This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A National Review of Court and Human Rights Commission Decisions, Part II: Discrimination

Lawrence O. Gostin, JD

JAMA. 1990;263(15):2086-2093.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

EVERY major government,^1,2 medical,^3,4 public health,⁵ and legal^6,7 organization to issue a report on the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic has condemned discrimination because it violates basic tenets of individual justice and is detrimental to the public health. Discrimination based on an infectious condition is just as inequitable as discrimination based on race, gender, or handicap. In each case, people are treated inequitably not because they lack inherent ability, but solely because of a status over which they have no control. Complex and often pernicious mythologies develop about the nature, cause, and transmission of disease. As the Supreme Court has recognized, "society's accumulated myths and fears about disability and disease are just as handicapping as are the physical limitations that flow from actual impairment. Few aspects of handicap give rise to the same level of public fear and misapprehension as contagiousness."⁸

Persons infected with HIV . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the American Society of Law and Medicine and the Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Mass.

Footnotes
Reprint requests to American Society of Law and Medicine, 765 Commonwealth Ave, 16th Floor, Boston, MA 02215 (Mr Gostin).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?