An HIV positive Iowa man used a condom to have sex with an HIV negative man but was later arrested and imprisoned for not telling the guy he was HIV positive. He was sentenced to 25 years in prison, placed on Iowa’s sex offender registry and owes tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, court costs and restitution.

The other man did not contract the virus. Read about the cops showing up with weapons, arresting and jailing him. Read on to see how his legal battle is going:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012307290070&nclick_check=1

Insanity! These laws remind me of The Scarlett Letter. Even with the risk of no harm, he is forced by law to divulge his status. Repulsive IMHO

Not only that, his doctor had told him that with his low viral load the chances of him infecting anyone were slim to none.

But, think abut this. The other guy. Should he not have the right to decide- for himself- if he wishes to engage in sex with a HIV positive guy? I believe in putting your cards on the table. But not a lengthy prison sentence

Not only that, his doctor had told him that with his low viral load the chances of him infecting anyone were slim to none.

But, think abut this. The other guy. Should he not have the right to decide- for himself- if he wishes to engage in sex with a HIV positive guy? I believe in putting your cards on the table. But not a lengthy prison sentence

I agree with both points - the poz guy SHOULD have informed his partner, but the penalty is out of proportion to the offense.

I am curious, you think a positive guy that is undetectable AND using a condom should be required by law to inform every partner they have?

I am curious, you think a positive guy that is undetectable AND using a condom should be required by law to inform every partner they have?

Not sure if your post was adressed to me, Lucky or both, but...speaking for myself, I said I think he should have disclosed his status, not that I think that it should be mandated by law. The article is short on details - was a condom used for oral (if there was oral)? (I doubt it) How recently was the the viral load tested?

The odds may have been VERY long, but there was the possiblity of infection. Condoms do occasionally break. I think the partner was deprived of his right to make an informed decision as to whether he was comfortable with the odds.

Not only that, his doctor had told him that with his low viral load the chances of him infecting anyone were slim to none.

But, think abut this. The other guy. Should he not have the right to decide- for himself- if he wishes to engage in sex with a HIV positive guy? I believe in putting your cards on the table. But not a lengthy prison sentence

Anyone that chooses to engage in sex is taking the risks associated with the act. Laws penaliziing HIV positive individuals for failing to disclose their status will deter more individuals from getting tested.

Anyone that chooses to engage in sex is taking the risks associated with the act. Laws penaliziing HIV positive individuals for failing to disclose their status will deter more individuals from getting tested.

That was my thought as well.

CNN has picked up the story, and we hear from the young man who had sex with the HIV positive man:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/02/health/criminalizing-hiv/index.html?hpt=hp_bn12

CNN has picked up the story, and we hear from the young man who had sex with the HIV positive man:

http://www.cnn.com/2...tml?hpt=hp_bn12

Thanks for posting this more detailed follow-up. According to the partner who reported the incident, there was indeed unprotected oral sex. I still maintain that Rhoades should have disclosed his status and given his partner the opportunity to make an informed choice.

And I still think that the punishment was disproprotionate to the crime (assuming he was actually guilty, according to the law).

whats crazy are folks who are positive not being honest with their sex partners. no excuse to withhold information that could potentially kill or change someones life. imo, I'd ask for 100% transparency each and every time there's sexual contact.