Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!usenet
From: gerri@watson.ibm.com (Gerri Oppedisano)
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
Subject: HIV testing and rape
Message-ID: <1991Jun10.150619.25217@cs.ucla.edu>
Date: 10 Jun 91 13:50:43 GMT
Sender: usenet@cs.ucla.edu (Mr. News Himself)
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Lines: 20
Approved: phil@wubios.wustl.edu
Note: non-commercial reproduction.
Nntp-Posting-Host: squid.cs.ucla.edu
Archive-Number: 3236

>> I am opposed to all mandatory testing for HIV.

Aren't other venereal diseases tested for after a rape? Are
you opposed to mandatory HIV testing because of the fact that
the tests are not reliable enough or because you think it's
somehow discriminatory?

I would think it makes sense to test for diseases after a rape. Even
if the HIV wasn't contracted from the raper, wouldn't it be beneficial
for the victim of the rape to know they're testing positive for HIV?

>> Testing a rape suspect for HIV tells you absolutely nothing, and it
>> is just a way of harassing a person.

Just how unreliable is HIV testing? My impression was that it wasn't so
totally unreliable as to not tell you anything.. particularly if the
test results are positive. How likely is it that a positive HIV test is
really false?

gerri@watson.ibm.com