Let's bring someone with HIV into the pig pile

submitted by jet199 from (reddit.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Alienhunter 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

It comes pretty close to breaking Saidit rules but I'd say you have a moral obligation to stop someone who is spreading a fatal disease to people without their consent. If you choose to interpret that as "telling everyone they are HIV positive" that interpretation does not break the rules of this website.

[–]NastyWetSmear 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I'm not sure what you mean. You mean the Mod should lock the thread and end all argument?

[–]Alienhunter 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Good. That's the general reaction I was hoping for. Plausible deniability.

What I'm saying is that someone who is HIV positive has a duty to let people know before they engage in activity that might spread it. Legality be damned. It is a moral duty. If they don't, other people who know have the duty to inform people of such, again legality be damned. And in extreme situations I'd say they have a moral obligation to stop the person from spreading the disease, by any means necessary, which should hopefully be simply telling people they have the disease.

[–]NastyWetSmear 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Oh, so we're just arguing the mortality of the situation? I was confused because my post was about the Mod of the thread just locking it and stepping in with their answer as though being the Mod and being able to lock the thread makes their answer the only correct one.

If you're asking about my thoughts on the situation, I should preface by saying that some time during the polly mess of fruit names I started to lose track of who was who and gave up with an eye roll and a self-summary of: A new person they want to fuck has HIV and they don't know if they should tell their wife's many boyfriends... That might be not totally accurate and more than a little facetious, so if I miss any important details, that's my fault.

Otherwise, yes, I agree with you. If you have a sexual partner and, for some reason, there's a risk of exposing that person to an STI of any kind, you should let them know. In the case of one that can be permanent and life threatening, I'd say you're all the more obliged. The idea that it's okay because this person takes medication to keep it under control and this reduces the chances of passing it on doesn't seem like a strong argument - If the chances aren't 0 and it relies on their commitment to a daily routine, you really are at the mercy of human error.

I know there's an argument being made that you have a greater chance of catching HIV from someone who has had sex since they were last tested than from someone on the medication, but I think that's wishful thinking. I know the person on HIV medication has HIV, while the person who had a test recently didn't at the time of the test. Asking if they've had unprotected sex since the test and asking if the person with HIV is totally sure they are up on their medication and have a 0% chance to pass the disease on seems to be two sides of the same coin - I can only trust in their honesty and commitment to their own health and safety... The difference being, if the person with HIV is lying or lazy, I'm certain to be at risk, while if the person who has had a test is lying, there's only a chance they've been exposed in the mean time.

I'd agree, they should be cautious and honest.

[–]Alienhunter 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Mods suck in general. Reddit mods are something else. But this is just standard for that site.

[–]NastyWetSmear 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Seconded.