1AMBDA
Q37&
H^U-
April 1987
Volume 13, Number 4
Carolitia Gay And Ivesbiaii_Agsog^tioii_Nev^^cttCT
Mandatory HIV/AIDS Testing Rejected
O
Due to the implementation late last year
of a mandatory human immunodeficiency virus
(HIV) antibody testing for all foreign
service employees and their dependents by
the U. S State Dept.—and similar plans
proposed by the Job Corps—the National Gay
and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) targeted
these measures as a violation of privacy
and individual rights.
Jeff Levi, Executive Director of NGLTF
said, "We believe that the decision to take
the antibody test should be an individual
one and not one that is coerced by the
government. Given the tremendous psycho
logical, legal, social, and economic impact
a positive test result can have on a
individual’s life, the government has no
business interposing itself into this
difficult decision."
«lso, the Lambda Legal Defense &
Education Fund,in conjunction with the
American Federation of Government
Employees, filed suit in federal court to
protest the new policy.
On other fronts, proposals were
surfacing at the Federal Centers for
Disease Contol (CDC) in Atlanta to
recommend that, as part of an AIDS
prevention program, there be mandatory HIV
antibody testing for all hospital
admissions and those seeking marriage
licenses. These proposals were soundly
»^ejected at a February 24-25 consensus
conference. The stated purpose of the
testing program was to identify those w c
had been infected with HIV so they could be
counseled about risk reduction.
NGLTF’s position was to oppose mand
atory, involuntary testing. NGLTF noted
that "the experience of the gay community
demonstrates that education and counseling,
iXql testing, are critical to changing
behavior. Not everyone needs or desires to
know his/her antibody status."
NGLTF also noted that the CDC’s program
was presented without regard to the
psychosocial ramifications of testing.
There is no conclusive evidence that
knowledge of antibody status is a necessary
precondition for changing behavior. Self-
identified low-risk individuals who test
seropositive would experience severe
psychological trauma and would require
extensive long-term counseling.
Summing up their position, NGLTF said,
"Testing will give them (CDC) something
countable that appears to be containing the
problem, when they have yet to undertake a
broad-based prevention education
program...the testing approach also
reinforces denial among a large segment of
the population by concentrating attention
on those who test positive, leading those
who test negative to believe that they are
not at risk." NGLTF also denied that the
gay community, which has been coping with
AIDS longer than any other community, was
placing civil liberties above public
(continued on cage 6)
Anti-Sodomy Laws Targeted for Repeal
After the Supreme Court’s landmark
l?c«wers V. Hardwick case last fall, civil
liberties and lesbian and gay rights groups
l^egan lobbying state legislatures to repeal
replace outdated anti—sodomy laws. The
*^6cision was seen by many as a time to
‘Change the focus of civil rights efforts
®way from the courts and into the
legislature.
Twenty-f ive states and the District of
^elurnbia now have laws on the books which
(at least) anal and oral sex a crime
^er consenting adults acting in private.
the most part, these laws are seldom
enforced, and thus they remain on the books
little more than monuments to
^C'^nophobia.
In some states, however, these laws are
now under attack, with varying degrees of
success. The right-wing’s increasing
activism on moral issues and increased
public concern about the spread of AIDS
through sexual contact have all but halted
the battle in states such as our own North
Carolina, where repeal of the "Crimes
Against Nature" statutes came close to
f'eality years ago, until this fact was
noticed by some conservatives.
The laws, while not often used as a way
to punish lesbians and gay men who have
private consensual sex, do serve some
right-wing purposes. On the UNC campus,
(continued on oage 7)
li
1/
1 *■