AIDS and Human Rights in the Prison: A Comment on the Ethics of Screening and Segregation (From Correctional Theory and Practice, P 162-177, 1992, Clayton A Hartjen and Edward E Rhine, eds. -- See NCJ-135949)

• NCJ Number: 135959
• Author(s): L Carroll
• Date Published: 1992
• Length: 16 pages
• Sale Source: Nelson-Hall Publishers
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS.

Annotation

The development of policies regarding screening of inmates for HIV and AIDS and the segregation of HIV-positive inmates should rest on awareness of the ethical considerations involved.

Abstract

Mass screening does not appear to offer any greater prevention than would education, counseling, and voluntary testing, because of the low rate of transmission, the possibility of inaccurate test results, and the need for education and counseling of all inmates. In addition, staff fears of infection are unfounded, all inmates need medical monitoring for at least 6 months after admission, and the diagnosis of HIV infection is no guarantee of higher quality medical care. Similarly, segregation of HIV-positive inmates is not an effective way to prevent AIDS. Thus, neither mass screening nor automatic segregation of those who test HIV-positive offers sufficient benefit to the public health to justify the intrusions on the rights of privacy, freedom, and equality that such policies inevitably entail. In fact, such policies might produce a false sense of security. Nevertheless, a Federal court recently upheld Alabama's policies of screening and segregation. 27 references