AIDS Task Force update: mandatory testing is not the answer.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
SEARCH · PubMed Health
Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The effectiveness of a screening programme for HIV infection among prisoners is discussed, in relation to validity of screening test, natural history ad modalities of transmission of the infection, hypothetical objectives of the programme, in comparison with alternatives prevention programmes. The association between HIV infection, e.v. drug abuse and sexual behaviours is analyzed. On the basis of available evidences the hypothesis of lack of effectiveness and possible harmfulness of this screening programme is proposed.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
This study examines (1) how the general population of Sweden defines the concept of mandatory HIV testing; (2) what measures people consider should be taken against HIV infected individuals if mandatory testing is introduced; and (3) how the opinion of mandatory testing is affected if people consider the matter from a personal rather than neutral point of view. The two first questions were investigated in personal interviews with 1651 randomly selected individuals aged 16-74 years (Study 1). The third question was investigated in an experimental study among Swedish college/university students (Study 2). A total of 58% of the respondents in Study 1 favoured mandatory HIV testing. Confronted with a situation where mandatory testing is introduced and someone refuses to take a test 40% favoured forced testing and 24% favoured fines. If someone is identified as being HIV infected three out of four recommended action only in case this person exposes others to risk. In Study 2 mandatory testing was not, as could be expected, considered to be more repellent if the issue was viewed from a personal point of view than from a neutral one.
Infection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) has become an increasingly important public health problem. Due to the profound increase in the incidence of the disease, testing has become an important tool in prevention efforts as well as treatment. In view of the dire prognosis associated with the diagnosis of HIV infection, there is a great deal of interest in mandatory HIV testing of special groups. Mandatory testing has been implemented for several groups such as the United States military. However, there are a number of issues to be considered before implementing a mandatory testing program. These include the predictive value and accuracy of the tests themselves, confidentiality and the social ramifications of breaches in confidentiality, the likelihood of forcing high risk persons underground to avoid testing, and the constitutionality of a mandatory testing policy. Since the discovery of the apparent transmission of HIV infection from a dentist to his patients, there has been increasing interest in a policy mandating the testing of health professionals. However, in view of the low risk of transmission to patients, it would be ill-advised to require HIV testing of health care workers. In general, the benefits of a mandatory testing policy do not outweigh the human and financial costs it would engender.
The AIDS epidemic has caused hysteria among the public and concern to many healthcare workers in the past 12 years. Currently, legislation exists for mandatory AIDS testing in some populations. The questions remain: Should healthcare workers be routinely tested? If so, is mandatory testing ethical? The author explores the incidence and prevalence of AIDS among healthcare workers, discusses why mandatory testing for healthcare workers is an issue, and examines the legal and ethical principles involved in mandatory testing.
OBJECTIVES: As the prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) increases, so does the prevalence of HIV-positive health care workers. This study explored what effect this will have on occupational therapy service provision. Attitudes and policies of 118 occupational therapy administrators were examined in relation to mandatory testing for HIV, attitudes on treating HIV-positive patients, working with HIV-positive staff members and students, and use of Centers for Disease Control's guidelines on universal precautions. METHODS: A stratified sample of 200 occupational therapy administrators, drawn proportionally from all occupational therapy fieldwork centers, was sent questionnaires. The respondents (N = 118) were asked questions reflecting policy and attitude regarding HIV-positive staff members, students, and patients and mandatory testing. Descriptive statistics and chi-square analyses were computed to examine variances related to policy, ethics, and attitudes. RESULTS: Few occupational therapy departments have policies regarding HIV-positive health care workers or students. Those policies in place involve disability discrimination acts and using universal precautions. More than one third of the respondents support mandatory testing of all health care workers and notifying patients if their occupational therapist is HIV-positive. A large minority of respondents would either refuse to hire or train an HIV-positive therapist or student, or would restrict patient care responsibilities. CONCLUSIONS: Although most occupational therapy administrators adhere to CDC guidelines and anti-discrimination policies, some concern and fear was expressed regarding HIV transmission through occupational therapy practice. This may result in administrative decisions regarding work and training responsibilities that are unnecessarily restrictive, such as limiting all patient care responsibilities.
Mandatory drugs testing of prisoners applies throughout England and Wales. Data from the 1995 pilot study in eight prisons show that the proportion testing positive for opiates or benzodiazepines rose from 4.1% to 7.4% between the first and second phase of random testing and that there was a 20% increase over 1993-4 in the provisional total of assaults for 1995. Interpretation of these data is difficult, but this is no excuse for prevarication over the danger that this policy may induce inmates to switch from cannabis (which has a negligible public health risk) to injectable class A drugs (a serious public health risk) in prison. The performance indicators for misuse of drugs that are based on the random mandatory drugs testing programme lack relevant covariate information about the individuals tested and are not reliable or timely for individual prisons.
A survey of 341 persons, 82% of whom were university students whose median age was 27.0 yr., was conducted to investigate the relationship between their attitudes regarding mandatory AIDS testing for various groups, attitudes toward the disease, sexual orientation and behavior, and attitudes toward homosexuals. Homosexual and bisexual respondents were less supportive of mandatory testing for anyone than were heterosexual respondents. Greater homophobia and attitudes in favor of legal sanctions against persons with AIDS were correlated for heterosexual respondents, with attitudes supporting mandatory testing for everyone and homosexuals in particular. However, concern about contracting AIDS was unrelated to heterosexual attitudes favoring mandatory testing. Social and political considerations in an era of growing and potentially militant public health concern are discussed.