title: Cain v Australian Red Cross Society: the case for universal blood donation reform.
abstract: This article reports on a recent Australian decision in which an Anti-Discrimination Tribunal was asked to rule on whether the exclusion of homosexual men from blood donation amounted to discrimination. While the tribunal ultimately found that the Red Cross's policy of "deferring" all donors who are men who have sex with men (MSM) within the last 12 months was "reasonable", the case is an important step forward for advocates of blood donation reform, given the consensus reached by many of the experts who gave evidence and importantly the tribunal's implicit rejection of the MSM donor deferral policies of most of the world's industrialised countries, including the United States of America, Canada and much of continental Europe. The article concludes by calling on governments, research institutes and universities to initiate the needed medical and sociological studies so that ultimately blood donor suitability is determined on the specific question of sexual behaviour and not the clumsy, awkward and ultimately discriminatory MSM question that remains in operation.
authors.affiliation: School of Sociology and Social Work at University of Tasmania.
authors.forename: Rodney
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Croome
authors.forename: Benedict
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Bartl
mesh_terms: D001315:Australia; D001782:Blood Donors / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D046148:Donor Selection / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D018451:Homosexuality, Male; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D012011:Red Cross