Partner Notification Stuff

[geminigirl]

Reuters Health (02.17.03)::Charnicia E. Huggins
People who find out their partner is HIV-infected are no
more likely to break off the relationship than those who find out
their partner has syphilis, according to a new study of partner
notification programs.
In nearly half of HIV-infection cases, the relationship did
end, according to the study, but the breakup rate was on par with
that seen with syphilis cases. And in a second report, also
evaluating partner notification programs, participants said the
notification was not a factor in the breakup.
Implemented in the 1930s to fight the spread of syphilis,
partner notification has been used to control the spread of HIV
since 1985. Notification opponents argue that it may cause
partners of HIV-infected individuals to end the relationship,
possibly facilitating the spread of the virus as infected
individuals form new relationships. Some also believe it may
cause notified individuals to emotionally or physically abuse
their partner, given the incurable nature of HIV as opposed to
syphilis.
But the two studies show that partner notification may not
have such effects - at least not for couples in long-term
relationships or who report living together. Such programs may
actually decrease sexually risky behavior by increasing condom
use, according to one of the reports. The reports, "Partner
Notification for HIV and Syphilis: Effects on Sexual Behaviors
and Relationship Stability," "Changes in Partnerships and HIV
Risk Behaviors After Partner Notification," and "Editorial:
Partner Notification for HIV: Running Out of Excuses" were
published in Sexually Transmitted Diseases (2003;30:75-82,83-
88,89-90).
In the first study, Dr. Patricia J. Kissinger of Tulane
University in Louisiana and colleagues looked at 76 HIV-positive
individuals and 81 people with syphilis, who were involved in a
total of 220 relationships. They found that notification did not
lead to more relationship breakups among HIV-positive
individuals, in comparison to syphilis-infected persons. Overall,
nearly half (47 percent) of the relationships dissolved, and 16
percent of study participants reported beginning new
relationships.
The second study, led by Dr. Tamara Hoxworth of the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment in Denver, found that
although 185 out of 284 partnerships dissolved within six months
after partner notification, none of the couples said the breakup
was due to their notification experience. "These findings suggest
that partner notification can help reduce HIV transmission within
the community," they conclude.
In the accompanying editorial, Colorado-based independent
consultant John J. Potterat wrote that the findings' true value
"rests on how persuasive they will be to those in positions of
public health authority. What is clear is that avoidance behavior
toward HIV partner notification... is no longer defensible."


(You should probably read this part after you read the article...but I've got mixed feelings on the partner notification things...it's potentially violating privacy, and at the same time potentially lifesaving. It's not an easy thing to make decisions about...)

Comments

[lovingboth]

Partner notification without the patient's consent would be illegal in the UK, I think.

[rivka.livejournal.com]

US public health laws are inconsistent. Partner notification without patient consent is illegal in the case of HIV, in most states, but it's mandatory in the case of syphillis.

Usually the way it's done is that partners are told that they've been exposed to a disease, but not by whom. Of course, most of the time people can figure it out.

[roosterbear.livejournal.com]

The biggest issue I have with partner notification is that it serves, for some, as a deterrent to getting tested. If I don't get tested, then I don't have to deal with notification. If I don't know, then it doesn't exist. Something like that.

It's not logical necessarily, but then people don't always do logical.