To think consent is required to do a HIV or hepatitis blood test??

I don't see why HIV/Hepatitis ought to be singled out

because of the very heavy social and psychological consequences of HIV diagnosis that still exist. Most particularly because of the history of the disease and the heavy stigma that still prevails. It’s not just one more trivial health matter, it just isn’t. Furthermore, although HIV is absolutely not the death sentence it once was- people have normal life expectancy and healthy lives, it’s still an incurable , life- long condition that requires significant medical management , adherence to medication (side effects), monitoring , etc . It’s not a small thing receiving an HIV diagnosis, even in 2025. Testing needs to be on the basis of informed consent, as is a legal and ethical requirement for other serious diagnoses.

Nor was it ethical to give thousands of people contaminated blood.
Yet they received it, were given that unexpected news, then lived with the illnesses and the stigma and some died from it and still are.

so as a mark of respect, I think helping stop the spread in whatever way is quickest and easiest is a great option,

No, actually your attitude is appalling. Fear of HIV isn't a diagnosable mental health issue. If you're capable of finding studies around the stigma, you're more than capable of finding the data to challenge your own misconceptions.
You need to ask yourself why you don't want to.

I don't agree. It's a public health matter as much as an induvial one. Unless we're going to go down the route of itemised consent forms for each and every Drs visit, I don't see why HIV/Hepatitis ought to be singled out.

Testing for things like Downs syndrome during pregnancy is offered and not always taken up on by the mother to be. By that rationale, she shouldn't deny this test?

Testing for things like Downs syndrome during pregnancy is offered and not always taken up on by the mother to be. By that rationale, she shouldn't deny this test?

I don't agree. It's a public health matter as much as an induvial one. Unless we're going to go down the route of itemised consent forms for each and every Drs visit, I don't see why HIV/Hepatitis ought to be singled out.

Absolutely no one is saying that there shouldn’t be testing for HIV. It should be widespread, available, accessible as possible. Encouraged , de stigmatised. But it should be carried out on the basis of patient knowledge, advisement/ education and informed consent. Mandatory / sleuth testing without informing people does nothing to combat stigma, and can be extremely traumatising for those who end up with an unexpected positive result / diagnosis that they didn’t even know they were being tested for and all the consequences that brings . It’s simply not ethical.

That is akin to telling an agoraphobic to give themselves a shake and get out the house. Rude and unhelpful.

Absolutely no one is saying that there shouldn’t be testing for HIV. It should be widespread, available, accessible as possible. Encouraged , de stigmatised. But it should be carried out on the basis of patient knowledge, advisement/ education and informed consent. Mandatory / sleuth testing without informing people does nothing to combat stigma, and can be extremely traumatising for those who end up with an unexpected positive result / diagnosis that they didn’t even know they were being tested for and all the consequences that brings . It’s simply not ethical.

Illogical stigma is no reason not to test for communicable disease.
The very reason HIV is still being transmitted is because people are not testing.
You're a grown up, you acknowledge it is illogical, so go off an work on your attitude. Educate yourself instead of perpetuating misconceptions.

Illogical stigma is no reason not to test for communicable disease.
The very reason HIV is still being transmitted is because people are not testing.
You're a grown up, you acknowledge it is illogical, so go off an work on your attitude. Educate yourself instead of perpetuating misconceptions.

That PP never said she wanted to live with that stigma- she said that it’s still real and people feel it. The stigma absolutely shouldn’t be there - treatments have completely transformed the disease since the 80s , but society has absolutely not caught up. There was an awful mumsnet post only a couple of months ago - I can’t remember the exact details but it was something about going on a date with someone HIV positive who didn’t disclose their status in advance- or something like that- and it was basically one long pile on of people saying that the person should disclose in advance and they would never consider dating someone with HIV. Never mind the new data on zero risk of transmission if on proper treatment/ undetectable viral load etc, people didn’t care or want to hear it. I was one of the few people pointing out the abhorrence in what people were saying and got piled on. the stigma , phobia, unpleasantness directed against people living with HIV was brazen and unashamedly out there, - the majority standpoint in fact. To pretend this isn’t the case is bullshit.

https://nat.org.uk/news/new-polling-shows-hiv-stigma-still-widespread/

It isn't just me. It is large swathes of the population. The stigma towards those with HIV & aids still exists and never went away. As I said in my post, I know there is no logical reason for my or others thinking there is a risk to ourselves.

But when this level of concern still remains, I'd suggest the population is not ready for HIV testing without consent being reasonably sought.

I hope to goodness I never meet you, I cannot fathom how people still wish to hold on to these stereotypes and stigmas from the past. Surely you have been educated enough since those adverts and the 80s to learn that people with HIV and Hepatitis are the same as everybody else and want compassion not someone stepping back.

I am in my 40s and would most certainly not take a step back. As you say, people living with blood viruses already have had to deal with that stigma already and I most certainly would not be adding to their discomfort.
Do you not learn from history? All sorts of things have changed since the 80s - new advice on using car seats/ not smoking/ using sun cream / new treatments etc etc. I’m sure you don’t hang on to everything you did in the 80s do you?

So do you really want to still live with outdated views on blood viruses? And fuel the stigma that clearly still lives on?

I hope to goodness I never meet you, I cannot fathom how people still wish to hold on to these stereotypes and stigmas from the past. Surely you have been educated enough since those adverts and the 80s to learn that people with HIV and Hepatitis are the same as everybody else and want compassion not someone stepping back.

I am in my 40s and would most certainly not take a step back. As you say, people living with blood viruses already have had to deal with that stigma already and I most certainly would not be adding to their discomfort.
Do you not learn from history? All sorts of things have changed since the 80s - new advice on using car seats/ not smoking/ using sun cream / new treatments etc etc. I’m sure you don’t hang on to everything you did in the 80s do you?

So do you really want to still live with outdated views on blood viruses? And fuel the stigma that clearly still lives on?

If people were to ask themselves, if somebody told them they were HIV positive or had Aids today, would they take a step back. For most of us, certainly over the age of 40, I believe we would. I was in that position in a social setting around 8 years ago.

Now I know the chances of infection without intimate contact border on zero, but there is still that stigma.

To pick up on your comment towards homosexuality and HIV. I have a friend who was in the gay scene in London at the height of aids. The prejudice and violence gay men faced was immense. Including being thrown out of rented houses if the landlord found out they were gay. This was happening well within living memory of a lot of us.

Perhaps some posters and the NHS need to accept that the fear of being diagnosed due to generational prejudice is still real for many middle aged people in particular.

I think the problem here os one of perception. A doctor says I think it would be a good idea to extubate/ fashion a tracheotomy or get a DNAR in place. The family 9 times out of 10 or maybe even 99 times out of a hundred say " yes that sounds sensible/ you are the expert " or something along those lines. The family erroneously belive their cinsent has been sought and given. The reality is the clinician was informing not asking.

I think the problem here os one of perception. A doctor says I think it would be a good idea to extubate/ fashion a tracheotomy or get a DNAR in place. The family 9 times out of 10 or maybe even 99 times out of a hundred say " yes that sounds sensible/ you are the expert " or something along those lines. The family erroneously belive their cinsent has been sought and given. The reality is the clinician was informing not asking.

I find that worrying in terms of how the NHS is treating the concept of consent

It really is a problem in the NHS- both in terms of culture and policy.

Well I can only speak from experience, and my family most definately were asked for permission to remove the breathing tubes and create a tracheotomy. This was a few years go granted, but if that is something else that has changed in recent years, then I find that worrying in terms of how the NHS is treating the concept of consent.

As others have said unless there is a LPOA decisions are taken in best interests- it has been this way dor at least 10 years.