about 14 years old.  No one asks a potential partner every "deal breaker" question.  "Are you a serial killer?"  "Are you prone to commit domestic violence?"  "Do you chew your toenails?", etc, etc.  That is the most ridiculous assertion I've heard in a while.
Both partners have a role to play in this "dance", but if one doesn't do it, the other is not given a free pass to do the same.  Remember, the responses in the thread are directed at the poz person because HE WROTE IN - If the negative person had written in, the responses would be about THEIR responsibility in this situation.
Grow up Zohar.

Mike

[leatherman]

then they need to ask that question

asking THE question is never the advice to give or the action to take. Asking a partner is actually the most asinine thing to do.

20-25% of people in America infected with HIV haven't been tested and don't know. If you ask them the question, their answer will be "why, no. no I'm not infected". Duh! No one should ever be told to ask their partner and no one should ever ask. Everyone (poz or neg) should be taught that anyone they partner with sexually needs to be treated as if they are infected with something.

[Zohar]

Please -- no one is saying that the poz person has 100% of THE COUPLE's responsibility -- but they do own 100% of THEIR responsibility.  yes, the neg partner is responsible for their actions, but that doesn't give license to the poz person to say, "well, you didn't ask, so I'm just moving forward".
This is some of the most contorted rationalization I've heard since my daughter was about 14 years old.  No one asks a potential partner every "deal breaker" question.  "Are you a serial killer?"  "Are you prone to commit domestic violence?"  "Do you chew your toenails?", etc, etc.  That is the most ridiculous assertion I've heard in a while.
Both partners have a role to play in this "dance", but if one doesn't do it, the other is not given a free pass to do the same.  Remember, the responses in the thread are directed at the poz person because HE WROTE IN - If the negative person had written in, the responses would be about THEIR responsibility in this situation.
Grow up Zohar.

Mike

If I was a dating women (and HIV-) and considered not using condoms, I'd sure as hell want to know if the woman was on the pill to avoid the possibility of getting her pregnant.

[Zohar]

asking THE question is never the advice to give or the action to take. Asking a partner is actually the most asinine thing to do.

20-25% of people in America infected with HIV haven't been tested and don't know. If you ask them the question, their answer will be "why, no. no I'm not infected". Duh! No one should ever be told to ask their partner and no one should ever ask. Everyone (poz or neg) should be taught that anyone they partner with sexually needs to be treated as if they are infected with something.

People who have been diagnosed, such as the OP are, if asked, able to give an accurate answer about their status.  But, yes, I do agree that people should assume their partners could be infected with something.

[bocker3]

If I was a dating women (and HIV-) and considered not using condoms, I'd sure as hell want to know if the woman was on the pill to avoid the possibility of getting her pregnant.

Great side-stepping and avoiding of the points I raise to your assertion that he should have asked, so it's ALL on him.
You merely changed your scenario from HIV status to birth control.   

[leatherman]

People who have been diagnosed, such as the OP are, if asked, able to give an accurate answer about their status.

unless they lie

[absopozilutely]

Having sex with someone using condoms, which has been the cornerstone of safer sex for three decades,  is not 'oppressing' someone, no. I also don't see how sex with condoms with an undetectable viral load is placing someone in 'a life or death situation', and I doubt you'd find any HIV specialist who would agree with that.

Condom breaks you don't realize it, 9 years down the road they've infected how many people, and are hospitalized with pcp Mac and god knows what else, they die. It is because you put them in that life or death situation, or I should say you gave them that opportunity since it's not 100% your fault.

[leatherman]

Condom breaks you don't realize it, 9 years down the road they've infected how many people,

however, that is NOT true with what your quoted from Zohar. His quote says "sex with condoms with an undetectable viral load" which is totally true as someone who is UD does not pose a transmission risk - with or without condoms, broken or not.

http://www.aidsmap.com/No-one-with-an-undetectable-viral-load-gay-or-heterosexual-transmits-HIV-in-first-two-years-of-PARTNER-study/page/2832748/

[absopozilutely]

however, that is NOT true with what your quoted from Zohar. His quote says "sex with condoms with an undetectable viral load" which is totally true as someone who is UD does not pose a transmission risk - with or without condoms, broken or not.

http://www.aidsmap.com/No-one-with-an-undetectable-viral-load-gay-or-heterosexual-transmits-HIV-in-first-two-years-of-PARTNER-study/page/2832748/

Uh there is still a risk, I can guarantee it, since my person that infected me was on medication and undetectable, and here I am sitting pretty having a conversation with you.

[Jeff G]

Uh there is still a risk, I can guarantee it, since my person that infected me was on medication and undetectable, and here I am sitting pretty having a conversation with you.

I guess its how you look at it ... the person who infected you only thought he was undetectable at the time . Its important to remind people hiv neg and poz that there are no guarantees that a person is undetectable at any one time .

[zach]

i chew my toenails, is that a deal breaker?

my kids wouldn't tell me they'd done wrong unless i specifically asked, and precise wording was taken advantage of

same sort of maturity level at play here

[Zohar]

unless they lie

This thread is concerned with people (such as the OP) who have been diagnosed and they are able to give an accurate answer about their status when asked, if they so choose. But if they don't wish to answer truthfully then it seems even less likely they'd volunteer that information up front.

[Zohar]

i chew my toenails, is that a deal breaker?

my kids wouldn't tell me they'd done wrong unless i specifically asked, and precise wording was taken advantage of

same sort of maturity level at play here

Nah, not really.  You can't compare family  - and ones that are dependent on you, at that - to acquaintances.

[bocker3]

Nah, not really.  You can't compare family  - and ones that are dependent on you, at that - to acquaintances.

    

See you in the next disclosure thread Zohar. See if you finally are able to respond to logic.... doubtful, but I am always hopeful.

[Zohar]

   

See you in the next disclosure thread Zohar.

Sure! 

[timmm55]

Uh there is still a risk, I can guarantee it, since my person that infected me was on medication and undetectable, and here I am sitting pretty having a conversation with you.

How long was he undetectable? 6 months or more?
Things you need to ask yourself:
When was the last time you were tested before you met him? Did you have sex with anyone 2 months prior to being tested? Did you have a second test within a year? Did you do a DNA test to determine if it was the same virus strain? Did you have any other sexual contacts while together, with or without him?

4 people in the Partner's Study came up positive, they had undetectable partners. The 4 got it (proven by DNA) from an outside source. I'm sure the undetectable partner felt awful, thinking he's passed on HIV. Wanna bet the other partner lied about the affair at first!

There have been a few cases of HIV transmission reported from HIV/undetectable. But non have borne out under closer scrutiny.

[drewm]

I'm aware my views aren't popular

Really? And you seem to take such pride in that. **yawns**

[Irish Eyes]

Quote from Zohar, Sept. 9th.


..... I also don't see how sex with condoms with an undetectable viral load is placing someone in 'a life or death situation', and I doubt you'd find any HIV specialist who would agree with that.

                   ***************************************

First, condoms break.
Second, undetectable Viral Load in blood stream doesn't equate UD VL in semen.
Third, life and death situation depends on whether infected person can, or is able to remain adherent to medication.

[zach]

zohar, i would simply say

it's not your decision to make as the positive partner, you are not the one assuming any risk (however negligible)

[leatherman]

First, condoms break.
Second, undetectable Viral Load in blood stream doesn't equate UD VL in semen.
Third, life and death situation depends on whether infected person can, or is able to remain adherent to medication.

1) condoms rarely break when used properly
"The rate of breakage is between 0.4% and 2.3%, while the rate of slippage is between 0.6% and 1.3%"

2)  the chance of someone with an undetectable viral load transmitting HIV is estimated at zero.

The second large study to look at whether people with HIV become non-infectious if they are on antiretroviral therapy (ART) has found no cases where someone with a viral load under 200 copies/ml transmitted HIV, either by anal or vaginal sex.

Statistical analysis shows that the maximum likely chance of transmission via anal sex from someone on successful HIV treatment was 1% a year for any anal sex and 4% for anal sex with ejaculation where the HIV-negative partner was receptive; but the true likelihood is probably much nearer to zero than this.

When asked what the study tells us about the chance of someone with an undetectable viral load  transmitting HIV, presenter Alison Rodger said: "Our best estimate is it's zero."

http://www.aidsmap.com/No-one-with-an-undetectable-viral-load-gay-or-heterosexual-transmits-HIV-in-first-two-years-of-PARTNER-study/page/2832748/

the take away from #1 and #2 is that even if the condom was to break, the risk of HIV transmission is basically zero if the HIV poz partner is UD

3) never believe when a stranger or less-known sexual partner says they are "hiv negative"" or that they are "undetectable"; however if your partner is better known to you and trustworthy, then the risk is once again negligible.

it's not your decision to make as the positive partner, you are not the one assuming any risk (however negligible)

exactly! It is the sole responsibility on each person to protect their own status. While I don't approve of an HIV+ partner not disclosing (and not taking the proper precautions of using condoms and being UD), if the HIV+ partner is UD then the actual scientific risk is negligible to the HIV- person foolish enough to not demand precautions be taken.

[mecch]

yabedybaabedydoo quoi?

[J.R.E.]

yabedybaabedydoo quoi?

Meech,

I am not even going to google this.  What does this mean?

[Joe K]

Meech,

I am not even going to google this.  What does this mean?

It says: garbled letters and then quoi, which is French and can mean: what, I do not know or no matter, even whatever.

Joe