Quantcast

Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
Newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr Instagram
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 22, 2014, 09:00:23 PM

Login with username, password and session length


Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 650182
  • Total Topics: 49632
  • Online Today: 192
  • Online Ever: 585
  • (January 07, 2014, 02:31:47 PM)
Users Online

Welcome


Welcome to the POZ/AIDSmeds Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and others concerned about HIV/AIDS.  Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning:  Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

  • The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own physician.

  • All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

  • Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ/AIDSmeds community forums.

  • We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are true and correct to their knowledge.

  • Product advertisement—including links; banners; editorial content; and clinical trial, study or survey participation—is strictly prohibited by forums members unless permission has been secured from POZ.

To change forums navigation language settings, click here (members only), Register now

Para cambiar sus preferencias de los foros en español, haz clic aquí (sólo miembros), Regístrate ahora

Finished Reading This? You can collapse this or any other box on this page by clicking the symbol in each box.

Author Topic: 1st Hypothetical Case History - For debate - Who is responsible  (Read 1719 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mecch

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,169
  • red pill? or blue pill?
1st Hypothetical Case History - For debate - Who is responsible
« on: October 25, 2008, 08:51:23 PM »
Todd, a gay man in his late 30's is HIV+ and has been diagnosed a few years ago. He receives no HAART and has a viral load varying between 7-10,000.  He has received some counseling from his health clinic about the risks of HIV transmission and is of average intelligence.  He does not have an ID or regular doctor.

He sometimes disclosses before having sex with someone new, sometimes doesn't.

He sometimes does not disclose, and has protected sex. He sometimes does not disclose, and has unprotected sex.

He doesn't frequently ask the status of casual partners but when he dates a few times, and thinks it could be BF material, he does ask, and does disclose. On casual or anonymous sex encounters, he never offers his HIV status, and when asked about his status, occassionally says the truth but usually trys to avoid the question by saying he fucks safe (even if he might try otherwise in a few minutes), or lying about not knowing, or saying hes is in "good health".   

Todd has had a few boyfriends and hundreds of lovers.

Todd meets Steve, a former "farm boy" who is fresh to the city with a recent MBA from a top 20 program. Intelligent, a bit naive.  Steven has been out for 5 years and had two boyfriends and a couple dozen lovers and never met anyone HIV+.  HIV tested once a year since he started cheating on his girlfriend with a guy, in UNI, so 6 tests (neg) so far.

Steven and Todd meet hot, and have hot sex, protected, 3 times in two weeks.  They start to see each other for drinks and movies and stuff, and Todd says he always plays safe (lying) because he doesn't want to catch anyone's viruses and sees too many people barebacking these days.  Talks judgemental about barebackers.  Steve says the same, and now assumes Todd is neg, though they never ask the question point blank and get clear answers.

A few dates down the road Steve is finding Todd kinda dumb and trashy, but hot, and Todd is finding Steve kinda boring, and square, but hot and potentially trashy, since Steve swallowed his cum once.  Todd figures Steve is good for another couple of dates and then its finished.  Steve thinks Todd could teach him a think or two in the sack and maybe a bf material. 

Todd drags Steve on a drinking party/bar crawl and they end up in the sack, and with the poppers and booze, Todd fucks Steve without a condom, and Steve doesn't object and sure enough a month later Steve seroconverts.

This happens in Charlotte, Virginia.

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-67.4:1(A)   
Class 6 Felony   Any person who, knowing he or she is infected with HIV, has sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, analingus or anal intercourse with the intent to transmit the infection to another person shall be guilty of a class 6 felony.

Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-67.4:1   
Class 1 Misdemeanor   Any person who, knowing he or she is infected with HIV, has sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, analingus or anal intercourse without having previously disclosed the existence of his or her HIV infection to the other person shall be guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor.. 

Steve decides to press charges.  Todd says he had no "intent" to infect, therefore not a felony, but admits that he did not disclose. 

Are Steve and Todd equally responsible for Steve's seroconversion? 

Should Todd be quilty of a misdemeanor?  Of  Class 6 Felony?
“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Offline HereIAm

  • Member
  • Posts: 68
Re: 1st Hypothetical Case History - For debate - Who is responsible
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2008, 09:00:54 PM »
What an interesting and probably common fact pattern.

First, my assessment is not of someone licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction the law is quoted from.  But, the laws are very similar and the analysis is similar.  So, in short, I guess it is not legal advice, but just a conversation.

Failing to disclose is clearly a misdemeanor.  Probably several counts.  Under the law, Todd would likely suffer a conviction for the misdemeanor.

The intent portion of the statute is very difficult.  While Todd was drinking, a defendant can not use voluntary intoxication as a defense.  However, I think it would be difficult for the prosecution to prove intent.  I am not sure inferred intent would be enough here.  I think it is very slim on intent for the felony.   This means that this is a case that would probably have to try to a jury.  If Todd were my client, I would try it on the intent issue.

Now, that is the legal analysis.  But, is there shared responsibility?  Certainly.  Consenting to have unprotected sex means you are risking a sexually transmitted infection.  End of story.  We do have some duty to help ourselves, or mitigate damages, as it were.  That is why this case would not be a good civil (tort) case against Todd, in my view.  The "victim" participated and failed to mitigate his own damages.

I think we have to take care of ourselves.  We have to be responsible for our own bodies and relationships. 
Tested Positive 10 Sept 2008.
24 Sept 2008:  CD 4: 23;   1%;  VL: 770,709
1st Oct 2008:  Started Atripla
4 Dec 2008:  CD 4: 145; 8%, VL: 209
1 March 2009:  CD 4: 91; 8%, VL: 49 (undet)
1 June 2009:  CD 4: 164; 11%, VL: 61
8 July 2011:  CD 4: 286; 17%, VL Undet
28 Oct 2011: CD 4: 346; 21%, VL Undet
2 Mar 2012: CD 4: 316; 20%, VL 6800 (probably an error)
12 Apr 2012: CD 4: 333; 21%, VL Undet

Offline skeebo1969

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,707
Re: 1st Hypothetical Case History - For debate - Who is responsible
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2008, 09:07:03 PM »


   Todd should get an ID doctor as soon as possible so that he can keep his low viral load in check.  He should also limit his alcohol intake and keep its use in moderation. :o

   You forgot to mention what Todd's Cd4 are.  Man I kind of feel bad for Todd.... :-\

   I hope for Steve's sake he does not follow Todd's lead in not obtaining a good ID doc early on. ;)

  
I despise the song Love is in the Air, you should too.

Offline newt

  • Member
  • Posts: 3,887
  • the one and original newt
Re: 1st Hypothetical Case History - For debate - Who is responsible
« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2008, 09:29:29 PM »
Everyone here is a case history, all real. For me it don't run well to have real life mixed up with case histories tagged "who is responsible?" There's no way to not even see a thread, and I guess people's free to make use of this LIVING WITH forum as they see fit, but for me moral theory studies is a bit off-topic and I don't like seeing these threads.

bedtime

- matt
"The object is to be a well patient, not a good patient"

Offline denb45

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,051
  • "1987 Classic Old School POZ+"
Re: 1st Hypothetical Case History - For debate - Who is responsible
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2008, 09:29:48 PM »


He sometimes disclosses before having sex with someone new, sometimes doesn't.

He sometimes does not disclose, and has protected sex. He sometimes does not disclose, and has unprotected sex.

He doesn't frequently ask the status of casual partners but when he dates a few times, and thinks it could be BF material, he does ask, and does disclose. On casual or anonymous sex encounters, he never offers his HIV status, and when asked about his status, occassionally says the truth but usually trys to avoid the question by saying he fucks safe (even if he might try otherwise in a few minutes), or lying about not knowing, or saying hes is in "good health".   




quoted above is what I have a problem with  ???  why Todd does not disclose, rejection, not being cool, or WHATEVER...is not a valid excuse not to disclose, it's just plan WRONG and irresponsible, in my opinion, and, as for Steve, he should have known better  >:( you have to treat everyone (that you don't know) like they have STD's or HIV, by being safe and using your own good judgment..........what Todd is doing, isn't being very smart at all, you have to take responsibility for you own actions when they may harm others........
« Last Edit: October 25, 2008, 09:43:17 PM by denb45 »
"it's so nice to be insane, cause no-one ask you to explain" Helen Reddy cc 1974

Offline mecch

  • Member
  • Posts: 12,169
  • red pill? or blue pill?
Re: 1st Hypothetical Case History - For debate - Who is responsible
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2008, 09:38:14 PM »
I guess people's free to make use of this LIVING WITH forum as they see fit, but for me moral theory studies is a bit off-topic and I don't like seeing these threads.
- matt


Your point taken, I just posted 3 to clear the air. And the Dutch case is real. Sweet dreams.
“From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need” 1875 K Marx

Offline skeebo1969

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,707
Re: 1st Hypothetical Case History - For debate - Who is responsible
« Reply #6 on: October 25, 2008, 09:49:09 PM »


     Seriously speaking...

     Steve is responsible for his own infection. 
I despise the song Love is in the Air, you should too.

Offline anniebc

  • Member
  • Posts: 5,956
  • AM member since 2003
Re: 1st Hypothetical Case History - For debate - Who is responsible
« Reply #7 on: October 25, 2008, 11:09:24 PM »
And seriously speaking, you are writing stories based on assumption rather than fact or reality, the reality is this forum is for those who are actually "Living" with HIV...I'm moving your "Hypothetical" stories to 'Off Topic"

Jan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Never knock on deaths door..ring the bell and run..he really hates that.

Offline jkinatl2

  • Member
  • Posts: 6,007
  • Doo. Dah. Dipp-ity.
Re: 1st Hypothetical Case History - For debate - Who is responsible
« Reply #8 on: October 26, 2008, 04:01:48 AM »
I for one see a real intent behind these threads.

And find it destructive.

Just saying.
"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

-Kimberly Page-Shafer, PhD, MPH

Welcome Thread

 


Terms of Membership for these forums
 

© 2014 Smart + Strong. All Rights Reserved.   terms of use and your privacy
Smart + Strong® is a registered trademark of CDM Publishing, LLC.