June / July #2 : Home Free? - by Arthur S. Leonard

POZ - Health, Life and HIV
Subscribe to:
POZ magazine
Newsletters
Join POZ: Facebook MySpace Twitter Pinterest
Tumblr Google+ Flickr MySpace
POZ Personals
Sign In / Join
Username:
Password:

Back to home » Archives » POZ Magazine issues




Table of Contents

S.O.S.

Bill T. Jones On Top

How TB Came Back

Remembering Rudy

Home HIV Testing Is Near

Home Free?

Strubco and the Home Test

Community Support?

C'est Magnifique!

Marlon Riggs, 37

Pas de Deux

Bad News Barrer

Finnish Your Veggies

Who's Tim McCarthy?

Flex This

POZ VCR

AIDS Law

POZ Biz: The Cure

See No Evil

Tribute

Speaking the Truth

Overheard

Urban Angels

Acting Up

AIDS Zen: Morning

Essay: World AIDS Conference

Animal Farm Redux

Life

Sex

Health

Alternative Health

Media

HIV Standard of Care

Going Home: Gene Schneider



Most Popular Lessons

The HIV Life Cycle

Shingles

Herpes Simplex Virus

Syphilis & Neurosyphilis

Treatments for Opportunistic Infections (OIs)

What is AIDS & HIV?

Hepatitis & HIV


email print

June / July 1994

Home Free?

by Arthur S. Leonard

Home testing also raises legal issues

The FDA is considering two kinds of kits: the direct access kit, which will allow an individual to produce an analyzable blood sample and send it to a lab, and the true home testing kit, which would allow an individual to test him or herself and determine the result.

Most people learn of their HIV status by a personal communication from a doctor or other clinic worker and, although CDC statistics show that counseling is often inadequate or missing altogether, those situations provide the opportunity to ask questions and receive counseling (which is required by law in many states). The Direct Access kit will provide counseling during telephone contact with a counseling center; a true home-testing kit might not. Counseling should include warnings about problems HIV positive folks may encounter if they are not careful about whom they tell. Although there is legal protection against discrimination, it isn't always effective in preventing problems, so people whould be counseled on how to avoid trouble by being careful about disclosure. Sole reliance on printed materials for counseling may be inadequate, since a pamphlet can't respond to questions and may be written in language the test-taker doesn't understand.

The testers - and anybody else who comes into possession of HIV information -- may be subject to a variety of laws and regulations governing HIV confidentiality. These laws, which differ from state to state, impose legal liability on unauthorized use or disclosure of information, but may also impose reporting requirements that could be complicated by home testing. Unless carefully controlled and monitored, home collection or testing kits might be improperly used by employers or others seeking to avid legal protection against the misuse of HIV information. Many states now legally require reporting of HIV positive results to public health departments. Licensure of home kits will raise questions about how such reporting will be administered when the doctor's office or a clinic is excluded from the process.

Home kits should substantially increase the numbers tested, which will predictably increase the absolute number receiving inaccurate results. There are already lawsuits by people claiming severe emotional distress on being told -- falsely, as it turned out -- that they were infected. False positives are a fact of life with mass screening. Even a test that comes closer to 100 percent accuracy than present HIV tests will generate many inaccurate results when 10 or 20 million people take the test, especially under home collection conditions.

When home testing increases the number of people who know their positive HIV status, it will also increase the number who need to be aware of legal constraints. A person who knows that he or she is positive when applying for insurance but fails to reveal that on the application may be guilty of fraud and subject to cancellation of insurance and other penalties. If a person engages in sexual activity that might transmit HIV, knowing his or her serostatus to be positive, he or she may be guilty of a felony in many states. Your state of knowledge will be critical in determining liability in many circumstances.

Scroll down to comment on this story.





Name:

(will display; 2-50 characters)

Email:

(will NOT display)

City:

(will display; optional)

Comment (500 characters left):

(Note: The POZ team reviews all comments before they are posted. Please do not include either ":" or "@" in your comment. The opinions expressed by people providing comments are theirs alone. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Smart + Strong, which is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by people providing comments.)

Comments require captcha.
Please enter this number for verification:

| Posting Rules



Hide comments

Previous Comments:


         

[Go to top]

Facebook Twitter Google+ MySpace YouTube Tumblr Flickr Instagram
Quick Links
Current Issue

HIV Testing
Safer Sex
Find a Date
Newly Diagnosed
HIV 101
Disclosing Your Status
Starting Treatment
Help Paying for Meds
Search for the Cure
POZ Stories
POZ Opinion
POZ Exclusives
Read the Blogs
Visit the Forums
Job Listings
Events Calendar
POZ on Twitter

Ask POZ Pharmacist

Talk to Us
Poll
Have you ever been diagnosed with diabetes or pre-diabetes?
Yes
No

Survey
Pop Watch

more surveys
Contact Us
We welcome your comments!
[ about Smart + Strong | about POZ | POZ advisory board | partner links | advertising policy | advertise/contact us | site map]
© 2014 Smart + Strong. All Rights Reserved. Terms of use and Your privacy.
Smart + Strong® is a registered trademark of CDM Publishing, LLC.