The American Red Cross says that I cannot give blood. I am not HIV positive. I don’t have any odd communicable diseases. I weigh more than 110 pounds and am less than 95 years old. Why can’t I do my duty and give blood? The answer:
…are [you] a male who has had sexual contact with another male, even once, since 1977[?]
Every time I hear someone bitching about low blood donation rates and how wonderful it is to experience the joy of giving blood, I want to vomit. It is disgusting. In the US I can’t get married, I can’t give blood, and I can be fired for being gay. What a fucking wonderful place. So tell me, why do so many illegal aliens come here? I digress.
I should be able to donate blood. It does save lives. It has saved the lives of many of my family members. I’m safe when I do have sex and am regularly tested for HIV. The American Red Cross is my target because of the prevalence of their marketing towards potential blood donors. Fuck them. If they want to be tolerant of the GLBT/LGBT community they should say in their ads that gay men are not able to give blood.
If it wasn’t for their poor testing practices and lack of follow-up counseling maybe this rule could be lifted. Honestly, when I was first of age to give blood (and still a virgin), I gave blood and got a letter in the mail saying that I had a false-positive result for one of the Hepatitis viruses. The letter said that if I did not feel well or was tired that I should see a doctor. Ain’t that great? Shouldn’t someone who has a false-positive test result get more personal counseling than a letter. It turned out that I did not have Hepatitis and never have, but did they enrage me.
I do admit that it was the United States Food and Drug Administration that banned men who’ve had sex with men from giving blood. Actually, we are “deferred” from giving blood. In all their double talk it comes down to this, if you answer the Red Cross blood donation questionnaire honestly you WILL be turned away as a blood donor.
The point of this post: to teach people that gay men who’ve ever had sex can’t give blood. I’ve known many straight people who don’t know about it. When we had blood drives at a former employer people would ask why I couldn’t give blood. Here’s the answer. Oh, I also can’t donate because of a former faulty blood screening test result.
Loading ...Tags: aids · american red cross · blood donation · gay · glbt · hiv · lgbt · red cross · redcross · sex16 Comments
16 responses so far ↓
They won’t let me donate blood any more and I’ve never had sex with a man. Some enzyme levels in an early liver enzyme test that couldn’t tell the difference between liver breakdown proteins and muscle breakdown proteins came back elevated. I was a runner in training at the time — overtraining, actually, which explains the muscle breakdown proteins. Still, I’m not allowed to donate because I might be carrying some form of hepatitis they’ve never seen before and can’t test for.
Gay men used to be one of the largest groups of blood donors. Their loss to blood donation is traumatic. At one point, the ban was logical — they didn’t have rapid tests for HIV — possibly they didn’t have any tests for HIV. At first, it was pretty much a Diagnosis of Exclusion.
Now? I don’t see it. First, HIV was in the United States at least in 1969, not 1977. Second, if you’re going to ban gay men, you should also ban those who have had sex with a prostitute and anyone who has had sex with an IV drug abuser.
Not sure it’s the Red Cross, though. I wonder if it’s their regs or if it’s something handed down from the CDC?
Almost the same here in Germany.
Blood donation is organized mainly by the German Red Cross. Since I am openly gay, I have to answer Yes to the “are you homosexual?” question. This will effectively exclude me from donating. Since I live in a monogamic partnership and we both are tested negative, I can say I have at most the same risk as any ordinary married straight person. But that doesn’t count — someone who picks up a new bitch every weekend (sorry) will pass the questionnaire without problems.
I also contacted the GRC about the problem. I explained my thoughts, told them I perceive their policy as ill-founded, discriminating and counterproductive, and also told them that I will not donate as long as the policy is continued — even if I could id I would conceal being gay.
They told me that they are bound to quasi-legal requirements (given by the German Medical Association, Bundesärztekammer). They can relate to my thoughts but all they can do is hope for a more appropriate rule. Maybe the new equality law (law against discrimination) stipulated by the EU will help correcting the flaws.
But this was one year ago and as far as I know nothing has changed so far…
Rob, I can’t agree more. It’s actually the US FDA that has imposed the rule on “MSM” (men who’ve had sex with men). When I had a false-positive Hepatitis test result in the late 90’s they didn’t even give me as much information as you got. That made me really angry at the American Red Cross. They should have shown the ENTIRE raw test results and contacted me personally instead of sending me a letter saying that I “might” have HepC.
Stefan,
Unfortunately, seeing any changes in the policies of the German Medical Association or US Food & Drug Administration is a matter for the bureaucrats. I will certainly state here, for the record, that until we get leadership in the US that is not homophobic. We all must remember former House Speaker Dr. Bill Frist, M.D. didn’t even have all the facts and I don’t doubt that he was a confidant of our president. http://www.planetwire.org/details/5153
It takes people to make the changes and I really wish I could give blood, but alas, not now, not ever?
Same deal in Canada - after inadvertently infecting many with HIV and hepatitis in the early 1990’s, the Canadian government took blood collection/management services away from the Canadian Red Cross and created Canadian Blood Services (CBS). Q.21 on the pre-screening questionnaire is the same - have you had sex with a man, at least once, since 1977 (male donors only)? Answering “Yes” gives you a “permanent deferal” which is how they apparently say “go away, we don’t want your blood.”
I wrote to the Canadian Minister of Health (Hon. Tony Clement) a year ago, and in the response from his office, my blood was compared to that of a prostitute or an IV drug user. Oy vey! When will they smarten up? It’s not even an “old, out-dated” thing - this policy was endorsed in July *2007*
Hi Jason,
so I wrote again these days to the GRC staff member I had contact with in 2006. I asked him about the current state of affairs.
He immediately wrote back and explained the situation. It basically boils down to this:
- The situation is still unchanged.
- The safety of all blood acceptors has absolute priority, even putting up with excluding certain sections of the population, such as prostitutes, i.v. drug users, persons having lived in Britain for more than 6 months (CJD, not HIV), or homosexual men (not women, btw.).
- The division line is purely defined by statistical means, without the intent of discriminating someone.
- It has also to be taken into consideration that there still is the “diagnostic window”, the time immediately after an HIV infection when the virus cannot be detected.
He also included (1) a public correspondence between a German gay magazine (”Männer” = men) and the Federal Agency for Sera and Vaccines which is involved in the guidelines and (2) a correspondence between the Greens MdB (member of parliament) Volker Beck (a gay activist) and the German Medical Service (BÄK). The argumentation was congruent in both cases.
Albeit this argumentation seems logical in a certain way, I cannot accept it, since it is wrong.
My opinion is: There might be a statistical correlation between being homosexual (actually being a so-called MSM, a man having sex with other men) and having an HIV infection — it certainly is — but that is beside the point. The point is that the blood service does not *detect* persons being gay but it *queries* them about their sexual orientation. Therefore they do have the risk of people not telling the truth. Given that a questionnaire is the only way in this case, asking people for promiscuous sex contacts would be far more adequate.
And, one more thing to consider: It would provide maximum safety if every blood donation would be stored at least for the time span of the diagnostic window, after which the donator would be tested for HIV. This could simply be the next donation appointment, approx. 3 months; most people I know go to every donation appointment, on a regular basis. Testing would be the same as it is today, but, granted, there would be a 3 months delay in blood supply when changing to the new system. The advantage would be that everyone who wants to give blood would have the legal opportunity to do so, without a raised risk for the acceptors.
Stephan,
Good points. I think we need to rely more on testing than on the voluntary answering of questions. One thing that does anger me, that’s partially related, is that the government does not look at current statistics. In the past few years we have seen HIV rates skyrocketing in the African American female community. They are not all IV drug users or prostitutes, but those who are cheated on by their husbands (who have unprotected sex with men). I think testing in the end must triumph over questions that can be lied about.
Jason,
For the record, they didn’t give me the information I have. I had to go digging on my own and pester my doctor to find out.
If the decision really is on a statistical basis, I could live with that. I can’t but wonder if there’s some latent homophobia in it, though.
That reminds me, I need to blog about Huckabee’s “We didn’t know anything about HIV in 1992″ bull…crap. When I was hired as an EMT in 1985, we had a very good understanding of how HIV was and was not transmitted. In 1992, when I was attacked by a confused HIV patient and suffered a severe exposure to the AIDS virus, I had to put up with that sort of ignorance. All these years later, I’m still angry. I wound up testing negative, but I’m still angry about how my “fellow” Christians treated me back then.
There’s actually a blog post about that incident on my blog. I need to let it go. But injustice pisses me off. Always has, always will.
Rob,
You allude to a very good point. A doctor is only as good as the information he continues to learn and adapt. The ignorance in recent years has spread because “Christian” doctors ignore the “gay disease” and disseminate incorrect information. HIV/AIDS is NOT a “gay disease” (look at Africa) and if you don’t keep up on the latest medical findings you SHOULD lose your license to practice medicine.
Were you even alive when the AIDS crisis began? Your comments make me think you didn’t live through it, at least not as an adult. Frack, do I feel old.
There were a large number of medical professionals who were Christians who, from the very beginning of the AIDS/HIV crisis, were the ones fighting for research, treatment, and concern for the PWAs.
If anyone’s archived the old FidoNet boards from 1984 and on, if you search through the boards concerned with AIDS, you’ll see my name among the discussions. I was one of the Christian medical professionals working to make a difference. There were a large number of us.
The problem wasn’t Christianity. It was people using Christianity as an excuse for their fears and lack of understanding. The idiot Christians had plenty of idiot agnostics and atheists and other religious groups fighting by their side.
Rob,
I said “Christian” doctors for one reason. How can these people call themselves Christians when they don’t believe in helping all those in need? How can the Roman Catholics have a leader (the Pope) who doesn’t love ALL humans? How could we have Dr. Bill Frist not knowing how HIV is spread, but knowing that God appointed George W. Bush the king of the U.S.?
I am Christian. It means that we love all people and help those in need. My response to you was trying to point out that these people are acting in a non-Christian way. Our nation’s leaders who call themselves Christians have the audacity to hate the homosexual. Do you see something wrong with that? I sure as hell do. They give religion a bad taste in the mouths of many. It’s wrong. I’m going to hell and they aren’t? WTF?!?!?!
One more thing… I have been alive for the entire HIV/AIDS crisis. No, I was not an adult during it. Still, better blood testing, better candidate screening, and proper post-giving counseling are called for. I want to give. It is worth more than giving hundreds to some charity. It truly is the “gift of life.”
I could not agree more. I am a 17 year old, and I brought a whole bunch of my friends to go donate blood with the Canadian Red Cross because they came to our school and complained about how important it was to donate blood. So I got inspired and I really wanted to do my part. I am going into the field of Paramedicine and I thought it would be a great idea to do my part. I am out to all my friends, and they all supported me. Some of them were even in the middle of donating blood when I texted the ones that were off in the back room that they refused to allow me to donate blood. They all told the nurse to stop the procedure immediately, and we all left. Needless to say, that’s 14 people who will never donate blood again. I think it’s absoutely revolting how much donating blood is in the media, as if it’s the most important thing in the world, and then when people go to do something about it, they get turned away based on their sexual orientation. It is disgusting.
- Sean Newton
Sean,
You got it! That was totally the point of this post. Thanks!
Redcross derfer me for 12 months cause I was raoed by same sex and health dept who tested numbers of time and my dr also tested me woman at helath dept told me I can donated blood and I said I was raped she said thats none of there bussness long you tested negative and I did, health dept did elsia and hiv rna was all negatives . so he working in health dept I took her word okay I can donated blood it was my first time so I didnt told them like she said so I talked to dets she said I dont see it promblem you are clean. jsut tell them see what they said good lord they was very rude. to me and I talked to medial dr at american redcross she said they mite let me doanted at 12 months. so they called me up and said we was going to let you donated again since you called us alot we ratter not let you donated, so I made them okay send me all my test results to my dr makin sure it all negative casuie I heard of false poz results.then was rude even at that making ass out of me and I got hold the newspapers and media on them real fast.. My Girlfriend she can donated not me . so I called up today boen marror and they are letting me donated they gave me 12 months derfer and ask me when was I tested last and I said Dec 19 2007 all negatives. she said I will calkl u back to let you knwo so she called me back and now i’m back on list. thanks god bless Rob
i just got finished being asked that question! and because of that im not allowed to donate. its the stupidest thing ever! if i said i has sex with a girl i bet u anything they wouldnt have a problem with it. its like theyre hating on gays, since when did liking the same sex make u not able to donate.how is it any different from being str8? oh well ive gone my whole life not donating im sure i can go the rest without it. :p more blood for me and less annoying people in the world 2 save