On the ethics of prosecuting for spreading STDs willingly

This troper is curious on two points:

• is it ethical to prosecute people for willingly spreading ST Ds without their partner's knowledge and possibly ruining the lives of others? If so, to what extent should those that do so be punished?

• What countries do prosecute for this? How heavily?

edited 5th Jan '11 1:12:26 PM by Diamonnes

I know that there was a guy prosecuted for Grevious bodily harm when he slept with people when he knew he had AIDS.

How do you define "willingly spreading ST Ds"? As engaging in unprotected sex despite having an STD? Engaging in protected sex with an STD? Is it okay if you tell your partner? What if you don't? Does intent matter (i.e., seeking sexual gratification through risky activities versus engaging in sex for the sole purpose of spreading ST Ds)?

I'd add the qualifier "without the partner's knowledge."

It's a crime to have sex with someone if you have HIV, know so and don't tell them, don't know about other STD's though.

But morally? I think it's always wrong. You're spreading a disease which can be very deadly or at least debilitating.

EDIT: Changed AIDS to HIV

edited 5th Jan '11 1:03:16 PM by thatguythere47

Pykrete, why do yo always think of the details I forget to implement? It's kinda creepy. (But very helpful :) )

I'm a programmer. Exception handling is a fact of life

I'd only say prosecution would be called for in the case of permanent ones and/or life threatening ones.

Spreading chlamydia and the like (treatable ones) is a dick move, to be sure, but not prosecutable in my opinion.

Even the spread of "minor" ST Ds can probably be prosecuted as criminal acts, and even if not, the injured party can seek significant compense for "damages".

If you poison someone, you are prosecuted for anything from assault up to murder. Why would you not be prosecuted for giving someone a disease that can kill them?

As for 'curable' diseases like chlamydia, even the ST Ds that can be cured can still cause permanent health problems, such as sterility and increased risk of cancer.

Also, the partner could spread it to others, amplifying the damage.

Oh whoops, misread the title and subject of the topic: people who KNOW they have something and yet neglect to mention it and spread disease like a 1400's era rat? Yeah, I could see where prosecution there could be in order.

Sorry, my reading comprehension's been a bit dodgy tonight; did not sleep well at all last night...

You have to think about the long term effects oof each STD, not just HIV/AIDS. Those two may be death sentences but Herpes Simplex is incurable as well. Not to mention all the ST Ds that cause brain damage in unborn children, or just good old infertility. I heard of this one guy who had sex with a chick he was dating: she dumped him after (it's not just girls who get screwed over) leaving him with the afore mentioned Herpes. She knew that she had it, he didn't.

Then you have to consider how many more people will be infected because of the victims ignorance.

I reckon that Herpes and other 'non-fatal' diseases that are spread without 'consent' should get the Grievous bodily harm sentence. As far as AIDS/HIV is concerned: manslaughter or murder as far as *I'm* concerned. They've basically poisoned them.

Grievous bodily harm may be a bit too far in my opinion, but yeah I can see where you're coming from.

I know my opinion may be a little extreme but I've heard to many times where someone (guy or girl) makes one stupid decision - hell, half the time they really thought they knew the person - and get one of these ST Ds.

It's bad enough that people are still getting AI Ds from botched blood donations but when someone runs around spreading this crap knowingly, I think they may as well be firing off a round of bullets into a crowd.

Just look what a gumma could do to your body and you will change your mind.

edited 5th Jan '11 8:27:28 PM by Blurring

A what now, Blurring?

From the other wiki.

A gumma is a soft, non-cancerous growth resulting from the tertiary stage of syphilis. It is a form of granuloma. Gummas are most commonly found in the liver (gumma hepatis), but can also be found in brain, heart, skin, bone, testis, and other tissues, leading to a variety of potential problems including neurological disorders or heart valve disease.

Not that I want to sound dumb, but what's a gumma and change my mind about a) being too extreme, or b) my actual opinion.

Not trying to be a Jerkass, so apologies if it sounds that way. Very difficult for me to convey tone through text.

My apologies, I was addressing Mark Von Lewis.

Cool, thanks for the definition Blurring (didn't see your post. connection is rubbish).

Meh, I have Herpes Simplex in the form of cold sores. ... I suppose it technically qalifies as an STD, but no sexual contact need be involved. It's honestly a minor annoyance- I'd place it just above 'paper cut' on the severity scale.

Though I do suppose it's possible that it's more inconvenient on the genitals; not sure.

edited 6th Jan '11 12:29:30 PM by Diamonnes

Do you feel the need to warn everyone you have Herpes before you kiss them?

Yes. When it gets to that point in a relationship I say "hey, this is important. I've got cold sores, which are both chronic and contagious. Snog at your own peril."