The Vexatious Allegation Continues 

I feel like an old boring record going on about this HIV case, but my mind can think of little else. Yesterday, I contacted the Police Force…the one I repeatedly reported the harassment, which I experienced at the hands of the man in question and his third parties, and I was told that I had made over thirty telephone calls to the Police. Was he ever issued a harassment warning? No, he was not.  

The criminal investigation into my allegedly trying to transmit HIV…the ex-partner making the complaint is HIV NEGATIVE…has now been ongoing for approximately eight months. I was interviewed by the Police two months ago. I was given the option to be interviewed voluntarily or to be arrested. I walked into the station voluntarily and was told during taped interview that I was free to leave. I made it known that I wanted the vexatious allegation clearing up asap so I would co-operate. Should I have decided otherwise and left the interview room, I would have been arrested, as I was later informed by my solicitor. This notion therefore of ‘voluntary’ was in actual fact an illusion.

The CPS have very clear guidelines to follow to investigate cases of HIV transmission and in my instance, because the complainant is HIV negative, they should not be investigating the complaint. The complaint should have been immediately dismissed, but it was not. The CPS have violated my privacy by involving third parties and through their investigation have asked extremely offensive questions. The CPS and the MPS have ignored their guidelines and are turning my life upside down. It seems to me that those responsible are following a course of discrimination and are also pursuing the matter on account of the complainant’s profession.

Impossible to Comprehend

I still find it almost impossible to comprehend that the man who is striving to have me prosecuted for not disclosing my HIV status (he is HIV negative) is actually the father of my…our small child.

He, the complainant, is trying to destroy my life with his vexatious allegation, whilst at the same time he is asking me to grant him important rights and responsibilities over my precious child. He has sadly never met his son despite my offering ample encouragement to be a good father. I should very much like him to be a good father, a dad, to his son. I once believed that he could be a wonderful father. But in the cold light of day, the simple fact is that he is trying his utmost to have that small child’s mother imprisoned, which can only have traumatic consequences for his young life.

To have me investigated, he does so in full knowledge that should the CPS decide to prosecute, the ramifications for his own infant son will be damaging in the extreme. Yet this knowledge does not stop him. Indeed, today I was informed that he is ‘adamant that he wants me prosecuted.’

In many ways, it is not he that I blame. Yes, he the complainant, has brought hell to every area of my life, but the simple fact is this. The CPS are not following their guidelines. My ex is HIV negative and this case should have been kicked out of the police station the second it was lodged. Instead, the police have lavished resources upon his untruths; fueling nothing more than hate and discrimination against the HIV community.

I should like to wake tomorrow morning to realise that this has been nothing more than a nightmare.

These articles previously appeared in the blog of girlwthhiv here. 

Workshops

Canada's Medical Marihuana/Cannabis Laws Are Changing - Wednesday November 6, 2013, from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. (presenter: Renée Lang, HALCO Staff Lawyer).

Immigration Update: Sponsorships, Humanitarian Applications, Refugee Claims, and Citizenship Laws - Thursday November 14, 2013, from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. (presenters: John Norquay and Meagan Johnston, HALCO Staff Lawyers).

Criminalization of HIV Non-Disclosure - Tuesday November 19, 2013, from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. (presenter: Ryan Peck, HALCO Executive Director and Lawyer).

Planning Ahead: Powers of Attorney and “Living Wills”, Wednesday November 27, 2013, from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. (presenter: John Nelson, HALCO Staff Lawyer).

In Debt? Learn about Options, Thursday December 5, 2013, from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. (presenter: Amy Wah, HALCO Staff Lawyer).

Everyone is welcome but space is limited so Registration is required.

How to Register: 

Please include your name, your contact information, your organization (if any), and the workshop(s) that you would like to attend:

E-Mail to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ,  or

Phone 416-340-7790 or toll-free 1-888-705-8889  or  FAX to 416-340-7248

Please avoid wearing scents or fragrances when coming to our offices.  If you require disability/communication accommodation, please contact us.  We regret that our budget does not permit us to provide refreshments or transportation assistance. 

For more information or to request other workshops, please contact HALCO. 

Dear Mr X, 

I do not hate you for trying to have me prosecuted with the vexatious allegation you have made to the police about my HIV status. I think you are seriously misguided, have received erroneous advice, and are trying to win a fight that no one is fighting, except you.

Your response is not rational, based upon scientific fact, human understanding or compassion; it is merely driven by revenge. You are, after all HIV negative. You have never been able to appreciate the consequences of your actions and in this instance the repercussions for all parties are grave. You could be forgiven for thinking that you and I are the only players in this battle. We are not. There is a child involved, our respective families and employers.

I could and perhaps should be consumed with hate towards you, but I am not.

You are the father of my small child and nothing will change that fact. Whilst you wait in hope that you can bring more destruction to my life and to the life of my – our – innocent child, I stand back and wonder what made you this way? You benefited from a privileged start, where humanitarian, medical, and public health concerns, were staple intellectual facets of your upbringing, clearly exerting an influence over your own career path into medicine. And yet you have now cast aside any moral and ethical integrity to do a fellow human being – me the mother of your own child – severe irreparable harm on account of my having a treatable medical condition.

Moreover, most fathers would celebrate that their child was born free of HIV, but you have not.

You have brought a considerable amount of pain and anguish to my life, but whereas I am finding a way to peace and a way to manage your past deeds, you are still vengeful and intent on ruining the rest of my life, and any chance I have of continuing to be a fabulous mother to our small child.

Clearly, your actions speak of wanting to have me imprisoned so our child is taken into social service’s care, to spend a childhood raised without a loving mother, home, or devoted relatives. I wonder if this is your true strategy? Or have you not thought this through? To hurt me, means to hurt your child in the most extreme and callous way? I wonder whether your friends and family really know what you are striving to achieve?

Whereas I seek resolution, peace, dialogue and a strategy to work towards supporting our child together, your only aim is to have me prosecuted for not disclosing my HIV status. That is not a crime in England and Wales. I would have disclosed in due time and was finding the confidence to do so. Indeed, on the eve of disclosing, my decision became defunct, for you abandoned your newborn child and informed me that you were in a new relationship.

Previously, however, we had discussed HIV generally and you were always level headed, liberal and intelligent in your dialogue. Those previous discussions, which were clearly influenced by your own career in medicine and those of your relatives working in the HIV field, makes me certain that you are quite aware that you were never at risk of contracting the virus as I have always adhered to the Swiss Statement.

What will you do if, or when, the media become involved? How will you cope with both our names being splashed across the press, which is now international in scope? How will you cope with our families being named and discussed? More to the point, how will they, as individuals, cope? As you have family working at senior level in the HIV charitable sector; in the HIV medical field, and also a relative working in humanitarian criminal law, what will the media do to them and their careers?

Are you aware that our private lives, our occupations, and any skeletons in our cupboards will also be dug over in a frenzied bid to sell copy and boost readership figures? Should you be kidding yourself that we are entitled to privacy, you are clearly wrong, for open justice in the criminal courts, prevails.

Yours,

Ms X

This article previously appeared on the blog of girlwithhiv here. 

Where: Carlton Cinema, 20 Carlton Street at Yonge, Toronto

When: Friday, November 1, 2013. 7:00pm.

What: RUINS is a documentary about a shocking case of HIV criminalization in Greece. It tells the story of the persecution of HIV-positive women who were detained by the Hellenic Police, forcibly tested, charged with a felony, imprisoned and publicly exposed, when their mug shots and personal data were published in the media in the run-up to the country's 2012 national elections.

The documentary will be screened in Greek with English subtitles. The screening will be followed by a discussion with the director and the producer.

Hosted by The Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network.

For more information go here. 

Friday 17 August 2012 was a life changing day for me. My doctor told me I’d tested positive for HIV.

Actually, he didn’t say it quite like that... I had gone to see him because I had a painful lump on my right ring finger. I’d had the lump for about 18 months; it had never caused me any pain until recently. My finger had swelled up and I could barely bend it.

Anyway, he arranged for an x-ray to see what was going on. While we were discussing another issue, his phone rang and he answered it. I didn’t catch everything the receptionist said but I heard “wants to talk to you about [my name]“. He got a bit flustered as he clearly wasn’t expecting this phone call and excused himself from the room. 

I should add here that I had had some blood taken about four days previously to specifically test for HIV as I had felt unwell for about a week with flu like symptoms and a rash had appeared on my chest. I googled it) and HIV came up as one possibility. Anyway, I had blood taken and was told the results would take between seven to ten days. He came back into the room and I knew. 

He asked how much of the phone conversation I’d heard and I said very little, just my name. I then said “I’ve got it, haven’t I?” and he said “they seem pretty convinced but want to retest to be sure”. Poor man, he wasn’t expecting to give me that news then. 

***** 

This whole sorry story started in February 2012 when I got together with my now ex-partner.  After a while I discovered he was HIV-positive; he told me he was taking medication and had an undetectable viral load.  I did my research and knew that if I protected myself, I would probably be OK. 

I'm not the medication police and had no reason to suspect that he wasn't taking his HIV medication.  I didn't discover this until much later. 

The relationship was largely dominated by his mental health.  He said it was bipolar, the psychiatrist said it was borderline personality disorder. 

His reaction to my HIV diagnosis was shock, followed by anger.  He couldn't understand why I was upset. He blamed me, said it was my choice to sleep with him and that it wasn't the 80s anymore - medication was better and I'd be fine.  What a charmer!  Hindsight is a wonderful thing, I should have walked away much sooner and his reaction should have alerted me but I was still in shock from my diagnosis and I thought his reaction was because of his mental health. 

 "I noticed that he was running out of HIV medication and over the course of a week, I realised he'd stopped taking them and hadn't gone to get any more."

The relationship finally ended in August 2013, almost a year to the date of my diagnosis. His mental health had declined this year, he had had a few psychotic episodes and his behaviour was beginning to get out of control. I noticed that he was running out of HIV medication and over the course of a week, I realised he'd stopped taking them and hadn't gone to get any more. The clinic said they wanted him to go monthly for blood work because his viral load had increased but he didn't like getting his blood work done and said that he was too busy to get to the clinic, that he shouldn't have to jump through hoops to get medication and that the clinic should make more of an effort to support him. 

I had my own appointment that week and I suggested he attend with me so we could get blood work done together - again, he was too busy.  His lack of concern about his own wellbeing meant that he had even less concern about mine and things started to become clearer in my mind.  He began to accuse me of bullying him, being abusive and controlling and I knew then that I had to go 

At the appointment, my consultant mentioned a START study to see if starting medication early had any benefit. The study requirements stated that people should have a CD4 above 500, a viral load of below 100,000 and were treatment naive. My latest CD4 was 943 and my viral load was 1,513.  I spoke to the research nurse and made an appointment for me to do the necessary blood tests.  I got a call a few days later to say that all my results were fine and they put my details into the computer to decide which group I went into: starting treatment now or deferring it until my CD4 dropped.  I got selected to start treatment early and I've been taking Eviplera (one pill a day) for about seven weeks now. 

'he said that if my ex-partner had been adhering to his medication, maintaining his undetectable viral load, it's highly likely that I wouldn't have been infected."

During these appointments, I spoke to another consultant and he asked how I'd contracted HIV.  I told him my story and he said that if my ex-partner had been adhering to his medication, maintaining his undetectable viral load, it's highly likely that I wouldn't have been infected even if an accident had occurred. This brought me to my knees. 

I've since discovered that he didn't disclose his HIV status to all his previous partners.  One of them never knew he had HIV and they were together for over a year.  I don't know how he can get away with this because it's reckless and dangerous behaviour. 

My viral load dropped to undetectable after two weeks of treatment and I had to be retested to double check as this was quite a speedy response.  And that's where I'm at now… 

To be continued . . . 

About the author:  A girl positive in Bristol, UK.

You can follow Becky on twitter @hivgirlbristol.  

About a year or so ago I came across a YouTube video   on Facebook posted by someone called Shane Crone who's partner died; he had documented his grief on video, titled it "It Could Happen To You" and shared it over the internet. It tells an important story which needed to be told, to be shared, and for action to take place because of it. Little did this man Shane know just how big an affect it was going to be.

That is how the movie Bridegroom was created. Bridegroom is a documentary about the story of Shane and Tom, a committed couple in a loving relationship which was cut short by a misstep off the roof of their apartment.

Linda Bloodworth Thomason, the director of 'Bridegroom', tells the story which unfolds after the tragic aftermath, where Shane is denied all rights, ostracized and not legally recognised by the law. This documentary opens the doors of marriage equality like nothing I have seen before and really shows the importance of it for everyone out there.

Even at the peak of the tragic event, when Tom was in hospital, Shane was denied the right to any information from the medical staff as he was not classed as immediate family, or a relation to Tom.

This demostartes the importance of equal rights and how we should all be entitled to them, regardless of sexuality. Love is love. What authority does anyone have to confine love to others when love has no boundaries?

Sadly it is not just society and the government who try to deny us rights, rights which are given freely to others. It can be those we deem the closest to us, those we call family, that can deny us the rights we deserve and who hurt us the most.

Bridegroom sheds light on this in the form of Tom's family who deny Shane the right to attend Tom's funeral and try to take away his belongings, denying and hiding any existence of their relationship. They had bought a house and started a business together. The documentary states that the makers made efforts to contact Tom's family, but they never responded to the invitation, thus allowing the story to be told through Shane, his family and their friends.

You're grieving the death of your partner only to be told you are not allowed to attend the funeral. It astounds me how families can do this and sleep at night, denying their son/brother/nephews partner to the funeral. Does it not register, like it clearly didn't in the minds of Tom's family, that having Shane at the funeral would be what he would have wanted?

I would be furious at my family and spin in my grave if they dared to deny a partner access to my funeral should a tragedy occur cutting short my life. They have no right at all and as far as I'm concerned this is a selfish and thoughtless act and even though I may not have known Tom myself, I can bet this was totally disregarding what Tom would have wanted.

Bridegroom not only clearly depicts the horrors that go on still, and stresses the importance of equality for all, it also shows the sheer courage, determination and bravery of Shane, who having lost the love of his life, is happy to put it all out there and risk everything else he has left to get his story and message across.

It shows how it all starts with just one person. One idea, a single determination which can, with the power of social media, manifest into something that nobody expected - to reach an audience in its millions, stretching all around the world.

This is a story that should show us that any doubt we may have seeded in our thoughts over anything in life where we think we are just one small person on this planet so can't make a difference....look at what Shane did. Look at the power the tool of social media really is.

You and I can change the world, it just takes one small step at a time, - and that first step may  be yours.

For anyone who wants to watch this documentary please see the movie website.  It is also available on Netflix which is how I was able to watch it (especially for those who may be reading this who are based in the UK). Please share this documentary with your friends and family, to show just how important the right to equality is and what not having it can cause.

Remember, you may just be one voice, but that voice could be the start of something phenomenal, life changing and positive. Make yourself heard. What I think this tragedy has taught us is to make a stand, and be that voice that makes a change.

Macklemore, the American Rap artist wrote a song entitled "Same Love" which talks about the fight for equality, to marry and love who we want to marry, and the stand for gay rights. His uncle is gay and he can't marry his partner at the moment as it is not recognised in their state. The lyrics below are so powerful and they hit me every time I hear the song and I want to share them to stress the importance of them. This song is also featured in the closing credits of Bridegroom.

"When everyone else is more comfortable remaining voiceless

Rather than fighting for humans that have had their rights stolen

I might not be the same, but that's not important

No freedom till we're equal, damn right I support it"

 - "Same Love" By Macklemore and Lewis

What a positive, enlightened attitude

Last week I was pleasantly surprised when I attended a leading London hospital. The reason for the visit was neither due to illness nor accident. I merely required some blood tests. I was handed a script to take along to the nurse who would take my blood and on that script was written ‘not infectious.’ Such a comment may seem like something that blows in the wind of inconsequentiality for many, but for a woman living with HIV in the UK who has previously experienced discrimination in medicine and healthcare, the comment, ‘not infectious’ reflects the cultural lag, which is slowly catching up with monumental scientific developments in the treatment of HIV.

The further surprise for me was the attitude of the staff belying the visit. The receptionist was chatty and none-judgmental during our telephone conversations and she was helpful when I arrived. The hospital doctor was embracing and enlightened and it was clear from the word go that he regarded me as no different from his other patients. This, of course, is how people living with HIV ought to be treated in the healthcare system, irrespective as to whether they are accessing NHS or private medical care.

As someone who was diagnosed with HIV in 2008, I can say that over the previous 6 months I have noticed a difference in attitude in many quarters towards HIV. It seems to me that rather slowly, the evidence of the Swiss Statement and BHIVA guidelines regarding non-infectiousness are seeping into the medical and public arenas. There is still a mountain to climb where HIV discrimination and prejudice are concerned in the UK, but my recent experience demonstrates that hard scientific fact can prevail over small minded attitudes and outdated stereotypes.

Forced to disclose my name

A medical condition is first and foremost a personal issue. It is also a public health issue. Anyone diagnosed with HIV must be allowed to decide the time and the circumstances that are right for them to disclose to others. Indeed, given the severe stigmatising culture, discrimination, harassment and hate crime that surrounds and permeates the culture of HIV, it is all the more important that one is not forced into such a life changing decision of disclosure by another person. Moreover, no one with HIV should have to face grave lapses of privacy by a third party disclosing their medical status to others with the sole intention of inciting harassment, hate crime or defamation.

I have now fallen into this category. But sadly, it does not just affect me. Each and every act of HIV discrimination targeted at myself affects the safety of my small child who is only two years old. It is for this reason, that I now refuse to live in fear of HIV discrimination and stigma. 

My name is Claire McQuoid.

These articles previously appeared on the blog of girlwithiv here.

November 22, 2013 

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, PC, MP

Prime Minister of Canada

Langevin Block

Ottawa, ON K1A 0A2  

Dear Prime Minister: 

Re:  Access to medicines and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement

Last week, the text of the intellectual property chapter being negotiated as part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement was leaked.

The leaked text confirmed what has long been suspected: the US government is pushing for provisions to be included in the TPP that would further hinder access to affordable medicines for millions of people in developing countries, as well as undermining equitable access in Canada.

The leak last week also revealed that Canada has been among the countries that has resisted some of these dangerous and damaging proposals.

Canada’s negotiators should be applauded for standing up to the pressure from the US and brand-name pharmaceutical companies.  It appears from the information now available that Canada and four other countries have put forward counter-proposals that, for the most part, preserve the flexibility that countries ostensibly have under the existing rules on intellectual property under the WTO’s TRIPS Agreement. 

We welcome this encouraging news, but we are not complacent.  The TPP negotiations are ongoing and there is intense pressure to trade away health and other public interests in order to conclude an agreement. 

This cannot be allowed to happen.  Canada must not give in to international pressure from the US, other countries or the pharmaceutical industry.  The success of the counter-proposals will depend on Canada and other proponents defending the public interest.

We are Canadian civil society organizations committed to the basic principle that access to medicines and to health care should be equitable, based on need and not on ability to pay, whether at home or around the world.  Medicines should not be a luxury.

We call on the Government of Canada to reject any proposals for provisions in the TPP that would restrict access to affordable medicines for millions of people.

In particular, we are concerned about provisions in the intellectual property, investment and pharmaceutical pricing chapters that will make it harder for patients, governments and treatment providers to get access to affordable, generic medicines.

Too many people already suffer and die because the medicines they need are too expensive or do not exist.  We cannot stand by as this proposed agreement threatens to restrict access even further.

And Canada should not stand by.

We urge the Canadian government to ensure that the final text of the TPP is aligned with its pre-existing global public health commitments.

In particular, we call on your government to ensure, in the TPP negotiations, the following:

• The TPP should not undermine public health flexibilities included in the TRIPS agreement by adopting even more stringent strengthening intellectual property measures (e.g., extending patent terms or more stringent, longer terms for data exclusivity).
• The TPP should not further undermine Canada's ability to export lower‐cost, generic medicines to eligible developing countries under the already complicated mechanism known as Canada’s Access to Medicines Regime (CAMR).
• The TPP should not include provisions that would potentially thwart access to medicines by introducing new rules on damages and injunctions, and limit the free international transit and supply of affordable, generic medicines.
• The TPP should not impose restrictions on the ability of government agencies to protect the public interest by regulating pharmaceutical prices and reimbursement programs and by regulating drug companies’ marketing practices.
• The TPP should not include intellectual property in the definition of “investment,” as this would enable pharmaceutical companies to impede regulation of the pharmaceutical sector in the public interest.  In fact, given Canada’s experience under NAFTA, the TPP should contain no investment chapter at all.

Please ensure that poor people in need of life-saving medicines don’t pay the ultimate price for this “free” trade agreement.

Sincerely,

Richard Elliott

Executive Director

Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network 

On behalf of:

AIDS Action Now!, AIDS Committee of Toronto, Alliance for South Asian AIDS Prevention, ANKORS - AIDS Network, Outreach and Support Society, Bruce House, Canadian Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, Canadian Federation of Medical Students, Canadian Federation of University Women, Canadian Health Coalition, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network,Canadian Treatment Action Council, CATIE, CIHR Canadian HIV Trials Network, Coalition des organismes communautaires québécois de lutte contre le sida (COCQ-sida), Council of Canadians, Global Network of People Living with HIV – North America (GNP+NA), Grandmothers Advocacy Network, Hepatitis Outreach Society of NS, HepCBC – Hepatitis C Education & Prevention Society, HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario, Interagency Coalition on AIDS and Development, International Community of Women Living with HIV – North America (ICW+NA), KAIROS: Canadian Ecumenical Justice Initiatives, Medical Reform Group, Northern AIDS Connection Society, People’s Health Movement (Canada), Positive Living BC, positively AFRICA, Québec Federation of Medical Students (IFMSA-Québec), RESULTS Canada, Universities Allied for Essential Medicines.

AIDS ACTION NOW! (AAN!)* is in full-force the second phase of our Think Twice Campaign, which encourages gay, bisexual and other men who fuck men to think more critically about pressing criminal charges in cases of non-disclosure involving sex partners who are HIV-positive.

The campaign is being developed in response to the Supreme Court of Canada’s October 2012 HIV non-disclosure ruling.  Under the criminal law people living with HIV can choose not to disclose their status only if their viral load is low and they use condoms if they have sexual intercourse.

Activists and people within the legal and healthcare community have strongly criticized the Supreme Court’s decision as it is still unclear when someone would have to disclose before oral sex, further stigmatize HIV and those living with it, throws what we know about HIV transmission (viral loads, condom use, etc.) out the window, may discourage folks from getting tested—especially those people who are most marginalized, and ultimately, criminalizes those living with HIV.

AAN! responded to the Supreme Court’s decision with the following posts here  and here.  

The Think Twice Campaign is a Public Service Announcement (PSA)-style social media campaign that will have guys’ tell their stories of the complex issues involved in sex, HIV disclosure and criminalization. The goal of the Campaign is to get guys to (re)consider the complexity and uncertainty of HIV criminalization, and the implications for gay, bi and trans male communities.  

We are looking for gay/bi/trans and other men who have sex with other men to be in the video PSAs.  We want guys to share their stories, thoughts, and experiences as a way to challenge the current push towards criminalization of people living with HIV.

Have you ever thought about pressing charges but changed your mind? Have you ever fucked someone and reflected on the shared responsibility? Have you charged someone but wish that you hadn’t? Have you been charged and want to tell your side of the story? Do you know of a friend who has been charged and you want to speak out?  

If you have a story or experience, we want to hear from you.  We are looking for guys to take “centre stage” in this community social media campaign.  We are also looking for people who have experience producing, filming, and editing short videos.  To find out more about the Think Twice Campaign, please contact Jessica Whitbread at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , check out our website  or Facebook page. 

HIV is NOT a crime!  

*AIDS ACTION NOW! is a direct-action, grass-roots activist organization that combines public demonstrations, lobbying and collaborative work with other community organizations. Through these efforts, our work focuses primarily on: improved access to treatment, care and support for people living with HIV within and outside of Canada; effective HIV and AIDS prevention that respects human rights; and improved social determinants of health for communities struggling against the AIDS epidemic. 

What Does World Aids Day mean to me? The personal cost of the criminalisation of HIV. 

I can lead a happy, fulfilling and healthy life with HIV. Facing discrimination, hate and other people’s fear, however, chips away at the quality of my life. But that is the thing. HIV does not discriminate. People do.

Appearance wise, I do not fit the stereotypical image of someone who is living with HIV. By virtue of parentage, I, for one, am blonde, 5ft 9. and athletic. I am also educated to doctorate level and prefer the finer things in life. In stark contract, when we give HIV a face, when we imagine what it looks like, we often conjure up a persona of African descent. If white European is the order of the day, the face of HIV tends to be of a prostitute woman strung out on intravenous drugs.

Do such stereotypes apply to any other medical condition? Of course not.  

We have years of misrepresentation by the media, clueless politicians and ignorant judges to thank for this discriminatory imagery in the UK. Printed word after media coverage after court judgment has contorted and twisted our fears about a chronic medical condition and bestowed this fragile virus with the power of a dangerous weapon. Nothing could be further from the truth. HIV is fragile and it is hard to sexually transmit.

In such a climate of institutional HIV discrimination, there is little room for rational dialogue, which gives rise to compassionate understanding of those people living with the syndrome, of how we treat HIV, and prevent its transmission. Rational thought and understanding are essential for public health. In the UK, a person either needs to be brave or mad to have a HIV test, knowing all too well that if the result returns positive, what lies ahead of them is a life of vile discrimination and possibly imprisonment if an ex-partner has a grudge.

What we need around HIV is calm dialogue.

I have endured for more than one year a false allegation and the ensuing criminal investigation. The vexatious allegation goes something like this,

‘Claire tried to deliberately infect me with HIV.’ 

The complainant is HIV-negative. Despite supplying ample medical information to the Metropolitan Police and the CPS, conclusively demonstrating that I adhere to HAART and have an undetectable viral load, meaning I am not infectious, I am still awaiting a charging decision to determine whether I will be prosecuted, with up to eight years imprisonment. Have I mentioned that I am a lone mother to a two year old child? 

I am being investigated under a Victorian piece of legislation, brought out of obscurity to specifically target people living with HIV in England and Wales. The false allegation was made by someone I once loved very much. He is not happy with me, you could even say that he is angry with me. In normal, everyday situations, people talk, like rational adults. In my case, the man walked into a police station and accused me of trying to infect him with HIV. A false allegation, which has completely destroyed the life, which I had, and irreparably damaged the life of his own child. 

Of course, when someone makes this type of vexatious allegation, they do not do so in isolation. The person complaining bounces the idea off others; family, friends, sexual partners, lovers, associates, lawyers, whoever will listen and endorse their decision, until the idea gains such momentum that the urgency to walk into a police station to cry wolf is simply overwhelming. The culture that surrounds HIV, is one of blame, hostility and a tragic desire to segregate and punish those living with the syndrome.  

Perpetuating such words, ‘Claire tried to infect me with HIV’ amounts to defamation of the worst possible kind. The person on the receiving end is having their human and civil rights attacked on both a social and legal level, which has far reaching consequences that overturn and damage each and every quarter of their life. 

Over the past year, many of the facets associated with discrimination are ones that I am experiencing, which are also exerting catastrophic waves of destruction over my child’s life. 

The allegation has decimated my working and professional life. The loss of earnings are high and have forced my child and I into severe poverty. In essence, the allegation took away from me the tools to support my child financially, forcing me into a position where I could only buy food, children’s clothing and pay for other essentials on a credit card. That option has now expired. Everything has a limit. One family member is now supplying us with food, not charity, but an act of kindness that needs repaying in cash at some point in the not too distant future.

The impact upon my career has been devastating; it is now unlikely that I will ever work again in my chosen profession. Indeed, the person who made the allegation also took away my clean enhanced CRB, with colossal ramifications on a personal, career and financial level. 

I have not commented upon the emotional and psychological damage that has been caused. I could say, ‘let’s not go there’ because it is such a dark place to comment upon. Too true. I have lived 13 months with the gripping fear that should I be prosecuted for a crime that I have not committed, my child will be snatched from me by social services.

I could comment upon the depression or the severe deep emotional scares which the allegation has left me with. Or I could comment upon the fear of knowing my career has been ruined and I will never probably earn a decent salary ever again to give my child and I a financially secure future. Maybe I ought to leave it there and not pass comment on the real fear and anxiety that my two year old child and I will never escape the risk of HIV discrimination, hate crime, harassment and stigma. 

I have recently been forced into naming myself as a woman living with HIV on account of the false allegation, the defamation and the HIV harassment. That now means that not only am I at heightened risk of rejection, further harassment, discrimination and hate crime, but so too is my small child. HIV by association is a situation where those close to people living with HIV are at a higher than normal risk of experiencing the harms of HIV stigma. That now means that I have the terrifying worry that my beautiful child now faces a childhood of rejection and bullying on account of my medical condition. How does one quantify that reality? 

I know that on World Aids Day, I will be caring for my small child, while the CPS have still not made a decision to prosecute me with up to eight years imprisonment. 

This article previously appeared on the blog of girlwithhiv here. 

Two days before World Aids Day 2013, I was notified that the CPS are not taking further action. My feelings may come as a surprise to some. 

I have forgiven the man who made the vexatious allegation against me. I bear no anger and I bear no resentment. Some might hate. But I do not. I believe he was misguided, received erroneous advice and acted foolishly, no doubt receiving encouragement from others. I bear no ill-will and I have completely forgiven him.

I took to writing about the situation as a means of coping and also to draw attention to a pressing area of human rights violations in England and Wales; a situation which is reproduced in the criminalisation of HIV on an international level. In my case, the allegation should have been dismissed on the grounds of facts and evidence. It was not, however, and it spiraled into an abuse in the application of criminal justice. The personal repercussions have been simply horrific and those repercussions exerted (and continue to exert) a terrible shadow over my two year old child. That has been the hardest part, living with the impact upon an innocent child.

I could write more, but right now, words simply fail me. There are too many fragments of damage to try and piece back together.

This article previously appeared on girlwithhiv’s own blog here. 

HALCO is very pleased to announce our new consumer debt guide for people in Ontario. It includes information about debt, collection agencies, bankruptcy, being sued in court, resources, getting legal help, and more. 

The guide is available in English and French on our website:

I owe money…I am having trouble paying my bills

Je dois de l’argent…J’ai de la difficulté à payer mes factures

If you are an organization and would like to include our guide or other HALCO publications on your organization’s website, please link to our site rather than downloading our document onto your site.  You can then be sure that you have the most up-to-date version. 

HALCO provides free legal services to people living with HIV in Ontario.  Clients can call our office to speak with the caseworker on intake:  416-340-7790 or toll-free 1-888-705-8889.  Our intake hours for new inquiries are Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.   

This article previously appeared in girlwithhiv’s own blog here.

I have an incredibly large and sincere thank you to offer to the UK HIV charities, international HIV organisations and online publications, as well as all the individuals both in the UK and around the world, who have offered practical advice and gracious words of support since I decided to go public and announce that I was under criminal investigation after an ex-partner made a highly malicious and false allegation to the Police claiming that I intentionally attempted to transmit HIV.

The support, which I have received, and continue to receive, has been instrumental in my continuing to speak up about this human right’s violation. I am just one of many people living with HIV internationally who will endure this severe form of discrimination, which is enshrined in criminal law in many countries. For me, the investigation is over, the CPS dropped the false allegation, but it took approximately one year, which has irreparably damaged my career, my earnings, forced my child and I into severe poverty, and paved the path for further victimisation. Of course, such repercussions are the same for anyone in this situation.

I have been asked to continue writing about my experience and the criminalisation of HIV. That I shall do. I will not remain silent.

For now, however, a big thanks to everyone.

These condomless sexual encounters continued. What I had originally planned and what I actually got were two different things 

All my encounters resembled sex of the late 70’s before the AIDS epidemic. I know that gay porn was always condomless then and that people were barebacking, but I never expected reality today to completely mimic that era in such a complete and consistent manner.

 For a short time, I was able  to go with the flow, so to speak, given the fact that sex was back in my life again and I was enjoying it. I didn’t realize how much I missed it and each of the sexual adventures was exciting by providing me with a unique experience. After having been in a relationship for so long and being sexless a period of time, I had forgotten how titillating the novelty of sex with a new partner each time could be.

The revolving door of my bedroom was fun but it didn’t last long. Out of that deep, dark closet that I had thrown it into before embarking on this new route, HIV had begun to occasionally peer it’s head out. There were the occasional reminders that it was still there, no matter how much I tried to deny it. The fact that I wasn’t disclosing before these sexual encounters had slowly become an activity angst with questions and concerns, including  a blaring mantra repeating in your head that goes like this…”I’m not doing anything wrong, I’m not infectious, everything is ok…” during sex. This was a detraction from the pleasure that sex was supposed to be. It’s supposed to fun and a clear conscious sexual activity. Anyone having sex should be fully enjoying it and I wasn’t, but not to a point that I would stop altogether.

I suppose I could have lived with the uneasiness that permeated these sexual encounters if I had kept all of them to a level of casual or one night stands, but some of these encounters turned into repeats and this was something I should have never let happen. I wasn’t thinking it through and reminding myself of the decision I took of keeping it casual before embarking on this road, when the suggestion of seeing each other again was brought up.

I‘ll have to admit at times it was me requesting a second time, and some of these repeats appeared as potentially ongoing situations. I have to admit too  I started to like the few guys who had started to turn into more than a one night stand. I never expected emotion would get in the way, but I lost focus. I actually started to like these guys at a very basic level while at the same time trying not to think about my nondisclosure of HIV status.

The question of how they would react to my disclosure after barebacking had passed my mind with each and every one of them. I even tried to imagine their reaction to it based on how well I knew them. I even thought that maybe, someone might disclose back to me after the fact too, After all,  how could they bareback with a virtual stranger and not ask any questions?

Was my façade that good? Or are they under some misguided impression that all poz guys disclose? The truth is that in spite of the laws presently in play, we do not. For some of us, for multiple different reasons, we can’t or won’t. Maybe that portion of the poz community has, metaphorically speaking, been kicked in the face too many times with rejection. Maybe our skin isn’t thick enough to bear the brunt of the impact of rejection and we’ve possibly lost a little bit of ourselves each time in a cumulative manner that we considered giving up. Maybe simply we all crave human warmth and to be treated as normal human beings which is paramount in our human existence, and finally, maybe because when we disclose and remove our masks, we’re rarely accepted.

The sad reality is that I would never know the answer to that question. It’s impossible to ask because of the implied betrayal and secondly, the illegality of what I had done. I couldn’t disclose under these circumstances , even though I believe I haven’t harmed anyone health-wise; the law has made certain of that. The law has given me two choices, disclose and face almost certain rejection or hide my status and walk a very dangerous line close to prosecution and imprisonment. These have been my two choices in almost all scenarios.

If you ask where I am today with all this, I can say I’m presently not seeking to hook-up with anyone. Blame it on the cold weather, low interest, or being in a reflective state from all that has transpired. What I can say is that there was one pivotal moment with someone I had started to see on a regular basis. I was fucking him one day and after a while, when he assumed I was possibly close to coming, we were in a position in bed where he hooked his hands behind my knees. I tried to pull out but he wouldn’t let go, as if to possibly imply by this action that he wanted me to cum inside him, which I hadn’t done in previous encounters. What I was concerned about was that I was at that point where I would normally pull out and it was getting awkward fighting his grip on my legs. I did finally get out of his grip by telling him that I was getting a muscle cramp.

I grasped that what I was doing with these people could escalate by them pushing the boundaries that I had set for myself. I realized because we are two in bed, I’m not in complete control of the situation. So, after some serious thinking, I came to the conclusion that I couldn’t continue with these established rotating situations and decided to get rid of all my regular fuckbuds which I hadn’t disclosed to, which is all of them, except one.

What I learned from all this is that, first, sex has always been more personal to me and although I can do the one-night stand thing, it’s not really me. I think now that is why I started to get involved with some of the guys I met. I believe as we get older and we have done the one-night stand thing, we start to look for something more. Being alone or single at middle age is not the ideal state in my opinion. I know the majority of the single scene has a very casual approach to what I call the wham, bang, and goodbye, but it’s never been me.

The other thing is the whole nondisclosure aspect, I know I can have sex without disclosing, but as I said in part one, it’s burning a bridge at the same time, one you can never cross again. You can try, but with possible legal ramifications. The sad aspect to all this is when you meet a nice decent guy and you can’t take it any further because of decisions made earlier in the evening or on a previous date.

In all this you ask where is the hope, the bright note in this story? Well, in my jaunt through the world of nondisclosure, I did meet someone who didn’t reject me or run when I dropped my mask. The details are interesting, but too long for this story, but he is intelligent, kind, and unique, but I don’t know where it’s headed. I have many questions for myself and this new presence that I don’t know yet how to label.

Am I done with nondisclosure? The answer I have for you right now is that I don’t know.

As a final note, what I want to say here is that realistically the odds are against us, but there are people out there who will not reject us solely on our HIV status and can still see the person before the disease. Keep hope alive in your hearts and souls, and don’t let the rest of the ignorant world diminish your quest. The ones we search for are out there. Good luck.

Fake science

I recently read a few newspaper articles highlighting the scandalous falsification of data in a study involving an HIV vaccine at Iowa State University (ISU). The story orbits around former assistant professor Dr. Dong-Pyou Han (he resigned from this position in October 2013) who admitted to tampering with the study’s rabbit blood samples by adding human blood to them. The human blood that he added came from people that had already produced HIV anti-bodies, thus making the study look like the vaccine in question was deriving a positive result from the rabbits. Over the years, this study had garnered approximately $19 million in National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding.   

While this study is one of the most brazen examples of falsified research results in HIV history, one can’t help but question the implications this has on future research in the area of HIV and/or AIDS and scientific inquiry more broadly. It also begs the question of how ethically current studies are being conducted and what type of academic environment (within and beyond ISU) permitted this study to advance seamlessly (while receiving more funding) for several years undetected.

In addition, we also have to ask ourselves how much additional research has been “faked” over the years? How can additional ethical safeguards be put in place to ensure that this doesn’t happen again? And how can we ensure that this unfortunate case of poor ethical judgment doesn’t negatively impact the ethically sound research being conducted now and in the future, particularly in the area of HIV vaccine research? 

It’s about integrity

The question of ethics in research is a considerably broad topic but one that deserves to be re-assessed and evaluated consistently considering how embedded ethical issues are in various aspects of research.

Within academic and healthcare institutions, research ethics boards (REBs) exist to ensure that research projects, particularly those involving human beings, are abiding by strict ethical guidelines to ensure that the well being, rights and privacy of participants are protected. REBs also monitor the ethics of study design, the dissemination of findings and issues of confidentiality, coercion, deception and so on. In principle, REBs (or other governing ethical bodies) are responsible for ensuring the highest level of integrity in research though in practice, regardless of the existence of REBs, ethics often slip between the cracks, as in the case of ISU.    

While my research experience is limited in comparison to many of my senior colleagues, over the last eight years or so, I have had the opportunity to conduct research and work within three universities in Toronto (as well as in collaboration with additional universities) and have witnessed a variety of ethical blunders varying in degrees of severity (none nearly as faulty as the case of ISU). For me, ethical considerations extend beyond having a clear and comprehensive informed consent form, protecting the institution, providing some form of decent compensation or minimizing risks for participants.    

Ethical integrity should begin prior to the idea stage of research. Before creating the research team, designing the study, submitting grant applications, ethical considerations must be made and I would argue that several critical questions should be asked before commencement. For example, should the research even be conducted? Am I the right person to do it? How and in what considerable ways is this research going to benefit the participants? Are the benefits experienced by the participants more significant than the professional advancement the researcher/investigator will experience? In the context of HIV, how will GIPA/MIPA shape the research and the involvement of people living with HIV? How are community members involved in meaningful ways? How does ally work factor into research when working with communities that you aren’t directly associated with? 

So what’s in it for me?

Research (involving humans) would be nothing in the absence of volunteer participants yet participants often take a backseat to other research priorities such as of being awarded the next big grant, producing manuscripts for peer-reviewed journal, or designing future studies. That being said, there are many excellent research studies (past, present, and future) that value the participants and their contributions immensely. For anyone thinking of participating in research, here are some things you can do to increase your comfort as a participant and encourage ethical research integrity*:

1)     .. Read and understand the informed consent form! It’s amazing to me how many people skim a 4-6 page consent form and sign off on it. This is your opportunity to understand what is expected of you and know your rights as a participant. If there’s anything that isn’t clear to you, ask and keep asking until you understand.

2)    .  Stay in communication with the research team even after your formal participation has finished! This increases accountability.

3)  . Request a copy of the study results: depending on the size and duration of the study, this might require some patience, as the results might not be available for months or years after your participation. If community events are held in relation to the study you’re involved in, attend these and hear what the research team has found or what they are planning for future studies. Ask questions and challenge anything that might seem impractical for you or the community you’re a part of. The primary goal of research should be to advance knowledge and benefit the people who are involved as participants. If a study is only advancing knowledge, but to the detriment of it’s participants or community members, it’s not a study you should participate in.           

Next steps for researchers and REBs

I believe that all researchers/investigators with active research studies would benefit immensely from taking part in mandatory ethical conduct training. This would enable them to be kept abreast of relevant ethical issues/serve as an ethical refresher. In addition, regular check-ins with REB members would likely increase ethical accountability. Outside of submitting the initial ethical protocol and subsequent renewal/annual reports, it would be beneficial for more in-depth reviews to be conducted. Researchers/investigators are left to their own devices to report any ethical issues that may have arisen during the course of the study. Outside of self-reporting, there aren’t any safeguards put in place to verify the ethical integrity of the research; therefore, this could be an area of improvement. Many academic REBs are comprised of a handful (or more) of rotating (but sometimes long-term) professors who are responsible for reviewing research protocols. Typically, REB members meet monthly or several times annually to review; however, it could be beneficial for the REB to be comprised of individuals whose primary job was upholding ethical integrity in research. Given the often busy work-lives of the people who sit on REBs and the relatively small amount of time they spend on REB issues, it’s clear why some ethical issues fall through the cracks. With the implementation of some minor changes, such as those listed above, the chances of derailing ethical misconduct increases, which would be beneficial for all. 

*This is not to suggest that the ethical integrity of research falls on the shoulders of participants (as it clearly does not). Rather, these are suggestions for participants to inform themselves on what they’re involved in and challenge issues should they arise.  

Lately we have been reading about and hearing about positive experiences with disclosing HIV status to sex partners, experiences that ended well where HIV was not an issue and where individuals were not rejected on the basis of their status. This is what we are ultimately aiming for as the goal - to be accepted as equal partners in sexual relationships. The success stories are well received and we encourage people to keep writing about them. 

As part of what feels like a delicate balancing act, we also need to continue to focus on the complexities of disclosure to ensure that individuals are not lulled into believing that acceptance in disclosing HIV to sex partners is resolved, and no longer a major stress in the lives of people living with HIV. Disclosure remains a major obstacle and it does create overwhelming anxiety, as many people continue to isolate themselves from potential sex partners as a means of avoiding rejection and hurt. Others choose to  continue disclosing and  taking risks, while trying to manage the anxiety and detrimental impact on their emotional and psychological wellbeing each time they are rejected, often alone, with little support and help.

All of this to say disclosing is for the most part, not a positive experience and that is what prompted the HIV Disclosure Project to provide a space where this can be discussed and solutions sought. Members of the HIV community identified disclosure to sex partners as the major stress in their lives today and requested a space where this topic could be explored further, where peer support could be provided, where individuals could feel more empowered, while making the general public aware of the impact on people living with HIV when there remains an automatic tendency to say no and reject them on the basis of their HIV status.

Simply stating that it is the obligation of every person living with HIV to disclose their status to potential sex partners and leaving it at that is not sufficient. It does not address empowerment of people living with HIV while working through the complexities of disclosure. It does not address the growing number of criminal prosecution for non disclosure.

The repeated message about the duties and responsibilities of people living with HIV to disclose their HIV status and in turn get rejected and discriminated against, is manifesting resentment, anger and a general attitude whereby individuals are simply stating – “I will not accept these obligations unless the general public takes the initiative to assume their own duties and responsibilities in this process”. This is a rather soft version of how many people living with HIV feel about the message, as there are some radical reactions out there if you care to look.

People living with HIV are growing weary of the message being delivered to them in one form or another. We got the message, now direct it to those who need to hear it and make changes accordingly. We cannot be expected to play the dutiful role of scapegoats in a system that is fundamentally flawed to begin with. Accepting the status quo would reflect behavior that perpetuates powerlessness, stigma and marginalization.

Positive stories are encouraged and as mentioned this is the ultimate goal to ensure that all people living with HIV may have sex and intimacy that is free of rejection, stigma and discrimination. But if we focus only on the positive outcomes we risk giving a false sense of acceptance with the general public. If we do not continue to discuss the realities of disclosure, which involve rejection, criminalization and stigma, we risk the unintended outcome of leading the general public and people living with HIV into the belief that all of the complexities have been resolved. We know otherwise and we need to continue to address stigma and rejection each time it occurs. We need to continue to keep this conversation alive, otherwise we will no longer be seeking ways to empower those who are being stigmatized to mobilize themselves to  eliminate stigma and discrimination.

We may even run the risk of having individuals doubt themselves and ask what is wrong with them if they are not having success stories.

We need to continue to challenge and re-think this easy dismissal of HIV disclosure which simply states it is the duty and obligation of people living with HIV to disclose each and every time to  potential sex partners. If we continue to accept this flawed, unrealistic, imbalance of power, we can be assured that the topic of disclosure will be silenced. We will continue to be marginalized, oppressed and criminalized as the general public contentedly carries on with no expectation on their part for any need for change. 

Keep the positive stories coming as they provide some semblance of hope as we strive towards complete acceptance in sexual relationships. But let us not forgot the harsh reality of living with HIV. The  general public needs to be reminded continually to take on their duties and responsibilities in working with the HIV community in finding solutions. 

Beverley M and Denis D

This article first appeared on The Disclosure Project website here. 

New Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations

In our HALCO news Spring 2013 newsletter, we reported that the federal government was proposing to change the process for accessing medical marijuana (the government, in their legislation, spells it as marihuana). 

The old system was governed by the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR). The new system is called the Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations (MMPR). The new MMPR came into effect in June 2013 but some of the old MMAR provisions are still law until March 31, 2014. 

Under the new regulations:

. You must get your doctor or other authorized medical practitioner to complete a “medical document” that is similar to a prescription.

. Once you have your medical document, you have to register with a “licensed producer” and buy your medical marijuana from the producer. This is the only way to obtain medical marijuana.

. Your licensed producer will send your marijuana by mail to you, or you can ask to have it sent to your physician. There are strict requirements for mailing and labeling.

. Producers may only send dried marijuana (for example, you cannot receive cookies).

. The most medical marijuana you will be allowed to possess at one time is 150 grams, and it is also the most that can be shipped to you at one time.

. You must dispose of any marijuana/cannabis, plants or seeds that you have from the old MMAR before March 31, 2014. You can either destroy these items, or give or sell them to a licensed producer (you need Health Canada approval to give or sell the items to a licensed producer). 

You can find general information on the Health Canada website: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/marihuana/index-eng.php. 

The changes do not address the problems faced by many people living with HIV or other health conditions. Many doctors in the past have refused to provide a medical document and the new rules do not provide any solution. The changes will also make medical marijuana more difficult to afford because:

• you will not be allowed to grow your own medical marijuana,
• you will have to buy your medical marijuana from a licensed producer, and
• there are no rules about how much the “licensed producers” can charge.

As with the old system, the new system does not recognize or authorize “compassion clubs,” even though these clubs have been shown to have multiple benefits, such as providing a space where medical marijuana users can offer each other support and information. 

A lawsuit has been launched in B.C. to challenge the affordability of medical. The lawsuit also challenges other restrictions like the requirement that only dried marijuana be supplied and the restriction that no producer can grow outdoors or in a residential dwelling. If this lawsuit is successful, there will be a declaration that the new medical marijuana regime is unconstitutional. Such a declaration would affect every person entitled to medical marijuana. You do not need to register with the law firm handling the litigation. The lawsuit includes a request for an interim injunction to prevent the new medical marijuana regime from taking full effect on March 31, 2014. The Federal Court will likely hear the injunction motion around the end of February, 2014. For more information, or to keep updated, you can visit the law firm’s website: http://johnconroy.com/MMARlitigation.htm. 

Privacy Breach for Medical Marijuana Program Participants 

In November 2013, Health Canada sent a mass mailing to medical marijuana recipients in envelopes that identified the recipients as participants in the Medical Marihuana Access Program. The mailing went out to approximately 40,000 people. A law firm in British Columbia has filed an application to start a class action on behalf of these recipients, seeking damages for breach of privacy. If the court allows this class action to proceed, all recipients of the mailing will automatically be part of the law suit (unless you notify the law firm that you do not want to be part of the class action). It is not necessary to register with the law firm to be part of the class action. However, people who register will receive updates from the law firm. To find out how to register or for more information, you can visit the law firm’s website: www.branchmacmaster.com/medical-marihuana/.

These articles previously appeared in the newsletter of the HIV/AIDS Legal Clinic of Ontario (HALCO) here.

Last week, I was contacted by a journalist at the Sun newspaper. She had read my blog and was requesting an interview about my current experiences of online HIV harassment and HIV hate crime. Apparently, issues around HIV stigma and discrimination are topical due to the storyline on Emmerdale. I do not watch soaps and had only learned about the introduction of HIV into the storyline via news reports and my contacts in the field of HIV.

The Sun newspaper wished to run a story specifically about HIV stigma and harassment, to coincide with the storyline in the ITV soap.  I was told that I would be paid generously in return for being named and photographed.

Whilst I am happy for journalists to contact me, I reserve the right to decline interviews. If I had been approached by a newspaper with a history of responsible journalism around HIV, I would have given considerable thought to the proposition in order to raise awareness about the medical condition and also to challenge social stigma and discrimination. On this occasion, however, the long history of the Sun newspaper irresponsibly running stories about the medical condition with extremely offensive and tasteless headlines and inaccurate medical facts, made me walk away from the proposition.

In many ways, this is unfortunate. Why should someone living with HIV have to be wary of the way a newspaper decides to report facts about their medical condition or worry about the language that may be used? Well, in an ideal world there would be no necessity in the first place to write or to report about HIV discrimination, stigma or hate crime, for these social occurrences and crimes would not exist. But in the here and now, it is much easier for journalists and editors to believe in outdated facts about this virus and propagate old, yet newsworthy, stereotypes of a person living with the condition, rather than report the truth.

I personally believe that it is incredibly newsworthy to crush stigmatizing stereotypes with the written word by printing scientifically accurate grabbing headlines and to also set an example of responsible journalism for other publications to follow.

Journalists and editors, like the rest of us, should pride themselves on career development and remaining top of their game. In the case of HIV reportage, this means staying in touch with the amazing developments in treatment, learning the meaning of bio-medical prevention of onward transmission, getting to grips with the significance of undetectable viral load, trying to understand why stigma and criminalization stop people from taking HIV tests, celebrating the fact that more than 99% of babies born to mothers living with HIV in the UK are born free of the virus…I could go on.

The take away point is simply this. Journalists and editors are imbued with an important role in society. They are the pulse of conveying current affairs, of politics and law, of developments in health and medicine, of sharing life real stories, and as such they can significantly influence the way their readership interpret and digest facts about HIV.

From HALCO 

You can find information about our workshop series by scrolling down  and also on our website (including a printable pdf notice):    

Please share this information  - everyone is welcome but space is limited so registration is required.  

As always, HALCO provides free legal services for people in Ontario who are living with HIV/AIDS.  Our intake hours for new legal inquires are Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. (not Wednesdays 

HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario (HALCO) 

Toronto, Ontario, Canada 

Telephone 416-340-7790 or 1-888-705-8889

***** 

FREE Public Legal Education Workshops at HALCO in April and May 2014

Our free workshops are held in person in our HALCO Boardroom at 65 Wellesley Street East, 4th Floor, Toronto, Ontario (one block east of Yonge Street/Wellesley subway station): 

In Debt? Learn about Options, on Tuesday April 15, 2014, from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. (presenter: Amy Wah, HALCO Staff Lawyer). 

Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) Overview, on Thursday April 24 from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. (presenter:  Jill McNall, HALCO Community Legal Worker). 

Refugees and permanent residents: How can you lose your status in Canada? and, Update on Canadian Citizenship Applications, on Thursday May 8 from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. (presenters:  John Norquay and Meagan Johnston, HALCO Staff Lawyers).   

Criminalization of HIV Non-Disclosure, on Wednesday May 14 from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. (presenter: Ryan Peck, HALCO Executive Director and Lawyer). 

Canada's New Medical Marihuana/Cannabis Laws, on Wednesday May 21 from 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m. (presenter: Renée Lang, HALCO Staff Lawyer). 

Everyone is welcome but space is limited so Registration is required.  

How to Register:    

Please include your name, your contact information, your organization (if any), and the workshop(s) that you would like to attend: 

• E-Mail to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.  
• Phone 416-340-7790 or toll-free 1-888-705-8889  or  FAX to 416-340-7248 

Please avoid wearing scents or fragrances when coming to our offices. If you require disability/communication accommodation, please contact us.  We regret that our budget does not permit us to provide refreshments or transportation assistance. 

For more information or to request other workshops, please contact us.