Arguments against mandatory screening for HIV in low-prevalence areas.
With heightened awareness that healthcare professionals may be a potential source of infection for the human immunodeficiency virus, calls for serial, mandatory testing and reporting are increasing. Fear and hysteria are particularly noticeable in rural settings, which are only now experiencing marked increases in the incidence of AIDS cases. While arguments for and against the merits of serial mandatory testing programs can be constructed, this paper presents support to oppose mandatory testing. Evidence for this stance is drawn from several sources, including epidemiologic, economic, and clinical research; as well as medical ethics literature.
Lovejoy
N C
NC
D015492:AIDS Serodiagnosis / Q000592:standards*; D000163:Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000453:epidemiology*; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D005189:False Positive Reactions; D006801:Humans; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000191:economics / Q000592:standards*; D015995:Prevalence; D012307:Risk Factors; D012424:Rural Population