Pet owners who eat meat - Case Study Example

This law come to the aid of those people who get infected by the infected people purposefully. A concern in regards to this issue comes with a thought provocation as to whether the law shall help in preventing the spread of the disease or the passage of the law shall escalate the spread of HIV/AIDS. The disease has been on the increase since the time it was recognized in the early 1980s. since then, its prevalence rate has escalated though to some extent the medics have tried containing it all along.

There has been invention of drugs that can contain the harmful effects of the viruses (Kalichman, 76). The discovery of the antiretroviral has helped in prolonging the life of the infected people. Medics and researchers are also on the lookout researching the mechanisms through, which this disease could be cured. The criminalization of the intentional spread of HIV is not a new concept. The same law is in effect in states such as Illinois, Arizona, and in so many other states and nations in the world have adopted the same law to help curb the spread of HIV and AIDS.

The cost of HIV and AIDS is too high. Living with the condition is awesomely high and the trauma of handling the disease is just unbearable though manageable. It would be unfair for one to subject another person to the same condition knowingly. One would therefore have to make a choice because the law would charge one with the responsibility of being free with their sexual partner in regards to their sexually transmitted infections. Failure of which one would be left with dares consequences and choices to make.

The probable choices and conditions available for not revealing one’s status would be choosing to go to prison, loose one’s job, and the government housing. The law also would pose psychological effects on people; such issues that may cause stigma and self-concepts. One would feel humiliated and deprived of the right of health privacy (Kalichman, 24). The law also would penetrate the cultural spheres and create a society where there is not private health information. People would thus be compelled to share their health status without hiding anything from another.

There are issues that must be taken care of with the passage of this law lets people shy away from taking the test to hanker on ignorance of their status. There should be incentives associated with testing and in the event one is found HIV positive, the federal government should offer the infected person some incentives. The incentives should include giving of tax breaks and exempting one from heavy work backlog without reducing the pay. The law should also be molded to offer a manageable punishment to the already infected people who have knowingly transmitted the disease to other to prevent causing more harm to a person who has already be harmed by the fangs of the virus.

The table below shows the pros and cons of passing the bill into law Pros Cons Option 1: Passing bill that would criminalize the knowing transmission of an STD -More likely to inform partner, thus decreasing spread (C, A, V) -Medical advances would evolved quicker because the virus would not evolve as fast with less transmissions (C) -Allows person B to protect themselves ( -Less likely to be tested so in case of transmission, it would be unknowing (C) -Economic burden on state (C) -stigma/negative stereotypes that go along with STD’s increase (E) -Violate right to privacy (R) (HOWEVER, right to live trumps right to privacy ie antithesis for this point) -Takes