AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 27–50 | Cite as

Criminalization of HIV Exposure: A Review of Empirical Studies in the United States

  • Dini Harsono
  • Carol L. Galletly
  • Elaine O’Keefe
  • Zita Lazzarini
Substantive Review

Abstract

This review of literature identifies and describes US empirical studies on the criminalization of HIV exposure, examines findings on key questions about these laws, highlights knowledge gaps, and sets a course for future research. Studies published between 1990 and 2014 were identified through key word searches of relevant electronic databases and discussions with experts. Twenty-five empirical studies were identified. Sixteen of these studies used quantitative methods with more than half of these being cross-sectional survey studies. Study samples included male and female HIV-positive persons, HIV-positive and -negative men who have sex with men, public health personnel, and medical providers. Research questions addressed awareness of and attitudes toward HIV exposure laws, potential influences of these laws on seropositive status disclosure for persons living with HIV, HIV testing for HIV-negative persons, safer sex practices for both groups, and associations between HIV exposure laws and HIV-related stigma. Surveys of the laws and studies of enforcement practices were also conducted. Attention should be shifted from examining attitudes about these laws to exploring their potential influence on public health practices and behaviors related to the HIV continuum of care. Studies examining enforcement and prosecution practices are also needed. Adapting a theoretical framework in future research may be useful in better understanding the influence of HIV exposure laws on HIV risk behaviors.

Keywords

HIV/AIDS HIV-specific criminal laws Criminalization HIV serostatus disclosure Public health 

Resumen

Esta revisión de la literatura identifica y describe los estudios empíricos sobre la penalización de la exposición al VIH en los Estados Unidos, analiza los resultados de los estudios sobre cuestiones claves en cuanto a estas leyes, pone de relieve las lagunas del conocimiento sobre el tema y establece un curso para futuras investigaciones. A través de palabras clave en bases de datos electrónicas y de la consulta con expertos, se localizaron los estudios publicados entre 1990 y el 2014. Se identificaron 25 estudios empíricos. Dieciséis de estos estudios utilizaron métodos cuantitativos y más de la mitad encuestas transversales. Las muestras incluyeron hombres y mujeres VIH-positivos y negativos, hombres que tienen sexo con hombres, personal de salud pública y proveedores de servicios médicos. Las investigaciones se centraron en el conocimiento y las actitudes hacia las leyes de exposición al VIH, la posible influencia de las leyes sobre la comunicación del estatus seropositivo por parte de las personas que viven con VIH, el acceso a la prueba de VIH entre las personas VIH-negativas, las prácticas sexuales seguras para ambos grupos y la relación entre las leyes de exposición al VIH y el estigma asociado con el VIH. También se realizaron encuestas sobre las leyes y estudios sobre las prácticas de su aplicación. El énfasis debe cambiar de las actitudes acerca de las leyes, a explorar su posible influencia sobre las prácticas de salud pública y los comportamientos relacionados con el continuo de atención del VIH. También se necesitan estudios que examinen las prácticas en cuanto al cumplimiento de las leyes y enjuiciamiento. En la investigación futura, adaptar un marco teórico puede ser útil para entender mejor la influencia de las leyes de exposición al VIH sobre las conductas de riesgo de VIH.

References

  1. 1.
    Galletly CL, Pinkerton SD. Conflicting messages: how criminal HIV disclosure laws undermine public health efforts to control the spread of HIV. AIDS Behav. 2006;10(5):451–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lazzarini Z, Galletly CL, Mykhalovskiy E, Harsono D, O’Keefe E, Singer M, et al. Criminalization of HIV transmission and exposure: research and policy agenda. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(8):1350–3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    O’Byrne P, Bryan A, Roy M. HIV criminal prosecutions and public health: an examination of the empirical research. Med Humanit. 2013;39(2):85–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lehman JS, Carr MH, Nichol AJ, Ruisanchez A, Knight DW, Langford AE, et al. Prevalence and public health implications of state laws that criminalize potential HIV exposure in the United States. AIDS Behav. 2014;18(6):997–1006.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dalton HL. Criminal law. In: Burris S, Dalton HL, Miller JL, Yale AIDS Law Project, editors. AIDS law today: a new guide for the public. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1993. p. 242–62.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Galletly CL, Lazzarini Z. Charges for criminal exposure to HIV and aggravated prostitution filed in the Nashville, Tennessee Prosecutorial Region 2000–2010. AIDS Behav. 2013;17(8):2624–36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Latham S. HIV criminalization by state map. (2013). http://lawatlas.org/query?dataset=hiv-criminalization-statutes. Accessed 7 Sept 2014.
  8. 8.
    Bennett-Carlson R, Faria D, Hanssens C. Ending and defending against HIV criminalization: state and federal laws and prosecutions. (2010). http://new.hivlawandpolicy.org/resources/ending-and-defending-against-hiv-criminalization-state-and-federal-laws-and-prosecutions. Accessed 15 Sept 2014.
  9. 9.
    Lazzarini Z, Bray S, Burris S. Evaluating the impact of criminal laws on HIV risk behavior. J Law Med Ethics. 2002;30(2):239–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hoppe T. From sickness to badness: the criminalization of HIV in Michigan. Soc Sci Med. 2014;101:139–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ahmed A, Hanssens C, Kelly B. Protecting HIV-positive women’s human rights: recommendations for the United States National HIV/AIDS strategy. Reprod Health Matters. 2009;17(34):127–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burris S, Cameron E. The case against criminalization of HIV transmission. JAMA. 2008;300(5):578–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Latham SR. Time to decriminalize HIV status. Hastings Cent Rep. 2013;43(5):12–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gostin LO, Hodge JG Jr. Handling cases of willful exposure through HIV partner counseling and referral services. Women’s Rts L Rep. 2001;23:45–62.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tesoriero JM, Battles HB, Heavner K, Leung S-YJ, Nemeth C, Pulver W, et al. The effect of name-based reporting and partner notification on HIV testing in New York State. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(4):728–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hecht FM, Chesney MA, Lehman JS, Osmond D, Vranizan K, Colman S, et al. Does HIV reporting by name deter testing? AIDS. 2000;14(12):1801–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roose-Snyder B, Lee P, Hanssens C. The Positive Justice Project: A new national campaign to end exceptionalist criminal law treatment of people with HIV. (2010). http://www.hivlawandpolicy.org/fine-print-blog/positive-justice-project-new-national-campaign-end-exceptionalist-criminal-law. Accessed 21 April 2016.
  18. 18.
    Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA). Position on the criminalization of HIV, sexually transmitted infections and other communicable diseases. (2015). http://www.hivma.org/uploadedFiles/HIVMA/Policy_and_Advocacy/HIVMA-IDSA-Communicable%20Disease%20Criminalization%20Statement%20Final.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2016.
  19. 19.
    Vernazza P, Hirschel B, Bernasconi E, Flepp M. Les personnes séropositives ne souffrant d’aucune autre MST et suivant un traitement antirétroviral efficace ne transmettent pas le VIH par voie sexuelle (HIV-infected patients under HAART without any other sexually transmitted infection do not transmit HIV by sexual intercourse). Bull Med Suisses. 2008;89(5):165–9.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Loutfy M, Tyndall M, Baril J-G, Montaner JSG, Kaul R, Hankins C. Canadian consensus statement on HIV and its transmission in the context of criminal law. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2014;25(3):135–40.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hermann DH. Criminalizing conduct related to HIV transmission. St Louis Univ Public Law Rev. 1990;9(2):351–78.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Galletly CL, Pinkerton SD. Toward rational criminal HIV exposure laws. J Law Med Ethics. 2004;32(2):327–37, 191–2.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kenney SV. Criminalizing HIV transmission: lessons from history and a model for the future. J Contemp Health Law Policy. 1992;8:245–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):264–9 (W64).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors (NASTAD). Understanding state departments of health and corrections collaboration: A summary of survey findings—part II and strategic guidance towards ending criminalization-related stigma and discrimination. (2011). http://www.nastad.org/hivc/decriminalization_findings.pdf. Accessed 5 Sept 2014.
  26. 26.
    Lee SG. Criminal law and HIV testing: empirical analysis of how at-risk individuals respond to the law. Yale J Health Pol’y L Ethics. 2014;14(1):194–238.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Close EM. An exploration of the implementation and effects of the North Carolina HIV control measures [master’s thesis]. Duke University; 2012.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Klitzman R, Kirshenbaum S, Kittel L, Morin S, Daya S, Mastrogiacomo M, et al. Naming names: Perceptions of name-based HIV reporting, partner notification, and criminalization of non-disclosure among persons living with HIV. Sex Res Soc Policy. 2004;1(3):38–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Barber B. Knowledge and attitudes toward HIV/AIDS and HIV law among probationers and parolees in Alabama [master’s thesis]. University of Alabama; 2013.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kelly B, Khanna N, Rastogi S. Diagnosis, sexuality and choice: Women living with HIV and the quest for equality, dignity and quality of life in the US (2011). http://img.thebody.com/pwn/2011/PWN-HR-Survey.pdf. Accessed 5 Sept 2014.
  31. 31.
    Burris S, Beletsky L, Burleson JA, Case P, Lazzarini Z. Do criminal laws influence HIV risk behavior? An empirical trial. Ariz State Law J. 2007;39:467–517.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wise DL. Criminal penalties for non-disclosure of HIV-positive status: effects on HIV testing rates and incidence [dissertation]. University of Missouri, Kansas City; 2008.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Horvath KJ, Weinmeyer R, Rosser S. Should it be illegal for HIV-positive persons to have unprotected sex without disclosure? An examination of attitudes among US men who have sex with men and the impact of state law. AIDS Care. 2010;22(10):1221–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Francis AM, Mialon HM. The optimal penalty for sexually transmitting HIV. Am Law Econ Rev. 2008;10(2):388–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Blankenship KM, Bray SJ, Merson MH. Structural interventions in public health. AIDS. 2000;14(Suppl 1):S11–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    UNAIDS. UNAIDS policy brief: criminalization of HIV transmission. (2008). http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/jc1601_policy_brief_criminalization_long_en.pdf. Accessed 21 April 2016.
  37. 37.
    Mykhalovskiy E, Betteridge G. Who? What? Where? When? And with what Consequences? An analysis of criminal cases of HIV non-disclosure in Canada. Can J Law Soc. 2012;27(01):31–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Galletly CL, Dickson-Gomez J. HIV seropositive status disclosure to prospective sex partners and criminal laws that require it: perspectives of persons living with HIV. Int J STD AIDS. 2009;20(9):613–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Galletly CL, Difranceisco W, Pinkerton SD. HIV-positive persons’ awareness and understanding of their state’s criminal HIV disclosure law. AIDS Behav. 2009;13(6):1262–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Galletly CL, Pinkerton SD, DiFranceisco W. A quantitative study of Michigan’s criminal HIV exposure law. AIDS Care. 2012;24(2):174–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Galletly CL, Glasman LR, Pinkerton SD, Difranceisco W. New Jersey’s HIV exposure law and the HIV-related attitudes, beliefs, and sexual and seropositive status disclosure behaviors of persons living with HIV. Am J Public Health. 2012;102(11):2135–40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Gorbach PM, Galea JT, Amani B, Shin A, Celum C, Kerndt P, et al. Don’t ask, don’t tell: patterns of HIV disclosure among HIV positive men who have sex with men with recent STI practising high risk behaviour in Los Angeles and Seattle. Sex Transm Infect. 2004;80(6):512–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lichtenstein B, Whetten K, Rubenstein C. “Notify your partners–it’s the law”: HIV providers and mandatory disclosure. J Int Assoc Provid AIDS Care. 2014;13(4):372–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sprague L, Strub S. The Sero Project: National criminalization survey—preliminary results, July 25, 2012. http://seroproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Sero-Preliminary-Data-Report_Final.pdf. Accessed 14 Sept 2014.
  45. 45.
    Hoppe T. Controlling sex in the name of “public health”: social control and Michigan HIV law. Soc Probl. 2013;60(1):27–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Galletly CL, Pinkerton SD. Preventing HIV transmission via HIV exposure laws: applying logic and mathematical modeling to compare statutory approaches to penalizing undisclosed exposure to HIV. J Law Med Ethics. 2008;36(3):577–84.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Delavande A, Goldman D, Sood N. Criminal prosecution and HIV-related risky behavior. J Law Econ. 2010;53(4):741–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Duru OK, Collins RL, Ciccarone DH, Morton SC, Stall R, Beckman R, et al. Correlates of sex without serostatus disclosure among a national probability sample of HIV patients. AIDS Behav. 2006;10(5):495–507.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Phillips JC, Webel A, Rose CD, Corless IB, Sullivan KM, Voss J, et al. Associations between the legal context of HIV, perceived social capital, and HIV antiretroviral adherence in North America. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:736.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Burris S. Law and the social risk of health care: lessons from HIV testing. Alb L Rev. 1997;61:831–96.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bolsewicz K, Vallely A, Debattista J, Whittaker A, Fitzgerald L. Factors impacting HIV testing: a review–perspectives from Australia, Canada, and the UK. AIDS Care. 2015;27(5):570–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Michigan Department of Community Health. 2014 epidemiologic profile of HIV in Michigan. (2014). http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdch/2014_Epidemiologic_Profile_of_HIV_11192014_474705_7.pdf. Accessed 25 April 2016.
  53. 53.
    Cohen MS, Chen YQ, McCauley M, Gamble T, Hosseinipour MC, Kumarasamy N, et al. Prevention of HIV-1 infection with early antiretroviral therapy. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(6):493–505.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bernard EJ, Azad Y, Vandamme AM, Weait M, Geretti AM. HIV forensics: pitfalls and acceptable standards in the use of phylogenetic analysis as evidence in criminal investigations of HIV transmission. HIV Med. 2007;8(6):382–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Sweeney P, Gardner LI, Buchacz K, Garland PM, Mugavero MJ, Bosshart JT, et al. Shifting the paradigm: using HIV surveillance data as a foundation for improving HIV care and preventing HIV infection. Milbank Q. 2013;91(3):558–603.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Finitsis DJ, Stall RD, Friedman SR. Theory, analysis, social justice, and criminalizing HIV transmission: a commentary on Lehman and colleagues (2014). AIDS Behav. 2014;18(6):1007–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Singer M, Clair S. Syndemics and public health: reconceptualizing disease in bio-social context. Med Anthropol Q. 2003;17(4):423–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Friedman SR, Sandoval M, Mateu-Gelabert P, Rossi D, Gwadz M, Dombrowski K, et al. Theory, measurement and hard times: some issues for HIV/AIDS research. AIDS Behav. 2013;17(6):1915–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Fisher JD, Fisher WA. Changing AIDS-risk behavior. Psychol Bull. 1992;111(3):455–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Timmermans S, Gabe J. Introduction: connecting criminology and sociology of health and illness. Soc Health Illn. 2002;24(5):501–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Mykhalovskiy E. The problem of “significant risk”: exploring the public health impact of criminalizing HIV non-disclosure. Soc Sci Med. 2011;73(5):668–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP). Human subject regulations decision charts. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/decision-trees/index.html#c1. Accessed 2 May 2016.
  63. 63.
    Office of Human Research Protections (OHRP). Human subject regulations decision charts. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/index.html#46.116. Accessed 2 May 2016.
  64. 64.
    Marks G, Crepaz N. HIV-positive men’s sexual practices in the context of self-disclosure of HIV status. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2001;27(1):79–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dini Harsono
    • 1
  • Carol L. Galletly
    • 2
  • Elaine O’Keefe
    • 1
  • Zita Lazzarini
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Interdisciplinary Research on AIDSYale UniversityNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.Center for AIDS Intervention ResearchMedical College of WisconsinMilwaukeeUSA
  3. 3.Department of Community Medicine and Health CareUniversity of Connecticut Health CenterFarmingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations