Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site bbncca.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!bbncca!rrizzo From: rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) Newsgroups: net.motss,net.med,net.kids,net.singles Subject: Re: Politics of AIDS, of Foster Care Message-ID: <1554@bbncca.ARPA> Date: Wed, 11-Sep-85 17:13:50 EDT Article-I.D.: bbncca.1554 Posted: Wed Sep 11 17:13:50 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 12-Sep-85 12:29:31 EDT References: <858@burl.UUCP> Organization: Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, Ma. Lines: 29 Xref: watmath net.motss:2039 net.med:2348 net.kids:1947 net.singles:9198 What's wrong with insurance companies using HTLV-III bloodtests to assess applicant risk for life insurance? The danger is that test results will be used to deny coverage, & not just raise premiums: Rep. Ted Weiss (D-NY), chair of the subcommittee that oversees Health & Human Services, expressed this fear, but my posting did not mention it. If results were used to deny coverage or put an astronomical price on premiums, most gay men in many urban areas would be effectively denied life insurance. Rates of positive test results among gay men have been as high as 70-80% according to surveys in a number of large US cities. There have already been recorded instances of people denied medical insurance coverage (& life insurance, too, I think) merely because it became known they tested positive. Even the military case isn't uncontroversial: despite catch-22, the military can't simply do anything it wants, at least not without serious challenge. If the military has a justification for HTLV-III testing, it would be specific, such as avoiding contact with blood & blood contacts plentifully available in combat or even in some forms of training. But it wouldn't extend to noncombat personnel or civilian employees. Regards, Ron Rizzo