By Kathleen McAleese
Editor-in-Chief

With the blood drive tomorrow at Westford Academy, some students have been taken aback by a rule put in place by the Food and Drug Association in 1983. This rule, men who have sex with other men (dubbed MSM), has been prohibiting men who have had sex with any man at any time since 1977 of donating blood at blood drives under the US Food and Drug Association regulation.

The issue surrounding this policy is that the rule is inherently homophobic at its core. Men who have sex with men do not automatically contract HIV/AIDS.

While the statistic of gay and bisexual men with HIV is much higher than that of heterosexual men, blood given during blood drives undergoes serious and rigorous testing before distribution. According to the Red Cross, “If a test result is positive, the unit is discarded and the donor is notified. Test results are confidential and are only shared with the donor, except as may be required by law.”

I would also like to give any individual who is aware of their infection with HIV the benefit of the doubt that they would not donate blood with any malicious intent.

HIV and AIDS are functions of unsafe habits, not sexual orientation.

The policy is in place because of the protection of people receiving blood donations, but the process of testing blood is incredibly thorough, enhanced by the presence of donor evaluations and computerized blood testing.

The FDA states that the “deferral policy is based on the documented increased risk of certain transfusion transmissible infections, such as HIV, associated with male-to-male sex and is not based on any judgment concerning the donor’s sexual orientation”  but the deferral of MSM is unnecessary.

HIV/AIDS is a nondiscriminatory disease, but the ruling to forbid any man who has had sex with another man from donating blood to people in need is only perpetuating the stigma around the disease.

Screening donors based on their sexual orientation rather than the risk they have of the disease is harmful and brings out more harm than good. Turning away willing donors for the sake of their past sexual history, even if it is a safe one, is wrong. Even in countries like Canada, there is a five-year deferral policy, and although this policy is not completely great, it is a step in the right direction.

The donation of blood is an integral part of what the Red Cross does, and although the MSM policy is flawed, donation of blood is still important for patients in need. I encourage eligible donors to donate blood if they would like to , and acknowledge that the ability to donate blood is nothing but a privilege.