At the height of the AIDS epidemic, California’s state government was unified in its response.

The state legislature decided in 1988 that somebody who donated blood while knowingly HIV-positive could be punished with up to six years in prison. Ten years later, it became a felony to have unprotected sex with the intent of transmitting HIV to a partner.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!

GET STARTED

What is it?

STAT Plus is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What's included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • Online intelligence briefings
  • Frequent opportunities to engage with veteran beat reporters and industry experts
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.

Leave a Comment

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

  • And we wonder how Trump got elected. News flash, it wasn’t the Russians. Its insane legislation like this. What responsible member of society or parents of children could possibly see the benefit in adopting legislation to reduce the incarceration time of someone that knowingly and intentionally infects another with a potentially life threatening disease? What if the person subsequently dies in say 5-10 years and during that time they lived a miserable painful existence. Do we then prosecute the accused for murder? What are the implications to law enforcement? Who would want to be a policeman under these conditions that some AIDs infected criminal is going to bite them during the arrest just to get his revenge. We will arrest , convict and incarcerate the cop who justifiably beats the daylights out of the criminal, while the criminal that inflicted the life threatening disease walks. As if we need more reasons to dissuade people from serving in this profession. We are going to wake up one day and find no policemen are securing our streets and wonder why? Think Oakland and Berkeley, CA. What about divorce couples seeking revenge? or revenge sex? Is there no one in Sacramento that could look at the problematic implications of such a law and see its devastating potential? Who would vote for a person that would propose such legislation? Hey liberal left THIS IS WHY TRUMP GOT ELECTED! You folks have lost your minds.

  • I’d rather someone knowingly shoot me in the head, rather then knowingly give me HIV, just because it’s “treatable” does not mean its curable.

    Maybe knowingly murdering someone will be a misdemeanor soon too, because black people murder more people based on population then other ethnic groups… so surely its racist for murder to be a felony.

    Damn liberals must be stopped.

A roundup of STAT’s top stories of the day in science and medicine

Privacy Policy