Hello All!
At the end of my presentation last week there were some questions about gay blood donation (or the lack thereof). I hope to answer some of those questions.
But first, a story. My senior year of high school I wanted to give blood for the first time. I was finally of age (over 16, I was still 17) and I met all requirements, so I thought. I signed up for my time slot and naturally got really excited. It was my first time to really do something good for someone else. Heck, I may even save a life. When my time came I went to courtyard and started the process. I filled out some paperwork and then got asked a line of questions. I passed everything except the last question. They asked if I had had any sexual contact with a man since 1975. In order to answer honestly I had to say yes. They then asked me to leave.
I wasn't old enough to vote, but I was old enough to face direct discrimination.
Now, the facts. In 1983 the FDA implemented a ban on gay blood donation in the United States. Any man who had any sort of sexual contact with a man since 1975 was no longer able to donate blood. Their reasoning surrounding the HIV/AIDS scare that was then labeled as the 'gay disease'. The ban still stands today. Since, at the time, gay men had a higher chance of having any sort of STD/STI then their blood was seen as too risky. This disregards the premise that all blood is tested for STDs/STIs and that more STDs/STIs are transferred (percentage wise) through heterosexual couples than homosexual couples nowadays. Even with many different marches (especially from college students), medical pushes, and protests, the FDA has yet to lift the ban.
In the United States, gay sex means a lifetime ban on blood donation. This discrimination is not unique to the US though. Countries form all over the world either completely ban gay blood donation or create deferral periods. Either way, the countries law directly discriminates based on stereotypes and cultural norms.
It is incidents like this that prove that the queer rights revolution means much more than just marriage and protection. The overall lack of awareness on this issue (and others like it) shows how far the movement needs to go. Whenever a donation happens on campus, it alienates certain sects of the population. Personally, each blood donation sign doesn't show me the way to help, but instead it shows me how I am secondary to my peers. This laws makes me not only vulnerable because I constantly have to admit something about myself, but also dirty to the practitioners I must deny.
P.S. A note on the 9 million LGBTQ+ people statistic: it is true that there is no way of predicting how many LGBTQ+ people exist in the United States. Gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, romantic orientation, and sex all exist on a spectrum of sorts. Because of this, it is impossible to label how many people within the community exist because of not only the breadth of identities (and the impossible ability to put a point on where the direct line exists) but also because of the fluidity of the spectrums. I put this statistic up to show that there has been an increase in people identifying as LGBTQ+ since Harry Hay started the revolution. I am sorry if I created any confusion.
Sources:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/15/gay-blood-donors-ban_n_3932001.html
http://www.takepart.com/article/2014/02/25/fda-blood-donation-ban
https://news.brown.edu/articles/2014/07/adashi
Blood Donation Questionnaire: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/BloodBloodProducts/QuestionsaboutBlood/UCM272981.pdf
Take a scenario: a straight man who habitually has unprotected sex with many partners and to their knowledge does not have STD/STIs can donate blood but a homosexual man who has had one lifetime partner is not able to donate. It seems like a heterosexual who has many partners would be just as much at risk is not more than a homosexual having had one partner. While this is an extreme comparison, it just illuminates the complications with the law as it currently is. I believe that there does need to be intense restrictions and screenings for donating blood, but they should be the same for everyone with screenings focused on number of partners, protection and blood testing, etc. As Sean mentioned, homosexuals have a higher chance of STD/STIs, but does that mean that someone in the situation I presented should be denied the ability to donate? This is a complicated topic with a range of opinions and reasoning; consider this just food for thought. I am not sure what the best way is to ensure a safe blood bank, but I believe the screening process should be just as careful regardless of sexual preference and not unnecessarily discriminatory.
ReplyDeleteKayla,
ReplyDeleteI thanks for the response! I just wanted to clear up a little confusion: homosexuals are no more likely to have an STD/STI than heterosexuals. Overall, there is about a balance of which group is more likely to have one disease/infection than the other. However, AIDS/HIV is more common in the gay community, but the number one effected group is young, black, men. Just another example how laws don't always keep up with the times (much like the Declarations of Human Rights).
P.S. I forgot to mention that men who have had any sort of sexual contact with another man cannot donate tissues, sperm (though this is a current gray zone), and bone marrow. If you want an interesting current event on the matter, here is a story about a gay man who wanted to donate his eyes after his death, but was unable to because of his sexuality:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/08/15/gay-teens-organ-donation-rejected/