by Lisa Shaver

Created on: August 03, 2010   Last Updated: August 04, 2010

     There are legitimate arguments for both sides of this argument; in fact, the NO side probably has more arguments than the Yes side does. For instance, the main argument for the No side would simply be that when you consent to have sex with a partner, either unprotected or not, you run the risk of obtaining a STD. We are told this from an early age even. Then there is the argument that not all STDs have the inability to be cured and these do not always carry symptoms. Unless the carrier gets tested, they have no way of knowing. Under these circumstances, there really is no criminal intent and it would be extremely difficult to prosecute.

However with that being said, HIV/AIDS is the deadliest of STDs out there. Being sexually active bears responsibility more than just protection from unwanted pregnancy. If one is to be sexually active then one should be responsible enough to get tested regularly. If a person has multiple sex partners the risk of gaining an unwanted STD becomes higher. Before having sexual intercourse with someone new, one should require their prospective partner to get tested BEFORE having sex. If the new prospect refuses to get tested, then refuse to have sex with them. Your health is far more important than the few minutes of sexual satisfaction you may or may not get.

Many people have sex and knowingly have an HIV/AIDS. This is completely irresponsible and not to mention criminal. Yes, criminal law requires criminal intent to prosecute, however, there is intent if the person knowingly has sex with a partner and does not relay their condition to them. In this case, the offender has made a deadly decision for their partner. They have taken the choice out of their partner's hands and made it for them. This is most definitely criminal and intentional. Whereas, it is true that using a condom can prevent the spread of HIV, condoms are only 80% to 95% effective and have the tendency to break unknowingly during sexual intercourse. Criminal intent is only present if the partner has NOT been informed by the person they are about to have sex with that they are infected.

The question remains: can it be proved? The answer is yes. Medical records can be obtained with a warrant proving that the offender knowingly had sex. What can not always be proven is that the "innocent" partner was not informed. This falls down to, 'he said, she said'. In Washington in 2004 Anthony Whitfield was convicted of 17 accounts of first degree assault for knowingly passing HIV to 17 women.

Regardless of what you know or do not know, or what can be proven and what cannot be proven, you are essentially responsible for your own sexual health. Be responsible and be safe.

Learn more about this author, Lisa Shaver.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.