Kyle Freeman, a Canadian who says he’s donated blood at least 18 times all the while lying about having had sex with men, owes the government $10,000 for his misdeeds after a court ruled the Canadian Blood Services can legally bar gay men (or rather, men who’ve had sex with men even once since 1977) from donating life-saving fluids — because they are not a government entity.
Meanwhile, Justice Catherine Aitken says in her decision that any discrimination against gay and bisexual men pales in comparison to the needs of those requiring blood transfusions. Patients “are asked to and must take a leap of faith that the blood or blood products they receive are safe. It is no wonder that blood recipients share an anxiety, at times elevated to fear, of the pathogens to which they may become exposed through the blood or blood products they receive.” Way to reinforce the stigma that gay men must be avoided at all costs!
Freeman himself wanted $250,000 in damages. Now he’s the one paying.
Faketroll
I mean do you really, really have to keep using “faggot” in your titles?
Bruno
Um, if they don’t actually screen their blood donations well enough to make the patients safe, then the patients aren’t safe. The judge has shit for brains.
Enron
I think the law should be abolished, but samples should be tested for viruses, because honestly, with the recent epidemic amongst young men with HIV, you just can’t take any chances these days. Its not about discriminating, its about being safe and the health of others.
L.
At the same time, Canada can hardly be singled out in this sad matter: almost every country bans blood donations from “men who have sex with men”. A very few lift the ban after one or five years since “last exposure”, but it’s a minority.
The US, all of the EU, Switzerland ban donations for life. Israel does too, if “only” for 30 years.
@Faketroll: +1. Or, +1,000.
Jeremy
So what? I’m gay, only have sex 3 times in my life and I can’t donate my blood. Ever? I think I need cry…
B
Re No. 2 and No. 3: the problem is the “window period” where blood can be infectious but a test comes up negative due to the donor not having yet developed antibodies. There are tests that can reduce the window period to a very short one (days, not months) but those tests are very expensive.
One thing they could do for people who are statistically at higher risk levels is to store the blood they donate after a preliminary screening test and then do an HIV test on the donor sometime later as a way to reduce costs.
Patrick
Maybe discrimination will stop when homosexuals stop referring to each other as faggots.
adam
Wait. They justified it because the CBS is not a government entity, but he has to pay the government because he did it? Uhhh…. hopefully this can be appealed.
Ken S
I do agree that the policy feels unjust (and it’s not a “law”- as someone above claimed- because Canadian Blood Services isn’t a government agency, so their policies aren’t laws) and- with the implementation of perhaps one additional test- probably unnecessary. Several years ago when they were holding a blood drive on my university’s campus I set up an info graphic thingy to let those who weren’t already aware know about the policy, and to encourage them to go advocate for its abolishment (as soon as they finished making their blood donation, of course). So I hope it’s understood that I’m in favour of lifting the restriction.
That said, I find it conspicuous that the article fails to mention one detail that I picked up from both the CTV and CBC news coverage of the story today: that when Freeman lied on the pre-screening questionnaire and made his donation he had syphilis. Personally I find that that detracts just a little from my sympathy for him as a well-meaning, turned-away would-be donor; if you’re running around catching fuckin’ syphilis, maybe you aren’t the *best* front-man to make the argument that we aren’t irresponsible, unsafe vectors for blood-borne pathogens. *Maybe* you should settle down and let someone who isn’t swimming with disease plead the case that we’re healthy and conscientious about our fluid-swapping, if only for P.R. purposes. You have to maintain a pretty clean personal track record if you want to be Righteous Indignation Guy and be taken seriously.
As it is, this has the optics of someone pooping in his hand and then wondering why no one wants to shake it… or elect him “commissioner of public sanitation.”
L.
@B: Either that, or, like (I think) Argentina, institute a six-months waiting period after “last exposure” before donating. Both could work, providing more blood for transfusions as well as ending discrimination.
nineinchnail
Quite a stupid policy really. As a Canadian its scary to believe they dont test blood before pumping someone else with it which is what the CBS is more or less admitting. I lived in the UK years ago and even if I wasnt gay Id still be banned fom donating blood. Why? CJD or Mad Cow Disease. Lets just hope I dont ever need a blood transfusion here in Canada. CBS is already responsible for spreading Hep-C. Nice huh.
nineinchnail
@Faketroll: Just imagine how upset some people get when straight people use the term? If you dont want heteros to call us fags stop calling fags fags!
fuzz
Being a gay man isn’t the only no-no for blood donation. If you were born in one of the African countries where HIV rates are off the charts, or you’ve lived there for a specific number of years, Canadian Blood Services also prohibits you from donating. Ditto if you’ve every accepted money or drugs for sex.
It’s stupid, because there are ways to screen and retest donors/donations that would minimize risk, without making blanket assumptions about entire groups of people while ignoring the fact that behavior is probably the greatest risk factor in blood infection.
Queer Supremacist
You don’t want my blood, it’s your loss.
And here I thought Canada was better for gays than the US. I guess it can still be better without being objectively good.
Jesus pig fucking Christ, have there been no advances in blood screening technology in the past 100 years? I bet they put up a fight against giving up leeches.
TomEM
@B: Good point. They could also just do a PCR though(?); or does Canadian Blood Services not thoroughly pre-screen ALL of their blood product donations already?
jason
I’m gay, have had anal sex, and I’m perfectly healthy. Despite being healthy, I’m prevented from giving blood. My straight next door neighbor, Jim, has unprotected anal sex with females he picks up at nighclubs. Why is he allowed to give blood but not me?
jason
Judge Catherine Aitken is a cunt.
Brent
Just FYI – the photo of Kyle Freeman was taken by Xtra freelancer Neil McKinnon: http://www.queerty.com/canada-where-banning-the-blood-of-faggots-is-a-perfectly-reasonable-policy-20100909/
Joe
The next time the Red Cross (be it Canadian or American) ask for a donation, you can tell them no and explain why.
rrr
@B:
Unless they are really short on blood and can’t entice others to donate, I don’t see why there’s a real need to go to a lot of effort or expense to try to make the blood of the various statistically high risk groups acceptable.
A serious, widespread, win-win, self-helping effort to curtail barebacking and become established as an average or low risk group would make more sense if there’s a lot of us who want to qualify to donate blood in Canada.
Kyle Freeman didn’t help our image or our case by lying and donating syphillis infected blood.
nineinchnail
@jason: I guess the CBS decided that heterosexuals cannot get HIV and I assume its an admission that they dont screen blood received for it either. SCARY!!
B
No. 20 · rrr wrote, “@B: Unless they are really short on blood and can’t entice others to donate, I don’t see why there’s a real need to go to a lot of effort or expense to try to make the blood of the various statistically high risk groups acceptable.”
It’s not a lot of effort, though, if you simply store the blood and wait for a subsequent test on the donor (after the window period) before releasing it. The cheaper HIV tests simply require that the patient be infected for longer before the test registers as a positive.
Regarding No 21, they probably do screen blood for it – after
mixing blood from multiple donors – which works as long as the infection rate is sufficiently low.
alan brickman
he has std’s when he donated and then lied about it…..he should pay more…
Lucas
I have a hard time getting angry about the blood donation issue. The Red Cross and this Canadian equivalent are clearly trying to do what’s best for the recipients of blood donations, rather than those that donate blood. If they have come to the conclusion that, because AIDS/etc tests are imperfect, that accepting blood from gay men would be harmful to recipients, I can accept that.
Honestly, do we think they’re just a bunch of bigots who don’t like gays? That seems implausible.
Brandon
As one who works in bloodbanking, I feel it is reasonable to try and eliminate high risk groups to make the blood pool safer. Sadly we as a whole are a high risk group. Yes, there are exceptions to the rule, but it is easier to eliminate the whole group as opposed using probing detailed questions that seek out these exceptions. It may not be the best system but it keeps our blood supply relatively clean. There has been discussion of a blanket ban on blood from women who have been pregnant before because of the high risk of antibodies in the serum. We are not alone in being excluded. Eventually when our rates of STD’s and HIV lower us as a whole into a lower risk group we can talk, until then remember recipients come first.
Gary B.
This is really the smart move to ban gay or bisexual men from donating blood because as we all know heterosexuals are incapable of contracting AIDS, and there is no way to test blood to see if its safe.
Soupy
plus, gay blood makes you gay.
Queer Supremacist
@jason: If I ever need a blood transfusion I am going to demand it comes from a gay person.
Blaine Ward
@Queer Supremacist: You do that. And make sure its untested blood just so you don’t know what you’re getting!
Blaine Ward
@Brandon: Finally, someone makes sense here and sees this for what it is!
Queer Supremacist
@Blaine Ward: Can lesbians still give blood (I assume that since female-to-female HIV transmission is so rare, they can)? I could always ask for a lesbian blood donor.
Zach
This man donated blood he KNEW was infected…and lied about it. I have no pity for him.
dvd-junkie
@Brandon: Yes, recipients do come first. So those who engage in RISKY BEHAVIOR – be they gay or straight –
should be banned. The current policy creates a false sense of security, while stigmatizing gays.
dvd-junkie
@Zach:
@alan brickman:
Yes, he donated blood.
What exactly do you think he was infected with? Gayness?