The Bay Area Reporter - May 8, 1995
Ed Zold and Jeff Getty ACT UP/Golden Gate Writers' Pool

Since the very beginning of the AIDS epidemic, California has offered anonymous testing for HIV infection. Currently, anonymous testing sites provide HIV testing and counseling while collecting demographic risk factor data regarding sexual activity, sexual orientation, and drug use. This information is then reported anonymously to state and federal health agencies.

Many states that once operated anonymous testing and reporting programs have abandoned them and have begun name reporting. In fact, 28 states now ban or limit the availability of anonymous HIV testing. These restrictions accompany requirements that state health departments record the name and other risk factors of all individuals testing HIV-positive. Further, many of these programs require persons testing HIV-positive to disclose names, addresses, and phone numbers of sex partners for "contact tracing."

Virtually all federal CDC-funded HIV testing sites offer contact tracing. In California and other states offering anonymous testing, such programs are voluntary, allowing individuals the chance to notify sex partners on their own.

A somewhat heated debate has sprung up between AIDS activists and right wingers. There is even some argument among opposing groups; the California Medical Association (CMA) and right wing radio types such as Dr. Stanley Monteith argue that many are HIV infected and do not know it. ACT UP/Golden Gate agrees. These folks also argue that if HIV-infected persons were alerted to their sero-status, they might be able to seek early medical care, thereby keeping themselves healthy longer. ACT UP Golden Gate agrees.

AIDS activists disagree with CMA and the right's contention that anonymous testing and volunteer contact tracing is not working. Anonymous testing and reporting is offered in most heavily HIV impacted American cities. In such cities, anonymous testing - combined with outreach, education, and HIV/AIDS awareness programs - have proven effective in lowering sero-prevalence rates among HIV high risk groups, including gay men and IV drug users.

The CMA, Monteith, and others argue that HIV infection name reporting and mandatory contact tracing will not discourage persons from getting tested or reporting risk factors. AIDS organizations and others disagree with this assertion wholeheartedly. Activists recently took over CMA office in San Francisco, demanding that the CMA stop pushing for name reporting legislation. Recent polling at test sites in Los Angeles and Alameda counties revealed that individuals at high risk for HIV infection said overwhelmingly that they would be much less likely to test if mandatory name reporting was the rule. Further, considering the illegal status of using IV drugs, and the stigmatization and persecution of queers in this country, ACT UP/Golden Gate finds it difficult to believe that people would be willing to disclose risk factors along with their names to the government.

Recent coverage of the CMA's decision to endorse named reporting for HIV infection and to pursue name reporting legislation has included two false assertions: a) that the Centers for Disease Control endorses name reporting and, b) that name reporting has worked in controlling other sexually transmitted diseases.

Dr. Rolland Lowe, chair of the CMA board, has distributed an article from a CDC publication in which Dr. Patricia Fleming, CDC epidemiologist at that time, gave noncommittal, lukewarm, waffling responses to questions asked by a reporter about name reporting. The CDC has actually refused to take the lead in this emotional issue, making no policy or obligation to states receiving CDC funding for any type of HIV testing program - anonymous, numeric code systems and name report systems alike. The CMA assertion that the CDC has called for mandatory name reporting is false.

The second assertion used by the CMA, that name reporting has worked in controlling other sexually transmitted diseases, is utterly ridiculous and unproved. STDs have proliferated wildly since name reporting was introduced as a control measure.

The CDC have begun to collect information and advice, which one can only hope will resolve this debate one day. Last year, a CDC advisory committee on HIV prevention stated in a comprehensive review of CDC HIV prevention and surveillance programs that, "Community fears around the systematic collection of names of HIV-infected individuals are real and ... such concerns are therefore bound to interfere with surveillance efforts." A second CPC announcement in 1993 was that a study is underway of a unique identifier system that can provide more accurate reporting than anonymous reporting systems. This new system may provide more accurate data than we now have, and at the same time will not compromise an HIV-infected person's confidentiality.

Clearly then, while the jury is still out on name reporting systems due to a lack of CDC leadership, any decision to change reporting systems would be inappropriate. While the CMA and others pretend to advocate for better health policies, let us not forget that they are the same people who have in the past called for hysterical HIV policies. The right wing wants the names and addresses of all those infected with HIV literally handed over to the police so that perhaps someday their ultimate wet dream could come true: quarantine and concentration camps for their enemies.

ACT UP/Golden Gate meets every Tuesday at 7:30 p.m. at 592 Castro Street, upstairs (Above Buffalo Foods).

950508
BR950502

Always watch for outdated information. This article first appeared in 1995. This material is designed to support, not replace, the relationship that exists between you and your doctor.

AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.

Copyright ©1980, 1995. AEGiS. All materials appearing on AEGiS are protected by copyright as a collective work or compilation under U.S. copyright and other laws and are the property of AEGiS, or the party credited as the provider of the content. .