Opposition to State-Mandated Premarital HIV Screening Essays -- AIDS

Opposition to State-Mandated antenuptial HIV ScreeningWhen screening for HIV became possible in mid-1985, debates began concerning the intent of much(prenominal) screening in controlling the spread of support. One such debate concerned landed estate-mandated premarital HIV screening. This policy was proposed to the CDC conference in February of 1987, but never receive much widespread support, because it satisfied uncomplete the proponents of public health nor the proponents of obliging liberties (Reamer 37). This essay will show that the state is unjustified in enacting such policy and hopefully also roam some light on why such policy received so little support.In a liberal society such as the get together States that values both civil liberties and public health, it is much unclear which policies best address the threat posed by the AIDS epidemic. It is clear that on the one hand, the United States is committed to respect the concealing and personal autonomy of its cit izens. Though not expressly written in the constitution, the right to privacy is implicit in the right to deny mislabeled search and seizure of home and explicit in the recent laws that nurse the privacy of internet and credit card users. On the other hand, the United States is also committed to promote the general welfare, meaning it has a moral obligation to promote public health. Traditionally, in the struggle amid civil liberties and public health, the United States has given precedent to civil liberties but yielded to departures when it was proven that doing so was justifiable by the resulting benefits to public health. AIDS, however, challenges the balance amid civil liberties and public health like no other anterior epidemic, due to the strong threat it poses to public health and ... ...avior, they could probably ingest been identified through programs aimed at groups with a higher prevalence of seropositives. Hence, the last-place two conditions of our ethical framew ork are also not met. victimisation an ethical framework borrowed from Childress, it is clear that a state committed to upholding the civil liberties of its citizens as well as promoting public health is unjustified in mandating premarital HIV screening. Such screening infringes on civil liberties and does not promote public health in an efficient way. The state is stimulate to seek other policies by which to promote public health, such as voluntary testing and educational programming for married couples, which do not violate civil liberties and which more efficiently target those who are seropositive.whole kit and boodle CitedReamer, Frederic G. AIDS & Ethics. Columbia University Press New York, 1991.