Update: http://www.hivlawandpolicy.org

Website with more information on state to state laws involving criminalization of HIV

Yes. They MUST be changed.

1. HIV+ people should NOT be required by law to disclose ****. The entire responsibility should fall on the neg person since well, it's THEIR body? In a lot of cases, no actual transmission of the virus has happened and the positive person gets sent to jail anyway. Where's the logic?
2. Even if transmission happens, everyone knows the disease is not lethal anymore. Sure, it's tragic to be stuck with a chronic condition for life, but to actually send people to jail for it and label them as a sex offender? TRAGIC.
3. The only instance where it should be criminalized is during rape. Otherwise, nope. There's no excuse.

What are the current HIV laws?

Interesting, I still think their should be some form of repercussions for people who are purposefully intent on transmitting it to someone else which is rightfully criminalistic.

But a majority of people living with HIV are as you've stated above considered sex offenders when in fact, the stigma and lack of education surrounding the disease, has given people living with HIV the idea that it's best to not address it, even when undetectable.

.

Basically, a brief rundown.
Most states require you to disclose your HIV status, if not it's considered a criminal offense.

Most have that it's attempted murder to transmit HIV wether or not transmission occurred.

It also includes low risk acts including oral sex and such.

You'll have to register as a sex offender.

A majority of the laws are simply ignoring medical facts and were enacted back when HIV was a death sentence.

Some states have where if you spit on someone and you're HIV positive it's a criminal offense, which modern science has alleviated that myth from being fact.

It's not a disease though.

How many people have these laws put in jail? The laws are effective ways to deter the expansion of the infection. They should be relaxed but not eliminated.

HIV is not like flu, where the sick person cannot control infecting others. HIV carriers have the options to avoid giving the infection to others, if they fail to disclose their condition and to take the proper actions to avoid the infection then yes, you could say they are acting on bad faith and impossing a huge life change in the person they infected.

Also lets not pretend the virus does not have huge and fast genetic changes that lead to resistance, to a point where new drugs have to be develop, so the expansion of a super resistant strain can put HIV back into death sentence territory (and considering the grindr twinks begin for their daddies to do it BB, well...)

Yes it is, it falls under a chronic disease.

Well nobody under ARV's have transmitted the virus to any partner that was negative and that was even unprotected sex between a negative and positive individual. When the viral load is undetectable, it's highly unlikely to transmit.

And see the entire second paragraph is subjected amongst mystifying the disease itself. The progression of ARV's and the new medications brought onto the market, are to combine the cocktail of drugs you would've taken in the 90's and to relieve heavy symptoms those drugs can implement on an individual's body.

The ONLY reason HIV spreads is due to lack of education and the stigma surrounding the criminalization of the HIV.

Pretty sure they renamed most STDs to STIs (infections), since they do not show signs of regular diseases. HIV in particular is invisible and carriers do not suffer anything especially on medication.

HIV/AIDS isn't considered an std or an sti.

A majority of infections come from drug use (needle sharing), unprotected anal/vaginal sex, blood transfusions, mother giving birth to child, so on so forth. You can't generalize a disease like HIV.

Science >>>>>

Seriously? Do you have HIV or something? That's insane.

Mija you're only 4 years late. I thought it was common knowledge?

i applaud you man for the bravery!

You think people should be allowed to give others HIV without any repercussions? If someone knows they are HIV positive and spreads their HIV to another person they didn't inform, yes, they should be thrown in jail. If they don't want to be punished maybe they should try informing their partner of their condition. 34 states and 60 countries adopted these laws, and even more have other applicable laws.

You should disclose your status of you are HIV positive just to be safe . I think it is only right ..

But what I'm asking is for the people who are undetectable, healthy, and taking the medication properly. Those people are what these laws affect the most, a majority of people who spread it knowingly are never under the ARV's necessary to deflect transmission.

You can get thrown in jail for not disclosing it period, regardless if it was transmitted or even remotely possible to transmit (ex. condoms, etc)

What's the issue with disclosing it?