Y'all have me scared with all this HIV talk, because

[thanos]

[Quinn]

LMAO...

[AllanahStarrNYC]

Thank you Ecstatic-

You siad it 1,000,000 times than I ever could have.

Kiss*

[Ecstatic]

You're most welcome, Allanah. I thought you had said it very clearly--and with good humor--but another voice doesn't hurt.

[Big Booty Shemale Lover]

[quote="Ecstatic"]

We are talking about the supposed "duty to warn" others of someone's HIV-positive status. The legal and ethical arguments are quite extensive--just google "duty to warn HIV status" for samples. For instance, concerning employers and co-workers, The Body: The Complete HIV/AIDS Resource (http://www.thebody.com/pos_work/issues.html) offers this:

Treat all human blood as if it is infectious. You are responsible for protecting yourself from exposure to bloodborne pathogens in handling blood spills or workplace accidents. Your employer is under no obligation to inform you when one of your co-workers has HIV disease. Your employer is obligated to maintain confidentiality of every employee's medical information. Your protection from exposure is your own behavior, including using universal precautions in first aid. Universal precautions in first aid include always using a barrier between yourself and human blood, and treating all blood as if it is infectious.

It is in extremely poor taste to compare disclosure and confidentiality codes of conduct in the workplace, to alerting a friend that they may be about to endager their lives by sleeping with an HIV infected escort.
Codes of Conduct in the workplace are set forth to provide all employees with equal and fair treatment without regards to race, sex, religion, or sexual orientation. Most employers today advertise themselves wholly with 'EOE', which means they practice equal opportunities for all persons employed. Confidentiality of medical information by the employer, is to ensure this equal and fair treatment, and eliminate the possible ALIENATION that an employee may experience due to their medical information being disclosed. This is why we have disclosure acts, because in the workplace, work production can continue normally without a persons medical history being disclosed. As long as an employee can perform the duties assigned by her/him, with or without limited assistance, their medical state has little to no relevance because it isn't needed to be known in order to continue production. Confidentialty seizes the possibility of unneeded occurences which can possibly disrupt work and production.

Workplace Codes of Conduct to ensure all people get treated fairly, and telling a friend to think twice about drinking the Jim Jones poisoned Kool-Aid? Not even remotely the similar.

Another example, from the GLAD website regarding Connecticut state laws (http://www.glad.org/rights/connecticut_hiv.shtml):
Connecticut law contains a broad prohibition against the disclosure by any person, without a release, of “confidential HIV-related information.” CGSA §19a-583 (a).
.................................
Many courts have found that a person has a constitutional privacy right to the nondisclosure of HIV status. Courts have based this right on the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution which creates a privacy interest in avoiding disclosure of certain types of personal information.

Even--or especially--physicians with factual medical knowledge at their fingertips are constrained by law; again, to cite Connecticut law:
Connecticut law permits both public health officers and physicians, under certain circumstances, to inform or warn partners that they may have been exposed to HIV. CGSA §19a-584. The term “partner” means an “identified spouse or sex partner of the protected individual or a person identified as having shared hypodermic needles or syringes with the protected individual.” §19a-581 (10). The requirements for such a disclosure by a public health officer are that:
In making such a warning, the physician or public health official shall not disclose the identity of the HIV-infected individual and, where practicable, shall make such disclosure in person.

Another poor example. Due to the fact really that physicians are licensed practitioners who took an oath foregoing into the actual practice. Their Code of Ethics is to protect themselves, just as much, if not, more than their actual patients. Their overall demeanor is to provide similar outcome and circumstance as a business, no disclosure whatsoever of a persons medical information, even sometimes without the patients CONSENT.
Public Health Officials have certain clauses which is meant to protect the official, and the AMA, most public health organizations, businesses and pharmaceutial companies. Confidentiality of medical information by physicians and medical health practitioners eliminates or at least minimizes the possibility of lawsuits by patients who may undergo public exposure, possible hate crimes, and other possible punitive damage.


I mean, this is all in common sense. A physician must adhere and fulfill a certain role if she/he expects to remain a physican for a duration of any substantial tenure.
The last time I checked, I haven't taken such oaths. I am allowed to tell a friend that there are landmines in the area where he or she is about to walk.

As much as we may want to know the HIV and AIDS status of any potential sexual partner, Allanah is right legally, ethically and morally: our responsibility is to protect ourselves, not to disseminate information about others, especially when that information is hearsay.

At BEST, Allanah is partially right, on certain legal levels. Business Law, but only on legal businesses, because many business laws adhere to relations between employer and employee, which was meant to be foundationally two distince entities. Escorting isn't even legal in most places, where sometimes the employer is the employee of himself or herself. In essence, the attempt to apply business laws to an illegal practice isn't even applicable. You'd get laughed out of court.

So Allanah is partially right on a legal level, but ethically right? Your opinion really. And morally right? I won't even comment.

Ecstatic you are failing to realize the foundations of moral obligations and legal obligations. You are thinking on a small scale my friend. You're intertwining morality and legalities; unjustly, because, what may be illegal isn't necessarily immoral, and vice versa.
Its illegal in my state to drive a car without a seatbelt, but that doesn't mean driving without a seatbelt is immoral.
Its not illegal to cheat on your wife, but yet, its IMMORAL.
Morals are deeper than laws, laws are arbitrary and made by man. Morals are right, and not because man said so, but because it constitutes the good in all things.

When you abandon what you know is morally right, and trade it in for legal permissions, you cater to the destruction of humanity.

[Ecstatic]

[AllanahStarrNYC]

Thank you for enforcing YOUR code of ethics and moral beliefs on ALL of us and tell us what we should do.

I almost thought I was at a neo-christian republican rally for a minute.
See lover, you nailed the problem eith the right wing propoganda right on the head- not to get off topic. Being concerened with what everyonedoes in everyone elses bed, instea dof being concerend with that you do in your own.

How are we supposed to know which escorts are HIV positive? How are we to know who is having sex with who? You can totally hire an escort and just share their company and nothign sexual might happen.
What then you are reffering to, is prostitution. Is that morally wrong as well?

And to correct what you said about escorting- escorting is completley legal in evert state in the US. You just need a liscene to escort in some of them.
Legally speaking- solicitation and escorting are two different things.
I can sell you my time love, not my body.


All of your arguments could have made some sense before- but now they are left completley unfounded. I am glad Esctatic whipped your butt on this one.

[Spanky]

I am glad Esctatic whipped your butt on this one.

LMAO

Is this an attempt at dry humor Allanah?

Reality check: Ecstatic didn't whip anyone's butt.

Allanah, I don't think that you made one single ounce of sense in this whole thread. Of course this is just my own humbe opinion.

[AllanahStarrNYC]

I thank you for your humble opinion.

[Spanky]

I would be willing to bet that Allanah maintains such an irrational and immoral opinion on this topic because she personally knows transexual girls that are HIV+ and continue to escort.

By the way, this is speculation. I am not making any accusations