It's a story that dates back to the middle of the month in the Lawrence [KS] Journal-World: "Gay rights advocate has quarantine concerns over proposed changes in infectious disease law."
The dispute is over House Bill 2183, which clarifies procedures on testing a patient for communicable diseases when a health care worker has been exposed to that patient's blood or bodily fluids.
Witt said he supported efforts to protect emergency personnel, but said one of the changes in the bill would remove a current provision that exempts those with HIV or AIDS from possible quarantine.
KDHE officials said they want to remove that exemption because HIV and AIDS are infectious.We've seen talk of quarantine before, earlier in the epidemic, when less was known about HIV/AIDS and the death rate was much higher. Are there health concerns? Absolutely. But HIV/AIDS is not Polio. It's not transmitted through casual contact, nor is it airborne. Are there risks to health care workers? Definitely. But unless you're going to quarantine people and provide no health care whatsoever, health care workers will continue to face those same risks, quarantine or no quarantine.
While many of the headlines I've seen are overblown, it concerns me that the idea of quarantining people living with HIV/AIDS has reappeared. I can't help but feel that the people behind this move still think of HIV/AIDS as a gay issue.
Here is the page from the Kansas Legislature that tracks HB 2183.
No comments:
Post a Comment