http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/11/24/hiv.trial.ap/index.html
LAWRENCE, Kansas (AP) -- An HIV-positive man accused of knowingly exposing three women to the virus has been sentenced to nearly three years in prison.
Robert Richardson II, 30, apologized at his sentencing Wednesday, but he argued that while his behavior was unethical, it wasn't criminal.
Richardson was found guilty last month of four counts of HIV exposure involving three women, and he was found not guilty of exposing a fourth woman.
Jurors said they were appalled by how he deceived the women by telling them his health problems were from a heart condition. Richardson said he didn't lie, and that he did have a "HAART" condition -- short for Highly Active Anti-Retroviral Therapy, the name he used for his HIV-treatment drug regimen.
I am interested what other people think of this. Is his behavior just unethical or do you think it should be illegal as well?
I am not sure how I feel because on the one hand I think he probably did purposely deceive these women. On the other hand, safe sex involves both the man and the woman. I know several people who won't engage in anything sexual until they both go in for tests for STD's together and show each other the results.
But then at what point does it stop. If a person doesn't disclose say a known genetic defect to his/her partner and it gets shows up in the kids resulting in the death of the kid or constant life lond care, should they be held criminally liable for not disclosing their genetics or lying about it...?....