Foodconsumer.org

 
USCards.com Bookmark Us
All Food, Diet and Health News 
 
 Misc. News
 Must-Read News
 Letter to Editor
 Featured Products
 Recalls & Alerts
 Consumer Affair
 Non-food Things
 Health Tips
 Interesting Sites
 
 Diet & Health
 Heart & Blood
 Cancer
 Body Weight
 Children & Women
 General Health
 Nutrition
 
 Food & Health
 Food Chemicals
 Biological Agents
 Cooking & Packing
 Technologies
 Agri. & Environ.
 Laws & Politics
 
 General Health
 Drug News
 Diseases
 Mental Health
 Infectious Disease
 Environment
 Lifestyle
 Government
 Other News
 
 Food Consumer
 FC News & Others
Search





Search Foodconsumer & Others


Add to Google
Add to My Yahoo
Newsfeed

foodconsumer.org news feed
Su bmit news[release]



More than 100 credit cards available at uscards.com from uscards.com, you can pick more than 100 credit cards


Misc. News : Non-food Things Last Updated: Apr 20, 2011 - 9:38:09 AM


New Jersey forces HIV testing in pregnant women
By Sue Mueller
Dec 26, 2007 - 11:58:59 AM

E.mail t.his a.rticle
 P.rinter f.riendly p.age
Get n.ewsletter
 
   

WEDNESDAY DEC 25, 2007 (Foodconsumer.org) -- The state of New Jersey Senate has approved legislation to force pregnant women and their newborns to receive HIV testing, a measure that critics say would deprive women of their right to make medical decisions.

 

Acting Gov. Richard J. Codey was reportedly ready to sign the measure into law today at University Hospital in Newark. The law would take effect in six months once signed. Gov. Jon S. Corzine is out of the country for the holidays.

 

"We can significantly reduce the number of infections to newborns and help break down the stigma associated with the disease," Codey was quoted as saying by the Associated Press. "For newborns, early detection can be the ultimate lifesaving measure."

 

The law would allow pregnant women to opt out the mandated screening though.   But it's not clear whether the healthcare providers are obliged to inform patients that they have a right to opt out.   Often hospitals and doctors do not want their patients to make any medical decision.

 

However, the law would require doctors and hospitals to provide pregnant women with information on HIV and AIDS, apparently so that they may accept whatever screening is forced on them. The law would also require newborns be tested should the mother have tested positive or her status is unknown.

 

New Jersey would be the first state in the nation to push HIV testing for both pregnant women and newborns, according to the Kaiser Foundation, a not-for-profit medical policy watchdog.   Early there is reporting that some other states including Arkansas, Michigan, Tennessee and Texas require mothers to be tested for HIV unless they ask not to be tested.

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends all pregnant women be screened for HIV although it says that the testing should be voluntary.   According to the federal health agency, medical intervention during pregnancy can reduce the odds of the mother-to-child HIV transmission from 25 percent to 2%.

 

Critics say women who are concerned can ask for the testing whenever they want.   Forced screening is a deprivation of women's authority to make medical decisions, the American Civil Liberties and some women's groups argued.

 

"Women's privacy rights and choices are as constitutionally valid as any other citizen, regardless of reproductive status," The AP quoted Maretta J. Short, New Jersey's National Organization of Women president as saying.





© 2004-2008 by foodconsumer.org unless otherwise specified

Top of Page




Google
 
Web foodconsumer.org

Search Consumer-friendly Health Sites












We have moved to Food Consumer . Org



disclaimer | advertising | jobs | privacy | about us | newsletter | Submit news/articles
link partners: | Buy Viagra | MarketAmerica.com |
Buy a home | Auto Insurance | Mortgage refinancing | DaytonaCPA.com | Take Your Blog to a Higher Level
© Copyright 2004 - 2008 foodconsumer.org All rights reserved

Disclaimer: What's published on this website should be considered opinions of respective writers only and foodconsumer.org which has no political agenda nor commercial ambition may or may not endorse any opinion of any writer. No accuracy is guaranteed although writers are doing their best to provide accurate information only. The information on this website should not be construed as medical advice and should not be used to replace professional services provided by qualified or licensed health care workers. The site serves only as a platform for writers and readers to share knowledge, experience, and information from the scientific community, organizations, government agencies and individuals. Foodconsumer.org encourages readers who have had medical conditions to consult with licensed health care providers - conventional and or alternative medical practitioners.