From Southern Voice: “An HIV-positive man has been indicted in Fayette and Fulton counties [in Georgia] on felony criminal charges for allegedly engaging in consensual sex with three other men without disclosing his HIV status, a violation of Georgia law.”
Although HIV-positive people shouldn’t have unprotected sex without disclosing their status, this is just stupid. Everyone, positive or negative, has to take responsibility for his own health and safety. Yes, it can be romantic to trust someone, especially when you’re engaged in as intimate an act as sex, but romance isn’t made of latex. As Jeff Graham, executive director of the AIDS Survival Project, says in the article, it takes two people to practice unsafe sex.
John Withrow, the 25-year-old man whose complaint led to the criminal charge against Carriker in Fayette County, also filed a civil suit in State Court in February against Carriker, claiming he has “suffered extreme and severe emotional distress arising from the fear of developing HIV.” …
The two men dated until April 2004 and had unprotected sex numerous times, according to the suit. …
[Adam] Jaffe, Withrow’s attorney, said his client is undergoing repeated HIV testing and has tested negative for the disease.
“He will be enduring real mental trauma for the next couple of years,” Jaffe said.
Huh? Today you can get an accurate test result three months after exposure, if not sooner. What’s with the repeated testing? What’s up with “the next couple of years”? If he’s tested negative more than three months after the exposure, he’s negative. (At least as regards Carriker.) This guy sounds like an extreme neurotic. I’ve experienced the fear of getting HIV, but at least I trusted the test results.
But I’ve worked on an HIV hotline, and he’s not the only guy with such issues. HIV-related fear and sex-related guilt (especially when it’s gay sex) can create a potent mix. People think God is trying to punish them – if not by giving them HIV, then by giving them the fear of having contracted HIV, which can be debilitating in its own right.
Yeah, Withrow shouldn’t have trusted Carriker (who clearly has issues of his own). He did a stupid thing, but luckily, he’s tested negative. He should be thankful, consider it a lesson, and move on with his life. His persistent guilt helps nobody, least of all himself.
The case should be tossed out of court faster than a dead skunk.
No excuse for barebacking.
NONE!
There is a particular grouping of men whose sense of opportunity for fast money is unimpeded by any regard for the men they victimize in order to reach that money. In addition to a man who would sue a sex partner for trumped-up psychological wreckage based on fear of undisclosed HIV, I am thinking of a particular altar boy who ruined a priest’s life with his fabrications designed to extract a settlement that would support his boyfriend’s drug habit. Yes, this group is neurotic in a way that goes beyond their willingness to do evil in order to gain money. They feel very little. As a result of your post, I am considering posting the story of that priest who is a close friend of mine.
absolutely agree with this post. one should always take responsibility for their actions. if you don’t ask about a person’s HIV status, you have to assume they are positive.
Without evidence to the contrary, assume the worst, or it ain’t ‘safe’ at all.
I’m as justifiably paranoid as the next person, and I mostly agree with the idea that anyone who engages in bareback sex–male or female, straight or gay–should be willing to accept the consequences. (We’re very lucky that HIV is a difficult virus to catch.) I think that you have to include, though, as exceptions to this principle, HIV positive people who intentionally try to infect others (they’ve been told that they can’t engage in unprotected sex, they tell others they’re negative and bareback them, with or without the other partner’s consent). They’re certainly a minority of the world’s HIV positive people, but I think that I favour some sort of criminal sanction against them.
I agree with no milk, except to amend that even if you ask, assume they are positive, and behave accordingly. Every single, dingle time.
This sounds like John Withrow, the plaintiff, is definitley doing this just to extract money from the Defendant.
By filing a criminal case he can improve his chances of winning his civil case.
Sounds like extortion.
If you are HIV + and lie about your status to others in order to engage in sexual activity you should be prosecuted. Garry Wayne Carriker a medical student is a criminal for lying and is being prosecuted under the law as he should be.
Are any of his former partners testing positive? No.
Did he force himself on any of his partners?
No.
Leave the guy alone. This is a situation where some people are regretting their own recklessness and want someone to blame it on.
HIV + people are required to disclose their status in over 23 states. In some states it does not matter if the sex is protected or unprotected. Point is the individual who helps spread a deadly disease should be prosecuted and apparently down in Georgia they did the right thing and locked this guy up.