# California drastically lowers penalty for knowingly exposing partners to HIV **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 8, 2017, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297 "2017-10-08T15:25:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2017, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/1 "2017-10-08T15:25:46Z")
[Story](http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/07/health/california-hiv-bill-signed/index.html) > [@](#): > > The law previously punished people who knowingly exposed or infected others with HIV by up to eight years in prison. This new legislation will lower jail time to a maximum of six months. > The new law also reduces the penalty for knowingly donating HIV-infected blood from a felony to a misdemeanor. The idea is to destigmatize HIV. I don’t want to judge this before I hear both sides but I confess my first impression is unfavorable. I’m quite willing to be convinced otherwise though. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2017, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/2 "2017-10-08T15:39:13Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > [Story](http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/07/health/california-hiv-bill-signed/index.html) > > The idea is to destigmatize HIV. I don’t want to judge this before I hear both sides but I confess my first impression is unfavorable. I’m quite willing to be convinced otherwise though. From your link. > [@](#): > > Bill sponsors Sen. Scott Wiener and Assemblyman Todd Gloria, both Democrats, argued California law was outdated and stigmatized people living with HIV, especially given recent advancements in medicine. **Evidence has shown that a person with HIV who undergoes regular treatment has a negligible chance of spreading the infection to others through sexual contact.** > “The most effective way to reduce HIV infections is to destigmatize HIV,” Wiener told CNN. **“To make people comfortable talking about their infection, get tested, get into treatment.”** > Since the previous law did not require a risk of infection, meaning people on HIV medication could still be charged with a felony, Wiener told CNN it was “extreme and discriminatory.” IF what I bolded is true, it makes sense. IF. Opposition > [@](#): > > Many Republicans staunchly opposed SB 239, saying it could lead to an increase in HIV infections. > Sen. Jeff Stone voted against the bill and strongly expressed his disapproval in September when the Senate voted on it. > Stone, who is also a pharmacist, took aim at Wiener and Gloria’s argument that modern medicine can lower the spread of HIV. The senator said **three out of four people who are on prescription medication in the United States do not comply with their doctor’s orders on how to take it.** That’s overall. What are the stats on HIV-positive patients? ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2017, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/3 "2017-10-08T15:43:03Z")
I don’t live in California. I would like to hear the reasoning behind the change. My general opinion is that intentionally exposing someone to HIV is assault or fraud but I am not a lawyer either. My more libertarian side says that you are responsible for who you have sex with. Demand a condom if you don’t know them that well or, better yet, don’t sleep with strangers. They could have a lot more than HIV and why are you sleeping with random people in the first place? That said, I don’t think there is a lot of utility in locking people with HIV up for years just because they found a new hookup. The responsibility should be equally shared between those that agreed to have sex and there is no benefit to sending the cost and responsibility to the state. What I don’t buy is the destigmatize HIV argument. It isn’t a death sentence now but it is still a very serious and extremely expensive disease that has to be contained throughout life just because of poor choices. It is one of the easiest diseases not to get as long as you follow some simple guidelines. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2017, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/4 "2017-10-08T15:55:36Z")
Under this law, HIV is treated like any other disease. Currently, the peneties for HIV are much harsher. ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2017, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/5 "2017-10-08T16:35:53Z")
> [@hajario](#): > > Under this law, HIV is treated like any other disease. Currently, the peneties for HIV are much harsher. Exactly. The current law is more punitive for people with HIV than for syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, HCV. **Maybe** that made sense when there was no effective treatment for HIV and infections were virtual death sentences. But now that treatments have made most folks on treatment non-infectious and able to expect long life and health, it seems a bit excessive. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2017, 9:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/6 "2017-10-09T09:00:37Z")
> [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](#): > > Exactly. The current law is more punitive for people with HIV than for syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, HCV. **Maybe** that made sense when there was no effective treatment for HIV and infections were virtual death sentences. But now that treatments have made most folks on treatment non-infectious and able to expect long life and health, it seems a bit excessive. The cost of lifelong HIV treatment is considerably higher than treatment for syphilis or gonorrhea. ---
**Author:** ![AI\_Proofreader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@AI\_Proofreader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AI_Proofreader)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2017, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/7 "2017-10-09T11:40:52Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > The cost of lifelong HIV treatment is considerably higher than treatment for syphilis or gonorrhea. Agreed… even if they had gotten the expected symptoms and effect on life expectancy down to 0, which they haven’t, we’re still talking about at least tens of thousands of dollars in prescription and treatments costs for the victim, \*with health insurance, over their lifetime. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2017, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/8 "2017-10-09T12:30:44Z")
> [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](#): > > Exactly. The current law is more punitive for people with HIV than for syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, HCV. **Maybe** that made sense when there was no effective treatment for HIV and infections were virtual death sentences. But now that treatments have made most folks on treatment non-infectious and able to expect long life and health, it seems a bit excessive. Perhaps the law should have been amended to remove the words “exposed to” HIV (lowering penalties for lack of disclosure by someone being adequately treated for the infection). The other listed diseases, while unpleasant and potentially leading to serious complications, are (for the most part) not incurable. That cannot be said for HIV. Lying about HIV status when donating blood should in my opinion remain a felony. ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2017, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/9 "2017-10-09T12:48:41Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Perhaps the law should have been amended to remove the words “exposed to” HIV (lowering penalties for lack of disclosure by someone being adequately treated for the infection). Not unreasonable, IMHO. Not disclosing and passing the infection could be a felony, while not disclosing and not passing the infection, a misdemeanor. Though the latter is fraught with implications about being prosecuted for lying to your date. Of course, proving who gave who the infection will always be a challenge. Even with modern viral genotyping. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2017, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/10 "2017-10-09T12:53:06Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Lying about HIV status when donating blood should in my opinion remain a felony. I agree with this. I can understand wanting to have sex even though one is HIV positive, but donating blood? I see no upside for anyone in that situation, apart from cookies afterwards. People who have sex without disclosing their HIV status _should_ be stigmatized. It’s a bad thing to do. > [@running coach](#): > > What are the stats on HIV-positive patients? I can’t find much, and it isn’t very current. > [@](#): > > Compliance was assessed at 6 and 12 months: patients taking ≥ 80% of antiretroviral therapy were considered compliant. Overall, 63% of patients were compliant with antiretroviral therapy. [Cite](http://lib.education.vnu.edu.vn/bitstream/DHGD/7330/1/EducationAndHighest54.pdf). Something a little more current but not much less depressing - > [@](#): > > Nonadherence to ART, likewise, is common in all groups of treated individuals. The average rate of adherence varies by the method used to assess it and the group studied, but appears to be approximately 70%. For example, in a prospective study, 140 individuals in a public hospital HIV clinic were followed for 1 year after initiation of ART. The investigators assessed adherence using 3 methods: a computer chip embedded in a specially designed pill-bottle cap to record the time and duration of each bottle opening (microelectronic monitoring system [MEMS], or MEMS caps), pill count, and self-report.(7) They calculated a composite adherence rate including all 3 measures that demonstrated a mean adherence rate of 71%. Only 6% of the patients took \>=95% of their medications, the optimal level for durable virologic and clinical success. [Cite](http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=kb-03-02-09). Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Kimera757](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kimera757/32/3765_2.png) [@Kimera757](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimera757)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2017, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/11 "2017-10-09T21:51:47Z")
The Ontario government is considering reducing penalties as well. > [@](#): > > It was around Christmas in 2008 when Chad Clarke said he got a phone call from a former partner screaming at him that he had given her HIV. And that’s why I oppose reducing the penalties. Is wearing a condom so difficult? Link: [Ontario a ‘world leader’ in unjustly prosecuting people living with HIV, advocates say](https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/09/11/ontario-a-world-leader-in-unjustly-prosecuting-people-living-with-hiv-advocates-say.html) ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2017, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/12 "2017-10-18T03:00:14Z")
> [@hajario](#): > > Under this law, HIV is treated like any other disease. Currently, the peneties for HIV are much harsher. That’s the explanation that made the most sense to me. I was initiallly quite miffed when I heard about this, thought it was PC BS, but it’s actually sensible given California’s policy on spreading other diseases. Now whether California’s policy on spreading disease makes sense is another question. Doesn’t this mean that under California law it’s a misdimeanor to unleash a bio weapon? I know the feds would come down on you hard for that, but it just seems odd that intentionally giving someone ANY disease would get a slap on the wrist. ---
**Author:** ![AI\_Proofreader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8dc957/32.png) [@AI\_Proofreader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AI_Proofreader)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2017, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/california-drastically-lowers-penalty-for-knowingly-exposing-partners-to-hiv/798297/13 "2017-10-18T05:14:39Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I agree with this. I can understand wanting to have sex even though one is HIV positive, but donating blood? I see no upside for anyone in that situation, apart from cookies afterwards. A lot of blood donations are not actually donated; the person giving their blood is compensated for their time. This is particularly true of plasma donations, which can take several hours between the wait time and the 1-2 hours it takes to extract whole blood, separate the plasma out in a centrifuge, and then return the red blood cells to the donor. Payment isn’t much, around $20-$50 per visit done a maximum of two times a week. Is it sufficient motive to knowingly donate blood when HIV positive? Of course not. But people who do this are often in abject poverty and/or on the streets and may not be in the right frame of mind to begin with. It’s not hard to imagine the occasional donor who doesn’t see the warnings about HIV being transmissible in a blood donation, or is under the mistaken impression that the plasma extraction machine would screen it out.