South Dakota Governor Mike Rounds has signed a bill that will require individuals found to have purposely infected a partner with HIV to register as sex offenders, the Associated Press/Rapid City Journalreports (rapidcityjournal.com, 3/17). In the past few years, two people in South Dakota have been convicted of intentionally spreading HIV and were sentenced to 15 years in prison.
According to the article, the law will take effect on July 1. The AP reports those convicted of this crime will be required to give their names, addresses and other personal information to be included in the state’s sex offender registry, which can be viewed by anyone online.
NEW! Scroll down to comment on this story.
Please click OK to confirm your comment and confirm you accept our posting rules. Note your message will be reviewed by our staff before going live.
ALZMEK, San Francisco, 2008-04-19 23:47:54
1 in 4 do not know they are infected, 40+ people will die today in the US from AIDS. This disease needs the responsibility from ALL PARTIES INVOLVED. If HIV+ people stopped infectng others, AIDS will eventually be abolished, no cure required. Throwing a person with HIV in jail will just spread the disease further. Sebastian Alzmek is the main charachter of my new book that exposes predators with HIV infecting unsuspecting victims with HIV. AIDS is undectable, just like thier viral load-Beware
James, Minnesota, 2008-04-16 02:07:52
Studies have shown that most HIV transmissions are by the people who rarely or never get tested (to afraid to get tested) and/or they dont know they have the virus. After I tested positive my sex life went from great to boring. I find this to be true of many poz people. It is a sober life changing event to find out a positive status for most so it is presumptious to assume that poz people are gleefully spreading the disease. HIV is a heavy with stigma as it is,this bill could deter HIVtesting
Ilene, , 2008-04-14 12:43:35
The bad thing about this law is that it will open up to revenge prosecutions in relationships that end badly.Poz people better start having a lawyer draw up an affadavit before they have sex.Ridiculous.The poz person is screwed anyway since they have the burden of proving that yes, this person did know and slept with them anyway, which many ignorant people would not believe that such a paring is possible and obviously the poz is trying to spread HIV.
susie, New York, 2008-04-10 10:05:53
This is so rediculous. Just one more way to discriminate against people. Everyone has the responsability to protect themselves during sex. I would love to see how they will prove the INTENT in court, when someone can easily say he/she didn't know. Once this ignorant Governor realizes that the mojority of people that will be prosecuted are heterosexual men he will have the law banned. I'm tired of ignorance.
Angel, , 2008-04-10 09:31:05
It all depends on the situation. Today no body can say in a one night stand they had no idea they needed to use a condom. If its commited relationship you should be tested regular no matter. This is the age when if you dont you can die. Wake up people. Protecting yourself is the important part. Even if you are married.
+ 25 years
love, , 2008-04-07 23:45:01
i totally agree with chris i think all states should follow this law a lot of people are out there spreading this stuff like rumors and not caring some women have children and trust a guy who lies about thier status i say prosecute them let them be known!!!!!
Tom, , 2008-03-19 22:07:03
Maybe us South Dakota people need to fight a little harder for our rights instead of cry and do nothing. This isn't going to be good. Being poz is hard enough. who needs this? All a person has to do is say they weren't told and the trouble starts. Even if the person isn't being so honest.
Greg747, Patchogue, NY, 2008-03-19 12:15:06
Well, as the previous writer mentioned, that 'slippery slope' towards criminalization of PWAs is well on its way! What is the deal with 'Midwest' politicians these days? Anyone else out there remember the year 1992 as well as I do? Yet Huckabee of Arkansas said that the 'science on AIDS' was just not 'in yet'. Uh, yes it was; and a lot earlier that '92, Gov.
And now South Dakota checks in to re-enforce stigma that we hoped was on the wane.
Brian L. Taylor, Portland, Oregon, 2008-03-18 22:09:40
This is the slippery slope toward criminalizing everyone with HIV. We need to protest and fight against these types of laws that do nothing but austrisize the HIV +.
Adam, Charlottesville, VA, 2008-03-18 13:08:05
What ever happened to personal responsibility? I have seen and read about cases where the infected person informed their partner and the partner still after the fact sued the positive person. What you rely on in court is one person's word against another. People in the heat of the moment do strange things but why is the positive person held more responsible than the partner who willingly engaged in unsafe sex irregardless of status. It has and still takes two to tango.
Maya, , 2008-03-18 12:20:44
Might I also add, I was infected by my husband at the time.I had no reason to expect we would have to use condoms in a married relationship.I was not told by my husband when he tested positive for HIV and I was not given the option of protecting myself, because I would have stayed if he had been honest, not hide it from me and thus resulting in my infection.Now if we had just been having casual sex,I would have taken part of the blame if I had not protected myself in that situation.
Maya, , 2008-03-18 12:16:51
It depends on how this is used.I don't think HIV- are the helpless victims the media portrays them to be and that they should be able to sleep around and see what happens.EVERYONE needs to take responsibility to protect themselves,if only for the fact that not everyone knows their status.Now if this is a long term monogamous relationship where both have a level of trust and have forgon the condoms and one decides not to tell,then it is different, as is rape.Intent to infect needs proven though.
Jonathan, Los Angeles, CA, 2008-03-18 10:49:25
I think it's important to weigh the consequences of this bill, such as public disclosure of protected medical information, and a decrease in HIV testing in order to protect one's self from prosecution of knowingly infecting a partner. All South Dakota needs now is a law banning unsafe anal sex and the prosecution of newly infected individuals for not protecting themselves adequately.
Ann Ward, Danbury Ct, 2008-03-18 10:37:53
That is riciculous what about those with syphillis and herpes will they have to register as sex offenders too. Talk about outing people! Will they also appear on a Web Site like here in Ct?
SB, NEW YORK, 2008-03-18 10:15:52
The rationale of the law is clearly understood. However, at what expense is this to the HIV Community as a whole? The SD legislature has acted careless and reckless. There’s a clear difference between sex offenders and people that are HIV infected. By putting one person out there who is guilty, they are subjecting millions of sick people to further undue stigma. Purposely infecting someone with HIV is reckless endangerment, attempted murder, and possibility murder.
SugarandSpice43
