Analyses key provisions in HIV-specific laws, outlining both protective and punitive provisions including criminalisation of HIV non-disclosure, exposure and transmission. Argues these provisions are generally overly broad, disregarding the best available recommendations for legislating on HIV; failing the human rights test of necessity, proportionality and reasonableness; consecrating myths and prejudice; and undermining HIV responses.
Responses to criminal prosecutions for HIV transmission among gay men with HIV in England and Wales
Considers respondents’ awareness of HIV prosecutions and how they have adapted their sexual behaviour as a result. Demonstrates considerable confusion regarding the law, suggesting misunderstandings could lead people with HIV to wrongly believe that how they act, and what they do or don’t say, is legitimated by law. Although criminalisation prompted some to take steps to reduce risk of HIV transmission, others moderated their behaviour in ways likely to have adverse effects, or reported no change.
Should it be illegal for HIV-positive persons to have unprotected sex without disclosure? An examination of attitudes among US men who have sex with men and the impact of state law
Describes the overall pattern and predictors of attitudes toward criminalizing unprotected sex without disclosure by people with HIV. Examines whether attitudes and sexual risk behaviours differ in states with or without HIV-specific laws. Found most respondents believed it should be illegal for persons living with HIV to have unprotected sex without disclosure, however, attitudes did not vary by state law, suggesting HIV-specific laws do not deter high-risk sexual behaviour.
HIV seropositive status disclosure to prospective sex partners and the criminal law that require it: Perspectives of persons living with HIV
Reports on HIV-positive persons’ focus group discussions about Michigan’s HIV disclosure law. Themes included perceived responsibility to prevent infection, concern about unwanted secondary disclosure of HIV-positive status, fear of being falsely accused of violating HIV disclosure law, and perceived vulnerability of HIV-positive persons within the US legal system. Although many agreed with the purpose of the HIV disclosure law, there was considerable concern about the negative impact of the law on persons living with HIV.
“I don’t blame that guy that gave it to me”: Contested discourses of victimisation and culpability in the narratives of heterosexual women infected with HIV
Considers how heterosexual women living with HIV make sense of their HIV acquisition, challenging the victim–culprit binary. None of the women interviewed presented themselves as ‘victims’ in any straightforward sense or placed the blame squarely on the men who likely infected them, including men who had not disclosed. Instead, the women’s narratives revealed themes of “mutual vulnerability” and far more ambivalent allocations of responsibility. The tendency to position women who become infected with HIV as ‘victims’ obscures the complex realities of gender and sexual practice.
Criminal prosecutions for HIV transmission: people living with HIV respond
Considers how people with HIV responded to the first criminal convictions for HIV transmission in England and Wales. The vast majority were critical of criminalisation, expressing concern that prosecutions conflict with ‘safer sex’ shared responsibility messaging, and exacerbate existing stigma and discrimination. Most felt a growing culture of blame undermined the successes achieved by HIV- human rights approaches.
From Sickness to Badness: The Criminalization of HIV in Michigan
Found that to justify a conviction or more severe punishment, prosecutors and judges often argued that HIV infection was a death sentence; that HIV is a deadly weapon; and that HIV-positive people are homicidal threats – despite fewer than 7% of cases involving alleged infection. Medical evidence was rarely invoked in the adjudication of cases. The study concludes that enforcement of HIV disclosure laws reflects pervasive, moralising narratives.
Disparate risks of conviction under Michigan’s felony HIV disclosure law: An observational analysis of convictions and HIV diagnosis, 1992-2010
Found uneven application of HIV criminalization laws in the state of Michigan, with black men and white women having a comparatively greater risk of conviction than white men or black women. White women had the highest conviction rate of any group analysed, suggesting they may face a particular burden under these laws. Many of the white women convicted were especially disadvantaged by issues such as poor mental health, substance abuse and homelessness.
Impacts of criminalization on the everyday lives of people living with HIV in Canada
Based on interviews with people living with HIV, participants reported that HIV prosecutions had created a heightened sense of fear, vulnerability and stigma – “consequences that can run contrary to the ostensible objective of discouraging behaviour likely to transmit HIV.”
The gender of lying: Feminist perspectives on the non-disclosure of HIV status
Arguing from a feminist perspective, this article contends that non-disclosure of HIV status to one’s sexual partner should not vitiate consent to sexual activity. Considers the gendered effect of lying, and how HIV status intersects with the power imbalance at the root of sexual assault. Discusses the tension between the need for women to protect both their medical information and their sexual integrity. Also considers the role of stigma in preventing disclosure.