« Shocking: Tax Cuts Go to the Wealthy | Blog Index | Amnesty Offers New Evidence on Rendition »

Advertisement

recent entries Gore's Speech: A Reminder of What's Missing Hezbollah Operating From Venezuela? Obama's Speech Tonight: What to Expect? Republican Solution to Health Care Crisis: Head, Meet Sand God Understands Irony, Part 2 John McCain Does Not Understand Cause and Effect Dep't of Rapid Response: 1968 Edition Mitt Romney Would Be Karl Rove's Handpicked VP Thursday Cat Blogging

Privacy Issues Arise in HIV Case

The California Supreme Court is currently hearing an interesting case with potentially far-reaching implications: A woman identified only as "Bridget B." is suing her ex-husband for infecting her with HIV, claiming that she had the right to know that she was at risk of exposure to the disease. The case hinges on the fact that Bridget's ex-husband waited over a year into their marriage to tell her he had previously engaged in sexual relations with men—an action considered "high risk behavior."

The defense claims that the ex-husband in question, "John B.", should be absolved of any responsibility because, while he may have known about his own sexual past, he wasn’t aware that he was HIV-positive. A ruling on the case could set a precedent for what sexual partners do and don't have to disclose to each other—the defense argues that should it lose the case, all Californians could potentially be forced to "divulge all past sexual conduct that posed any remote possibility of a contagious disease." The court will hand down a decision within 90 days.

Posted by on 04/05/06 at 11:34 AM | E-mail | Print | Digg this | de.licio.us