WHAT'S IN IT FOR YOU?
I have often spoken about my irritation when it comes to the issue of blood donation and the outright ban of gay men (men who have had sex with another man).
A recent article mentions that the ban may be lifted and replaced with a 12 month deferral (read it here). While a temporary "deferral" is a step in the right direction, as far as I am concerned, it still isn't really good enough considering that all blood is tested and that HIV testing (because HIV is really what everyone is concerned with here) has become pretty advanced/accurate and fast.
I haven't given blood since I was in high school. I gave once and then had to wait a while because I had gotten a tattoo. By the time that deferral was over I was in university and in the process of coming out. I would definitely give blood on a regular basis if I was given the chance. However even a 12 month deferral would mean that I would have to abstain from sex in order to give blood. Not a problem if I am single and not dating. But while this restriction is placed on me and people in a similar situation it is still not placed on heterosexual partners.
In July I had an HIV test which came back negative. I had another one a year before that. Having this test done is more for my own peace of mind - and to be smart about my choices. If I was sick and didn't know it I could unknowingly pass it onto a partner. However if I was HIV positive and gave blood that blood, presumably, wouldn't get used since all donated blood is tested. There is a fail-safe when it comes to donating blood.
I still say that I could just lie about my being gay and give blood anyhow, but I'm not about to do that. If blood services really cared about their blood shortages they would examine their restrictions. Some make sense. Some do not. For years I have disagreed with their stance on this one, and my opinion isn't about to change anytime soon.
It's not my right to give blood, but I sure do have the right to be offended that they won't let me. For now it's in me to keep.
Later all... ;)
A recent article mentions that the ban may be lifted and replaced with a 12 month deferral (read it here). While a temporary "deferral" is a step in the right direction, as far as I am concerned, it still isn't really good enough considering that all blood is tested and that HIV testing (because HIV is really what everyone is concerned with here) has become pretty advanced/accurate and fast.
I haven't given blood since I was in high school. I gave once and then had to wait a while because I had gotten a tattoo. By the time that deferral was over I was in university and in the process of coming out. I would definitely give blood on a regular basis if I was given the chance. However even a 12 month deferral would mean that I would have to abstain from sex in order to give blood. Not a problem if I am single and not dating. But while this restriction is placed on me and people in a similar situation it is still not placed on heterosexual partners.
In July I had an HIV test which came back negative. I had another one a year before that. Having this test done is more for my own peace of mind - and to be smart about my choices. If I was sick and didn't know it I could unknowingly pass it onto a partner. However if I was HIV positive and gave blood that blood, presumably, wouldn't get used since all donated blood is tested. There is a fail-safe when it comes to donating blood.
I still say that I could just lie about my being gay and give blood anyhow, but I'm not about to do that. If blood services really cared about their blood shortages they would examine their restrictions. Some make sense. Some do not. For years I have disagreed with their stance on this one, and my opinion isn't about to change anytime soon.
It's not my right to give blood, but I sure do have the right to be offended that they won't let me. For now it's in me to keep.
Later all... ;)
Labels: Blood Donation, Blood Services
posted by Todd at
9/09/2011 01:35:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home