Page 3500 - Week 13 - Thursday, 26 November 1992

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


I repeat, "where they exercise their discretion to notify the partner". That is not having the infected person notify the partner. It is not there, Mr Berry. You tried to quote from it before and you stopped short because you realised that it was not there. You tried to fudge that question and you did not get away with it. It is not there, Mr Berry. Do not look down and pretend that you can find it somewhere on the page, because it is not there. (Extension of time granted)

This recommendation clearly says that in exceptional circumstances there must be the capacity by health authorities in this Territory, or anywhere else that this applies, to notify a partner where somebody is infected and will not notify themselves. They must be protected by law. It says here, "by legislation". Where is your legislation, Mr Berry? It has not turned up. It is not here. You are putting in place only part of the recommendations that come forward from this working party.

Mr Connolly: We are moving swiftly by regulation while we consider other matters.

MR HUMPHRIES: It is not in the regulations either, Mr Connolly. You will have a chance to contribute to this debate. You show us where it is in the regulations. It is not there. We have heard this claim about blood on our hands coming from Mr Berry in a suggestion that we have blood on our hands by not letting this regulation stand. I want to quote an example of something which has happened in this Territory. I know of a case, Madam Speaker, where a person in the ACT contracted the HIV/AIDS virus in the ACT. That person came forward for treatment and was treated. That man was married and had a wife with whom he was living. That person was told that if he continued to have sexual relations with his wife he would put her at a serious risk of contracting HIV/AIDS. The man declined to notify his wife.

Mr Moore: Why?

MR HUMPHRIES: Why? I do not know why; in fact, I do not care why. The fact of life is that he did not notify his wife. That is the current state of play as far as I know. It might have gone on from there to some other stage; I do not know. The fact of life is that that man was sentencing his wife to death by having unprotected sex with her without telling her that he had contracted the HIV/AIDS virus. A regime which allows that to happen, surely, Madam Speaker, sentences someone to death. The regime proposed today by the ACT Government does not provide for notification where a man, in that very position, will not tell his wife or his partner, and that is reprehensible. We heard the expression "Murderous Goebbels-speak". I ask you, Madam Speaker: "Where does that term apply properly in this debate?". "Where does the term 'murderous' really apply in this debate?", I ask you.

If you do not have some form of notification of people who are suffering from this disease you are going to find yourself again and again, regrettably, putting people in that position, because it is a fundamentally common part of human nature that where a person contracts that disease and where they might find themselves in another relationship they are not often going to want to tell their partner, and, of course, the partner is going to expect to continue sexual relations.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .