Homosexuals and Blood Donations

If you happen to be a homosexual male, you are barred from donating blood with the claim you are at a higher risk of obtaining HIV, which causes AIDS. Contaminating the blood supply is nothing to dismiss lightly, but one wonders if this precaution unfairly targets a segment of our population. If so, should not other high-risk groups be excluded from donating blood.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommended donor screening policies in 1993 to prevent those individuals exposed to HIV from donating blood. Excluding individuals from giving blood based on their sexual histories is determined by the Blood Products AdvisoryPanel (or BPAP). In September of 2000, this panel of experts, independent from the FDA, decided to recommend that males who have had sex with another male since 1977, should be “deferred” from donating blood. According to the FDA’s website, “Studies have shown that men with a history of male to male sex since 1977 may be infected with HIV and/or may have evidence of a lifestyle that potentially exposes them to HIV.” (http://www.fda.gov/cber/faq/bldfaq.htm#gm). To be fair, the FDA recommends other individuals who engage in high-risk activities, like intravenous drug use, should be barred from giving blood.

The FDA’s emphasis on the “lifestyles” of homosexual men does nothing more than focus attention on the stereotypes (some which may be founded in truth) about gale male sexual behavior. For a long time people considered AIDS to be a “gay” disease, a concern of only those who frequented bathhouses. Now most understand anyone is susceptible to obtaining the disease. To focus on the gay male segment of the population ignores other groups at risk for contracting and spreading the disease.

Any heterosexual male with multiple sexual partners could walk in and donate blood with almost no trouble. His risk is higher than a homosexual male in a monogamous relationship who always practiced safe sex. What is even more laughable is the continued need to prevent a gay male from donating blood, once the sexual practices of many in our generation is considered. When the Red Cross or any other organization seeks blood donations on campuses like Brown University they are tapping into a generation that finds hand-holding more intimate than oral sex. Combine that attitude with binge drinking and the feeling of invisibility that clings to every young adult, it is surprising that they would even bother to come to a college campus. Of course, we know the ABCs of STDs and the types of protection available from female condoms to dental dams, but I wouldn’t bet my money on the fact that these things are always utilized properly. This is not meant to be a condemnation of the sexual practices of my generation. I only mention these observation because itis difficult to reconcile the promiscuity of many heterosexuals with the ban on gay men donating blood.

Even it one agrees with the FDA’s policy of preventing homosexual males from donating blood because it helps ensure the purity of our blood supply, it would be easier to go a step further and prevent other groups of individuals from donating blood. Black women represents one of the groups with the fastest growing number of people infected with HIV. It would be just as reasonable to prevent this group of individuals from donating blood.

It is hard to quibble with a group of scientists committed to keeping our blood supply free of diseases. This could be the best way to protect people who need blood transfusions in the future. At the same time, it is hard not to sympathize with many homosexual males unable to donate blood because they are considered to be more likely to have HIV. It ignores sexuality is ultimately a private matter. While some use the utmost caution in their sexual encounters, others—gay and straight—play a game of Russian Roulette with their genitals.