Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

June-14-10

Advisory Committee Upholds Ban on Blood Donation by Gay and Bisexual Men

The federal Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability ruled on Friday to uphold the long – standing ban preventing gay and bisexual men from donating blood. CNN reported that the policy faced review thanks to pressure from a group of 17 senators, led by Sen. John Kerry (D-MA). Despite the senators' efforts, the ban was upheld by a committee vote of 9 to 6, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Progressive groups joined the senators in their criticism of the policy. In a release, the ACLU quoted James Esseks, director of the ACLU LGBT & AIDS Project as saying "Eligibility for donating blood should be based on scientific evidence, not stigmatizing and outdated stereotypes…We know that many straight people have HIV. If the existing screening methods are sufficient to protect the blood supply from straight people with HIV, then the government needs a really good reason for having a different rule for gay and bisexual men. It's not clear that it does."

According to The Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law said that by completely opening up donation to gay men, 219,000 more pints of blood would be available a year.

Currently, any man who has had sex with another man since 1977 is banned from donating blood regardless of their detailed sexual history or HIV risk assessment The ACLU argues that treating gay or bisexual men differently than heterosexual individuals has serious constitutional concerns, and points out that this type of policy pays no recognition to high risk or safer sex practices. The policy ignores individual practices like condom usage, and quantity of partners one has, and the types of sexual activities one engaged in.

The Los Angeles Times reported that the Committee did acknowledge that the policy is "suboptimal." The Committee recommended certain steps to create a more nuanced policy in the future, and remains open to changing the policy upon further study.

Media Resources: ACLU 6/10/10; The Williams Institute 6/10; ACLU briefing 6/8/10 Los Angeles Times 6/12/10; CNN 5/26/10


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1. The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .
 
10/30/2014 UPS Switches Pregnant Worker Policy Ahead of Supreme Court Case - The United Parcel Service (UPS) is changing its policy on light duty assignments for pregnant workers, even though the company will stand by its refusal to extend accommodations to a former employee in an upcoming Supreme Court case. UPS announced on Monday in a memo to employees, and in a brief filed with the US Supreme Court, that the company will begin offering temporary, light-duty positions to pregnant workers on January 1, 2015. . . .
 
10/30/2014 North Dakota Medical Students Speak Out Against Measure 1 - Medical students at the University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences are asking North Dakotans to vote no on Measure 1, a personhood measure on the state ballot this fall. The students issued published a letter in the Grand Forks Herald stating that they opposed Measure 1 in part because they are against "the government's taking control of the personal health care decisions of its citizens." Nearly 60 UND School of Medicine students signed the letter, citing concerns over the "very broad and ambiguous language" used in the proposed amendment, which has no regard for serious and life-threatening medical situations such as ectopic pregnancies. Measure 1 would change the North Dakota state constitution to create an "inalienable right to life" for humans "at any stage of development" - including the moment of fertilization and conception. . . .