Gay Ont. man loses blood donation negligence suit

[slipnslide]

Gay Ont. man loses blood donation negligence suit (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/09/09/ontario-court-blood-kyle-freemen-suit-negligent.html)

[slipnslide]

and another article (http://www.xtra.ca/public/National/UPDATE_Gay_student_groups_resign_from_blood_group_ citing_Freeman_case-9148.aspx)

[littlerayofsunshine]

By law he should of lost, he lied on a form that requested truthful information on a voluntary procedure and process.

Is the rule that makes it so gay/bi men shouldn't donate ethical this day.. No.....

No matter what sexual orientation or whatnot, a blood donor system, should always test for AIDS/HIV. regardless. Even donor systems can be fraudulent, and send off infected blood/or other organ systems just for profit or for reputation. Testing, should happen at each level before getting to a patient. Of course in case of emergency, that can't always apply and the risks should be stated in consent forms.

[slipnslide]

By law he should of lost, he lied on a form that requested truthful information on a voluntary procedure and process.

I agree - but I wonder how many are also lying every day.

[littlerayofsunshine]

I agree - but I wonder how many are also lying every day.

I am sure no more than straight people. People who have had more than (if i am not mistaken) 5 sexual partners are a higher risk and can be turned away from donations. As can IV drug users ( could have been years and years in the past, but won't matter) and those with medical conditions. There's a reason for them.. To limit unhealthy donations.

Also, People with bleeding disorders can't donate. People who are way obese will be turned away.

It should be regulated in some ways.. Receiving a blood or organ donation is something that can never be undone once it is.

I think outside of his issues, it only points a light at more thorough testing and guidelines to protect a receiver of such. A lot of the time a patient has no choice but to receive what is given to them, except in those that have reasons that prevent them from receiving blood or tissue donations, not to mention that those that are conscious and give consent.

[tenni]

I think that this is a bit complicated but it seems that it is not a Charter issue? If all people were to be asked some form of questioning that was not gender based, it might be better. Someone posted the following as a possible guidelines on a questionnaire.

"male-male sex is not the only risk for HIV infection and ALL HIV infections are for life. The questionnaire should ask: have you ever had unprotected sex? if yes, have you had an HIV test that was negative at least 3 months after the last time you had unprotected sex? if yes then okay, if no, then get tested for HIV and come back."

Perhaps the questions should be asked of both men and women regardless of their sexuality. I don't know if three months is a guarantee to state that you would not be HIV +? Unless a guy has been HIV tested, I think that it is unwise though for a guy to donate blood if he is sexually active and not in a monogamous relationship regardless with a man or a woman. I'm not even sure about using protection as a guarantee but it improves the odds a lot. Getting HIV from a woman is not impossible (but not common).

I agree that any donated blood should be tested for HIV before given to a patient as well as Hep C etc. It must be cost that makes that rare or is it done?

I suspect that this may be challenged again from a slightly different angle but maybe not.

[slipnslide]

I'll see if I can find the details later but I think it's Italy that has moved to a risk-assessment procedure - what exactly that means, I can't remember.

[bisexual Bill]

The ban on how bisexual and gay men can't give blood is discriminatory and wrong.

Nobody bats an eye if you are a bisexual or lesbian woman or a straight man or woman and want to donate blood.

You can be heterosexual highly promiscuous and into unsafe sex. Then walk into any blood donation place and donate blood or plasma.

Here's a list of people who can't donate and temporary bans on donating blood.
http://www.thebody.com/content/art13321.html

Permanent Restrictions (Please do not give blood if you:)

* Have used intravenous drugs (illegal IV drugs), even once

* Are a man who has had sex with another man since 1977, even once

* Are a hemophiliac

* Have ever had a positive antibody test for HIV (AIDS Virus)

* Are a man or woman who has had sex for money or drugs any time since 1977

* Have had hepatitis any time after your eleventh birthday

* Have had cancer (except localized skin cancer)

* Have multiple sclerosis

* Have had myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass surgery

* Have had a stroke

* Have had babesiosis or Chagas disease

* Have taken Tegison for psoriasis

* Have Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease (CJD) and/or an immediate member of your family has CJD.


The blood gets tested for HIV, Hepatitis, and other pathogens and straight people are just as likely as gay and bisexual men to have HIV or Hep A, B, and/or C.

I know some gay men who do lie about being gay just so they can donate blood.

[slipnslide]

fuck that guy.

haha!

[mikey3000]

fuck that guy. he's endangering people by lying and really, why lie about it.

Got a better way to test the law? I do think the law is discriminatory, plain and simple. Do they screen for intravenius drug users? How about men who pay for sex? It every person who ever had a homosexual experience were to stop donating blood, there would be a lot more deaths in society.

Now, way before I started exploring my bi side, I had a friend who's husband became critically ill and needed a blood transfusion to save his life. His wife and child were frantic. Problem was that he had very rare blood and there was none on supply. But guess what? I have the same blood type, AB-. So I offered up my blood and he was saved. I felt pretty good to be able to save his life and a family, especially one I know personally. For years after I donated regularly. But once I became active in my bi side, I stopped. Now I still get calls from the Canadian Blood Services asking me to donate because of the need, but I can't, so I don't. Never gave them a reason. Now I have one. I will tell them that, because of their discriminatory practices, I will no longer donate. Even though I know I'm clean, both of my partners are clean and none of us sleep around, someone is going to die because I can't and won't donate my blood anymore. That saddens me deeply.

[DuckiesDarling]

By law he should of lost, he lied on a form that requested truthful information on a voluntary procedure and process.

Is the rule that makes it so gay/bi men shouldn't donate ethical this day.. No.....

No matter what sexual orientation or whatnot, a blood donor system, should always test for AIDS/HIV. regardless. Even donor systems can be fraudulent, and send off infected blood/or other organ systems just for profit or for reputation. Testing, should happen at each level before getting to a patient. Of course in case of emergency, that can't always apply and the risks should be stated in consent forms.

I agree totally. I did a lot of volunteer work for the Red Cross, taught CPR, assisted with blood donations. I was aware of a lot of the questions but never did anything that put me in a negative risk. Til I had unprotected sex during my trip to New Zealand (duh kinda why I went sheesh) and was denied the ability to donate no matter the fact we both were clean and have always been clean. I was very upset at them for a long time, told them to take me off the disaster relief team and the list of CPR teachers available. Wouldn't have been quite so annoyed if I hadn't of been there to donate in response to a card I recieved in mail saying my blood type was desperately needed. All blood is tested regardless of the information on the questionnaire and should be tested at each stage down the line as a safeguard. But as you pointed out in an emergency all they care about is type and cross matches not whether or not the blood has been tested more than once.

[slipnslide]

If you consider these stats (http://www.avert.org/usa-transmission-gender.htm) from AVERT you see that "Men are more affected by HIV and AIDS in the United States than women. In 2008 males accounted for 3 out of 4 AIDS diagnoses in the U.S.

The HIV transmission route leading to the most AIDS diagnosis in 2008 was male-to-male sexual contact, followed by injection drug use and heterosexual contact."

This means that by excluding gay and bi men you've eliminated the largest source that could result in accidental transmission of HIV by blood transfusion. So yes it happens in heterosexuals, but that's listed as the lowest possibility. Until a better system is adopted for screening this may be the best method we have of protecting the blood supply from any blood where a new infection goes undetected.