Iowa Supreme Court hears appeal of man convicted of HIV notification law

  • metta

    Posts: 39134

    Mar 11, 2014 7:48 AM GMT
    Iowa Supreme Court hears appeal of man convicted of HIV notification law


    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/03/iowa-supreme-court-hears-appeal-of-man-convicted-of-hiv-notification-law/
  • goforwand

    Posts: 7

    Mar 12, 2014 6:07 PM GMT
    What did the court decide??
  • johndubuque

    Posts: 319

    Mar 13, 2014 3:03 AM GMT
    The court case came about because of a bad law that basically criminalized being HIV positive and having sex. The Iowa legislature is in the process of fixing the law. The Democratically controlled Senate voted 48-0 to fix the law, but the House is controlled by Republicans, so I don't know what they will do.
  • chadwick1985

    Posts: 391

    Mar 16, 2014 2:37 PM GMT
    Honestly I agree with the law. If you know you have HIV and don't tell the person you are going to have sex prior thus not giving them the option of risking getting HIV you should be prosecuted. No one HIV positive should keep that information from a sexual partner. If they do they need to be punished.

    People with HIV are humans and shouldn't be forced to register and have that info public however they have the responsibility of telling their sexual partners prior to engaging in a sex act and should have the decency of telling those they've had sex with before they tested positive that they've tested positive so their previous partners can go get tested.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 16, 2014 3:16 PM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle saidPoor guy. Although he's been freed from prison he'll be a registered sex offender and his future is screwed for life.


    good, screw this selfish dirt bag, only cares about himself and his own needs
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 16, 2014 4:17 PM GMT
    chadwick1985 saidHonestly I agree with the law. If you know you have HIV and don't tell the person you are going to have sex prior thus not giving them the option of risking getting HIV you should be prosecuted. No one HIV positive should keep that information from a sexual partner. If they do they need to be punished.

    People with HIV are humans and shouldn't be forced to register and have that info public however they have the responsibility of telling their sexual partners prior to engaging in a sex act and should have the decency of telling those they've had sex with before they tested positive that they've tested positive so their previous partners can go get tested.


    I agree 100%. We should not come across that situation where the Government is forced to register HIV carriers because people do not notify partners of their status.

    Should be the same with herpes too.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 16, 2014 4:40 PM GMT
    I think not disclosing is really bad, but not bad enough to be punished forever. If he had sex without a condom it would be worse.
  • Chainers

    Posts: 375

    Mar 16, 2014 5:17 PM GMT
    shawnathan saidI think not disclosing is really bad, but not bad enough to be punished forever. If he had sex without a condom it would be worse.


    I think if you want to stay negative, you should treat everyone as if they are positive.

    While it is good ethics to disclose any kind of STD that you have, when using a condom I don't need to ask if they have HIV because I know I am safe. Either way, if someone says they don't and want to have BB sex with you, it should be a red flag.

    Always wrap it before you tap it, that will keep you safe and HIV free.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 16, 2014 7:36 PM GMT
    The fundamental problem with this law is that is depends on a "he said - he said" scenario.

    Suppose a poz guy DOES tell his sex partner that he has HIV. But later that sex partner says he WASN'T told. What is the legal protection for the poz guy? Is he de facto presumed guilty?
  • chadwick1985

    Posts: 391

    Mar 17, 2014 1:23 PM GMT
    Chainers said
    shawnathan saidI think not disclosing is really bad, but not bad enough to be punished forever. If he had sex without a condom it would be worse.


    I think if you want to stay negative, you should treat everyone as if they are positive.

    While it is good ethics to disclose any kind of STD that you have, when using a condom I don't need to ask if they have HIV because I know I am safe. Either way, if someone says they don't and want to have BB sex with you, it should be a red flag.

    Always wrap it before you tap it, that will keep you safe and HIV free.



    Wrong!

    A condom is not a 100% safe way to have sex. I ask if they have any Std's no matter what because a condom is not perfect. Condoms break, have flaws wich make them worthless at times etc. Thinking "I don't care enough to ask if he has an std because we're gonna use a condom" is an arrogant and stupid mindset to have.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 17, 2014 2:27 PM GMT
    In the 1990s I was staying with a guy in Miami for a while, and we had sex daily. I topped him wearing a condom and also did oral on each other. He told me he was clean.

    But finally he confessed to me he had been lying - he actually had Hep C! You can imagine the shock that went through my system.

    And at the time I didn't know the difference between the 3 types of hepatitis: A, B & C, I thought they were all highly contagious, even without sexual activity. I now know that Type C is the more difficult to transmit to another person, but I didn't know it then. I was seriously scared.

    His excuse, a way of complimenting me and sorta reducing his guilt, was to tell me he was blinded by his desire for me, that I was so hot, taking him for rides on my motorcycle, dressed in my leathers. Yeah, right. Even 18 years ago I wasn't hot.

    I immediately moved out of his place, feeling totally betrayed, and worrying for my health. Later tests showed I was not infected, and remain Hep-free to this day. My understanding is that hepatitis can take a long time to appear, so for years I fretted, but at this distance I'm long out of risk. Yet my blood panel always tests for all types of hepatitis, plus HIV, STDs and other infectious diseases, all negative so far.

    Moral: men lie when they want to have sex. Men can have diseases that have no outward symptoms you can detect yourself. Condoms are very effective for HIV (I lived with an HIV+ partner for several years, and was the bottom, I'm still negative). But condoms do not protect against all STDs, because some diseases do not come solely from the urethra.

    Treat every new partner like he's HIV poz, and could also have some kind of STD. Regardless of what he says himself, he might not even be aware that he's got something. He could pass a lie detector test, honestly believing he's clean, but still be infectious. That's what having "safe sex" means.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 17, 2014 2:49 PM GMT
    A law requiring people to disclose their STD status will only keep people from getting tested thus making the HIV epidemic worse.

    Just always use a condom.
  • Chainers

    Posts: 375

    Mar 17, 2014 3:54 PM GMT
    chadwick1985 said
    Chainers said
    shawnathan saidI think not disclosing is really bad, but not bad enough to be punished forever. If he had sex without a condom it would be worse.


    I think if you want to stay negative, you should treat everyone as if they are positive.

    While it is good ethics to disclose any kind of STD that you have, when using a condom I don't need to ask if they have HIV because I know I am safe. Either way, if someone says they don't and want to have BB sex with you, it should be a red flag.

    Always wrap it before you tap it, that will keep you safe and HIV free.



    Wrong!

    A condom is not a 100% safe way to have sex. I ask if they have any Std's no matter what because a condom is not perfect. Condoms break, have flaws wich make them worthless at times etc. Thinking "I don't care enough to ask if he has an std because we're gonna use a condom" is an arrogant and stupid mindset to have.


    OMG you are so adorable! Tell me, what is it like to live in the 1990s?

    Here, in 2014, we have this thing called education. And with education, I know that people who infect others with HIV don't know themselves that they have...wait for it...HIV! DUN DUN DUN!!!!

    How does this happen, you might ask? Well, morons (like you) go around asking their partners if they have HIV, they say no, then you bareback because you don't believe in condoms, then get HIV and go around telling everyone you don't have HIV! Then you go around on forums and blame people who have HIV for being moronic, stupid, and less of human. Joy of joys!

    Let me know how that goes for you, dick.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 17, 2014 3:58 PM GMT
    UndercoverMan saidA law requiring people to disclose their STD status will only keep people from getting tested thus making the HIV epidemic worse.

    Just always use a condom.

    An important point. What you officially don't know can't hurt you (legally in this case). But it can infect and potentially kill someone else. So don't be that someone else.
  • chadwick1985

    Posts: 391

    Mar 17, 2014 9:58 PM GMT
    Chainers said
    chadwick1985 said
    Chainers said
    shawnathan saidI think not disclosing is really bad, but not bad enough to be punished forever. If he had sex without a condom it would be worse.


    I think if you want to stay negative, you should treat everyone as if they are positive.

    While it is good ethics to disclose any kind of STD that you have, when using a condom I don't need to ask if they have HIV because I know I am safe. Either way, if someone says they don't and want to have BB sex with you, it should be a red flag.

    Always wrap it before you tap it, that will keep you safe and HIV free.



    Wrong!

    A condom is not a 100% safe way to have sex. I ask if they have any Std's no matter what because a condom is not perfect. Condoms break, have flaws wich make them worthless at times etc. Thinking "I don't care enough to ask if he has an std because we're gonna use a condom" is an arrogant and stupid mindset to have.


    OMG you are so adorable! Tell me, what is it like to live in the 1990s?

    Here, in 2014, we have this thing called education. And with education, I know that people who infect others with HIV don't know themselves that they have...wait for it...HIV! DUN DUN DUN!!!!

    How does this happen, you might ask? Well, morons (like you) go around asking their partners if they have HIV, they say no, then you bareback because you don't believe in condoms, then get HIV and go around telling everyone you don't have HIV! Then you go around on forums and blame people who have HIV for being moronic, stupid, and less of human. Joy of joys!

    Let me know how that goes for you, dick.




    Well considering I don't bareback... ever it wouldn't happen that way. I was simply pointing you that your mindset of 'i don't care if they have HIV I always use a condom' is a stupid way to think. I was also pointing out condoms don't always work as they are man made thus not always being perfect.

    So take your panties out of the bunch they're in and think about it. Asking if they have HIV is just a way of being cautious.
  • chadwick1985

    Posts: 391

    Mar 17, 2014 10:03 PM GMT
    Chainers said
    chadwick1985 said
    Chainers said
    shawnathan saidI think not disclosing is really bad, but not bad enough to be punished forever. If he had sex without a condom it would be worse.


    I think if you want to stay negative, you should treat everyone as if they are positive.

    While it is good ethics to disclose any kind of STD that you have, when using a condom I don't need to ask if they have HIV because I know I am safe. Either way, if someone says they don't and want to have BB sex with you, it should be a red flag.

    Always wrap it before you tap it, that will keep you safe and HIV free.



    Wrong!

    A condom is not a 100% safe way to have sex. I ask if they have any Std's no matter what because a condom is not perfect. Condoms break, have flaws wich make them worthless at times etc. Thinking "I don't care enough to ask if he has an std because we're gonna use a condom" is an arrogant and stupid mindset to have.


    OMG you are so adorable! Tell me, what is it like to live in the 1990s?

    Here, in 2014, we have this thing called education. And with education, I know that people who infect others with HIV don't know themselves that they have...wait for it...HIV! DUN DUN DUN!!!!

    How does this happen, you might ask? Well, morons (like you) go around asking their partners if they have HIV, they say no, then you bareback because you don't believe in condoms, then get HIV and go around telling everyone you don't have HIV! Then you go around on forums and blame people who have HIV for being moronic, stupid, and less of human. Joy of joys!

    Let me know how that goes for you, dick.


    And how was I saying people who have HIV are moronic, stupid and less human? Read my fucking post, pull the shit off your eyes and understand it.

  • Chainers

    Posts: 375

    Mar 17, 2014 10:07 PM GMT
    chadwick1985 said
    Chainers said
    chadwick1985 said
    Chainers said
    shawnathan saidI think not disclosing is really bad, but not bad enough to be punished forever. If he had sex without a condom it would be worse.


    I think if you want to stay negative, you should treat everyone as if they are positive.

    While it is good ethics to disclose any kind of STD that you have, when using a condom I don't need to ask if they have HIV because I know I am safe. Either way, if someone says they don't and want to have BB sex with you, it should be a red flag.

    Always wrap it before you tap it, that will keep you safe and HIV free.



    Wrong!

    A condom is not a 100% safe way to have sex. I ask if they have any Std's no matter what because a condom is not perfect. Condoms break, have flaws wich make them worthless at times etc. Thinking "I don't care enough to ask if he has an std because we're gonna use a condom" is an arrogant and stupid mindset to have.


    OMG you are so adorable! Tell me, what is it like to live in the 1990s?

    Here, in 2014, we have this thing called education. And with education, I know that people who infect others with HIV don't know themselves that they have...wait for it...HIV! DUN DUN DUN!!!!

    How does this happen, you might ask? Well, morons (like you) go around asking their partners if they have HIV, they say no, then you bareback because you don't believe in condoms, then get HIV and go around telling everyone you don't have HIV! Then you go around on forums and blame people who have HIV for being moronic, stupid, and less of human. Joy of joys!

    Let me know how that goes for you, dick.




    Well considering I don't bareback... ever it wouldn't happen that way. I was simply pointing you that your mindset of 'i don't care if they have HIV I always use a condom' is a stupid way to think. I was also pointing out condoms don't always work as they are man made thus not always being perfect.

    So take your panties out of the bunch they're in and think about it. Asking if they have HIV is just a way of being cautious.


    To you it clearly isn't if you think that people should be jailed for not disclosing without being asked.
  • chadwick1985

    Posts: 391

    Mar 17, 2014 10:52 PM GMT
    @ Chainers - yes I believe if they know they have HIV and they don't disclose that to a sexual partner prior to having sex taking the choice completely out of the hands of the partner as to whether or not they want to have sex with an HIV+ person or not they should be jailed.

    It isn't their right to risk giving HIV to someone who is un informed. Now if they inform the person they have HIV and the other person still wants to have sex that's on them. They've made an informed decision on it and decided to have sex anyways.

    The HIV+ person who fails to disclose that fact to a sexual partner has now made the decision for the other person.
  • safety43_mma1...

    Posts: 4251

    Mar 17, 2014 10:59 PM GMT
    If he knew he was positive and was infecting people anyway he needs to locked up and not let out. If he didn't know then it is bull. Ok so since he knew he needs to be locked up period for not saying anything.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 20, 2014 1:56 PM GMT
    This was not sexual assault or statutory rape. This was two consentual people having sex.

    I am by no means saying anyone should have sex with someone they don't want to. However, it continues to amaze me the number of people who will have casual safer sex being unware of their partner's HIV status, but FREAK if they find out someone if positive.

    This law obsolves people from having to take responsibility for their own sexual health. YOU are responsible for YOUR OWN sexual health. YOU are responsible for getting educated on HIV/AIDS from a reliable resource (ie. a local HIV/AIDS organization) so that you can make an EDUCATED decision, not one based soley on emotional reaction, misconception and prejudice.

    WAAAAAAAY back in the olden days (a.k.a. the 80's & 90's), an expression went that you were sleeping with everyone that person has ever slept with. As such, if you're going to get involved in casual sex, you would assume everyone MAY have HIV and take the appropriate procautions.

    Should someone with HIV reveal their status? It's a complicated & emotionally-charged issue on both sides. Many people don't disclose for fear of rejection. Other's assume that if the other person doesn't ask, then they don't care (either they're educated & are aware of the safeguards, or are positive themselves) -- much in the same way many negative people erroneously assume that because someone doesn't look like they have HIV or hasn't said they have it, that they are negative too (it's 2014, not many people look like they HIV patients in the 1980's & 1990's, before treatment options were available)

    If someone you are interested in having consentual sex with is not volunteering information about their HIV/STD status, then it is your responsibility to ask. If it's that important for you to know, be accountable in procuring the information you claim is paramount. You can't say he was too cowardly to tell you he was positive when you were just as cowardly not to ask.

    If they say they're negative, then you have to ask yourself: How much do I trust this person's word at face value? How do I know that this person is actually aware of their correct HIV status?

    If you don't trust someone enough to give them a key to your place to use when you're not there and/or your pin number, you shouldn't be having unprotected sex with them.

    If they say they're positive, what do you know about HIV? Do you know how it differs from AIDS? Do you understand what "undetectable viral load" means?

    If you're not prepared to have casual sex with someone who may be lying about their status OR may not be aware of their status (as both situations can happen), then don't have casual sex with them.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 31, 2014 8:27 PM GMT
    Laws like this are a deterrent to getting tested, because if you don't know your HIV status you can't be charged.
    And the absolute BEST THING an HIV person can do (for himself and society) is not transmit the virus, and a zero viral load is damn close.

    Undetectable Viral Load Essentially Eliminates Transmission Risk in Straight Couples

    These studies included a combined 991 couples with 2,064 person-years of follow-up. The researchers found a transmission rate of 0.0 per 100 person years.
    http://www.aidsmeds.com/articles/heterosexual_transmission_1667_23387.shtml

    "..... the study intends to get infected individuals' viral loads down to levels where they cannot infect their sexual partners#8212;even in the absence of a condom. "The philosophy," Fauci says, "is if you test everybody, and treat everybody who has HIV, you could use treatment as prevention."
    http://www.realjock.com/article/1546/

    I was actually surprised in the "without a condom" part. The National Institute of Health doesn't go out on a limb. And this from fricken Anthony Fauci! As recently as last year they were saying with a condom. This tells me the preliminary finding we've been given so far are just a hint to how effective the therapy is. Also note in the straight study not all were down to zero viral load yet. Of those that were at zero/undetectable there were NO transmissions.

    A lot of you were born after "The Plague" started and "USE A CONDOM to prevent HIV" has been well absorbed into your thinking. I get that. I doubt the prejudices and knee jerk reactions will instantly go away.

    Could it be that the person who says he's Negative is actually more likely to pass on the HIV virus? Wouldn't it be ironic after all these years! The Negative guys are now the ostracized ones? Actually I've seen this already, a guy I know will have nothing to do with "so called" Negative men. Only long term undetectable and Positive.....that was 3 years ago. I was dumbfounded then, but that is actually a fairly wide held belief now. I now get hit up online from Negative bottoms regularly.

    "Rhoades’ attorney Christopher Clark argues Rhoades used a condom and has a low HIV level, which means transmission was nearly impossible."

    That he has as a low, not undetectable level, says to me he was new to the regimen in 2008. And he wore a condom. Essentially what Dr. Fauci prescribes, for which he got a 25 year sentence and is a lifetime sex offender.

    Almost all HIV laws need to be looked at. The punishment no longer fitting the crime. But the whole "HIV+ = Go To JAIL" shit is an anachronism already.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 31, 2014 8:41 PM GMT
    safety43_mma170 saidIf he knew he was positive and was infecting people anyway he needs to locked up and not let out. If he didn't know then it is bull. Ok so since he knew he needs to be locked up period for not saying anything.



    He didn't infect him! Between a low Viral count and a condom, statistically, he was less likely to pass on the HIV virus than you...the general Gay population.

    These laws were written in the 1990s when HIV+ was a death sentence. The idea of a Positive man going about infecting people out of revenge seemed a possibility. Or just fear mongering I think.
    That his sentence was reduced from 25 years to 18 months isn't enough. His record should be expunged.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 17, 2014 9:19 PM GMT
    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/05/iowa-legislature-updates-hiv-transmission-law-with-lesser-penalties/

    Iowa Legislature updates HIV transmission law with ‘lesser penalties’


    Better but I still see flaws in it.