



The blame game continues down in Australia, where 48-year old Michael John Neal stands accused of intentionally infecting sex partners with HIV. Sixteen men testified to having unprotected anal sex with Neal after his infection, implying that he knew what he was doing. For his part, Neal claims a doctor told him his contagion levels were low risk.
Now, a number of the men involved are pointing their fingers not at Neal, nor themselves, but at health officials. They claim authorities knew of Neal's plans at least four years ago and yet did nothing to stop him. Attorney Bernard Murphy insists:
Our clients consider that the inaction of the Department of Human Services was negligent.Now, there are two issues to consider here. First, a patients right to privacy. Do health officials have the right to tip off police for potentially reckless behavior? From what we understand of Australian law - which isn't really that much - an individual must be informed before private details are disclosed. This leads to the second question: if officials think an infected person will put others at risk, how can they stop him or her without their consent to release the information. If taken to the extreme - a big if, mind you - it could lead to scapegoating and a general climate of fear. Take that to the extreme and you have a big old, unjust mess.The Health Act charges the Department of Human Services with important public health responsibilities and I am not persuaded that they have got the balance right between protecting the individual and protecting public health.
We are closely reviewing section 121 of the Health Act and various authorities to ascertain whether any litigation on behalf of our clients is possible.
Health officials may face HIV suit [The Australian]
I still feel that the "victims" bear responsibility for their health. It shouldn't be up to the government nor the potential partner to protect otherwise competent adults. Did the individuals involved think unprotected anal sex is simply risk free just because someone said it was? I'm HIV positive and I cannot blame anyone else for it. I knew the risks and did it anyway. It wasn't the government's responsibility to require my one-night stand to use a condom. Many infected people are not aware of it until they become ill or it is discovered by accident. Since I am always eager to keep the government uninvolved in my personal life, I do not hold any government responsible for the sexual activities of individuals done in private and with consent of all adults and no one under the age of consent.
My responsibility to sex partners ends with disclosure and at the end of my dick.
I agree the "victims" have to take some personal rspnsibility for any possible infection. Now if he lied to them and said he was "clean" he should be jailed for attempted murder. If the the health officials did something like say warn people he was infected or our confine him there would be holy outrage from all over the world of the violation opf his rights.
Ousslander
Dont be so sure that there would be any outrage if he had been confined... we have two fairly young gay men in my city who have been detained under our health laws for several years now. No outrage is heard either from the world or the local gay community.
It may be a violation of his rights...but he also has some duties to discharge and under our law the positive person, being in control of the 'hazadous substance' has the main duty both to disclose and use protection.
Also it is my understanding that the victorian health dept released not only his info but several other people's files at the police request, no questions asked....still no outrage...
I think you may find that a large majority of the gay community will want him put away. Positive gay men are usually the scapegoats for the communities fears around this disease....
For what it's worth, I played with Michael Neal, and he told me he was positive when asked.
As for attempted murder? Rubbish. HIV isn't fatal any more.