Transmission: a moral question

[manchesteruk]

This is an interesting discussion and something i'm sure has entered every HIV+ persons thoughts.  My own personal opinion on this is I can't imagine there being any circumstance where it would be acceptable to willingly transmit to another person, HIV stops with me.  I even worry that some day someone would lie to me about being HIV+, a bug chaser for example for this reason and others i'd like to think unprotected sex is something I wouldn't ever consider again unless I was in a trusting relationship with another HIV+ person.  Even then I think I would worry about drug resistance etc.

[allopathicholistic]

HIV stops with me

yay!    that has a nice ring to it

I even worry that some day someone would lie to me about being HIV+, a bug chaser for example

manchesteruk, If I could have a FRACTION of your sensibilities I'd be blessed indeed! (what you said never crossed my mind. thank you)

[david25luvit]

When all is said and done....I think the great majority agree on one thing.  We do not wish to share our little 'GIFT"
We can't control what other people do....The scenario Ron brought up regarding the moment of orgasm and someone choosing at the last minute to forgo caution suggest we are not always in control.  If someone is bent on getting HIV...I dare say he's going to succeed.  But to willingly infect a negative person (My opinion) irregardless of the reasons, is just WRONG.

In My opinion the issue of two positive people choosing to engage in unsafe sex is another subject entirely...

[leximancer]

Could it be that he assumed the other guy to be positive?  It's not a far-fetch scenario that someone who knows their sexual partner to be positive and chooses to have unprotected sex, does so because they too are positive and just decided not to disclose? 

There are people out there who will not disclose their HIV status, even if the other person has.  This honestly sounds more like heaping more judgment on your BF because he cheated on you.  The devil incarnate he may be, but I'm willing to bet that he's just human.  Like the rest of us.

Cliff, I know quite well that he's human.  I accepted that long ago.  I'm not sure I would last two months, let alone two years, with someone whom I thought was supposed to live up to some superhuman ideal.  But I also know a lot more about him, like how he has a habit of going through possible scenarios in his head.  I think he considered the possibility that the other guy was pos, but didn't conclude that it was something that could be banked upon.  When I spoke to him about it, he didn't even bring that possibility up.  He said instead that he understood the feeling that bug chaser idea that one wants to have control over when he gets HIV.

[scotttt]

Very interesting thread. 

[newt]

Knowingly having unprotected sex with someone while HIV positive is wrong...dead wrong.

Peace,
Hal

I think this kind of blanket statement don't quite fit the bill (soz Hal) because....

...lots of people in long-term relationships and indeed shagging around have unprotected sex (of some sort)/sex with some transmission risk (of greater or lesser degree), and, for better or worse, do so with their eyes open.  There is a difference between accepting that there is a risk and deliberately setting out to infect someone/get infected with HV.

Quick count among my friends: people in serodiscordant relationships who have sex that is technically a risk of transmission: all - people who forget/choose not to use condoms sometimes: several - people who have given up on condoms: 8 (4 couples) - negative people who routinely raise the topic of HIV status with casual shags: 0.

For me the important point is consent to the risk, not transmission...ah! there you go, the just and unclouded bed of sexual relationships....

So to answer the original poster's Q, I think you offer the wrong question, the real poser is perhaps "What is an acceptable level of risk of transmission?" which to my mind varies on the people involved, and perhaps their stupidity/greed but also their love/commitment.

- matt

(edited for spelling and grammar)

[scotttt]

"So to answer the original poster's Q, I think yoi offer the wrong question, the real poser is perhaps "What is an acceptable level of risk of transmission?" which to my mind varies on the people involved, and perhaps their stupidity/greed but also their love/commitment."

You raise an interesting point Newt.

[scotttt]

I find the range of opinions fascinating from Dingo's :

“to throw a tempest into the teapot....the idea of barebacking a neggie is hot (to me) since it's 'forbidden fruit.'     Would I?  I hope not.  Should I?  Definitely not.   Might I?  Havent' been faced with that situation.   The psychological allure works both ways... Course, I think about murdering my bosses all the time... but i don't.

To SD Girl's:

"We have a moral and personal responsibility.........We have to be the responsible ones.  If someone is interested in having unprotected sex with an HIV+ person, it is incumbent upon the person with HIV to NOT EVEN entertain the idea.  Period, end of story.

Lisa"


I think there is certainly a range of opinions and I find all of them thought provoking!

[HunkySpunkyOz]

For what is worth, my thoughts are that it is important for HIV- people not to put the responsiblity of transmition onto HIV+ sex partners. I fully support safe sex, but humans being what we are, lie to aviod being hurt and forget when it is convienient.

HIV+ are just human..