HIV problem with dishonest partner

[guyinsf]

We don't know whether the "ex" ever said he was hiv negative to the original poster, so I don't assume that his appeals to have unsafe sex included those statements.

 

It is interesting to notice what ISN'T being said (or written).

 

If the topic of hiv infection didn't come up (hard to believe it wouldn't, but also hard to believe that someone could willingly engage in unprotected sex under these circumstances without getting hiv tests together), then the original poster carries a lot of the responsibility himself. I think that suing under those circumstances is ridiculous. If the ex did knowingly lie about his hiv status, perhaps there is a case there though there are certainly other considerations (many of which were mentioned above already).

 

I'm not sure whether to take this post seriously. The first red flag is that the poster feigns ignorance to the basics of hiv testing when he has, in fact, been testing for two years (if you believe the posts). Then he later says he wouldn't have sex if he found out he was hiv positive. I think this is another example of a post designed to get people all riled up. If I'm wrong, then to you, original poster (sorry I forgot your user name): Please get into some counseling.

 

>>Why are you people taking this poster's word at face value

>>without all the facts? And why should his ex be branded a

>>criminal just because he is HIV+, especially when you have

>>nothing to go on other than the poster's

>>statements!!!!!!!!!!!! :-( :-( :-( :-( This is not a

>>scenario, where the HIV+ person was intentionally and

>>maliciously out to infect other people who were not adults

>and

>>thus easily influenced!!!

>

>I’ll admit that is doesn’t really make a lot of sense, but why

>not just question the facts as presented. Go back to the

>first post. He claims that the boyfriend pressured him into

>unprotected sex with appeals to trust and love. Those appeals

>had to include a claim of being HIV negative. He says he now

>knows the guy was positive several years before their

>relationship. He doesn’t specifically state it, but how could

>that be determined unless the guy knew when he became

>positive? His intent may not have been to infect someone, but

>he sure showed total disregard for his boyfriend’s safety.

>

>Of course we are only hearing one side. This isn’t a court of

>law. It’s somebody asking for advice. I often wonder if such

>posts are legitimate and the poster is really just looking for

>conversation, but what’s the big deal? If you don’t think

>they are legit, don’t get involved. You don’t need to rant at

>the people who are taking it at face value just because you’ve

>decided that you know the real deal. It’s also going to piss

>some people off when you making sweeping judgments about their

>knowledge.

>

>Disclaimer: I only said that because you asked if you were

>off track on this one. I often like rants. And sweeping

>judgments ALWAYS make me grin.

>

[VaHawk]

I absolutely love your rebuttal, although I don't agree with it. It is intelligent, fact based, and presented in a non-personal attack mode. I wish more posters would be this way when disagreeing with others! As I stated before, and I am always willing to admit, I definitely can be an opinionated asshole, subject to rants and rages, and I too think it is amusing and part of the fun of an internet board!

 

>I’ll admit that this doesn’t really make a lot of sense, but why

>not just question the facts as presented.

 

What facts? The mere typing of someone's "rants" does not make them facts.

 

Go back to the

>first post. He claims that the boyfriend pressured him into

>unprotected sex with appeals to trust and love. Those appeals

>had to include a claim of being HIV negative.

 

This is no more factual than my rants or the orginal poster's accusations. And even if true, it does not excuse anyone's lack of sound judgement in making his decisons.

 

> He says he now knows the guy was positive several years before their relationship. He doesn’t specifically state it, but how could

>that be determined unless the guy knew when he became

>positive? His intent may not have been to infect someone, but

>he sure showed total disregard for his boyfriend’s safety.

>

Once again, I believe imo, that this is just the rantings of a dumped boyfriend! We have only his word, as you say, and I doubt if his ex's medical records would be revealed to an outside source.

 

>Of course we are only hearing one side. This isn’t a court of

>law. It’s somebody asking for advice.

 

Gee, I never tried to pass myself off as Judge Judy. And it also, seems that other posters posted similiar sentiments. And imo, he was not asking for advice, just ranting! Why is he asking about AIDS incubation periods and such, if he has already been getting tested for the last two years as he states?

 

>I often wonder if such

>posts are legitimate and the poster is really just looking for

>conversation, but what’s the big deal? If you don’t think

>they are legit, don’t get involved. You don’t need to rant at

>the people who are taking it at face value just because you’ve

>decided that you know the real deal. It’s also going to piss

>some people off when you making sweeping judgments about their

>knowledge.

 

I, just like everyone else here, am entitled to respond to any post on this board, just like "oh, my God" you! Who am I ranting at besides the original poster, and those who responded with condescending attitudes???? And just what statements of mine are any more of a sweeping judgement that this very statement by you and those who facts unknown, think the HIV+ man in question is a "mean mother fucker" criminal who should be prosecuted and thrown in prison? If you are all that pissed off, I know some guys into golden showers that would just love to get pissed on!

 

>

>Disclaimer: I only said that because you asked if you were

>off track on this one. I often like rants. And sweeping

>judgments ALWAYS make me grin.

>

:-(

 

Likewise Does make the place more fun, don't it?

[Boston Guy]

Thanks for starting this thread, if only because it helps to remind people that we need to remain vigilant, even in the context of committed relationships. (How I wish more of the guys who are currently in their late teens and 20s would take this to heart!)

 

Quickly and simply:

 

1. You were betrayed. If he knew he was HIV+ and led you to believe that he was not and that unprotected sex would be safe, he betrayed you in a remarkable manner. Simply put, he cared more about his own pleasure than he did about giving you a potentially-fatal disease. The breadth and depth of that betrayal is breathtakng.

 

2. In many jurisdictions, it's illegal for an HIV+ person to have unprotected sex with someone, especially without notifying the other person of their HIV status. I support these laws. We humans are stupid enough about sex often enough to not need the active and knowing complicity of others to compound our stupidity. People who are HIV+ simply need to know that infecting other people is wrong, stupid, immoral and illegal. This activity should be condemned in the strongest-possible terms.

 

3. Your friend's behavior is typical of the kinds of things that happen when relationships end and people who are caught in the middle have to choose. There is no rule that says "he was my friend originally so he's mine at the end". Time will tell if your friendship with him will survive. (That's a decision you both will take part in.)

 

My recommendations:

 

1. Try to shed the emotional baggage of the relationship as quickly as possible. It's tough to do but necessary. Talking about it -- even in places like this -- is a great step. So is getting back out and dating other guys, even if you don't feel like it. You'll be amazed how much emotional distance you can put between you and your ex as soon as you start letting other people into your life.

 

2. If you are obsessing over this, consider getting some counseling to help you deal with this issue.

 

3. Put some room between you and your friend. Try to view things from his point of view if you can. (It NEVER looks the same as from your point of view.) After enough time -- maybe a few months -- ask yourself if you still want to be his friend. If the answer is yes, ask him if he wants to be your friend. If you both want the friendship to continue, it will. But it will be different.

 

4. Pursue the legal action against your friend. But don't do it if your only motive is your anger because it's not likely to be the solution to your anger. What your ex did was illegal and should be. The fact that you are still negative is immaterial -- attempted robbery and conspiracy are both crimes. Only time will tell if you were not, in fact, harmed physically and it seems on the surface that you were harmed emotionally. More to the point, in my mind, is that your ex needs to be discouraged from doing the same thing to other guys in the future. He's a walking time bomb who could easily kill others guys simply for his own amusement and he clearly doesn't get that or doesn't care. Yes, I believe we are all responsible for our own safety and should remain vigilant and use proper safeguards. But I also think that someone who has any disease that can be spread by sexual contact, much less HIV, has a special responsibility to inform his or her partners. Not only did your ex not do this, he implied that he was negative by the messages he did give you. His actions lead me to wonder if he cared for you at all, in any kind of real way.

 

I wish you good luck with whatever course of action you choose.

 

BG

[Guest wisconguy]

I've already accepted my responsibility.

 

Its obvious that people with HIV out there don't want to take their responsibility. They want to say it's everyone's responsibility to protect themselves. then they can feel better and still have sex without guilt.

 

I am naieve about testing. I always got tested because I thought the incubation period was unknown and could be years. Since I was only with my partner for 2 and thought the incubation period may be longer, I took no chances and continued to get tested.

 

pardon my ignorance, I know it's something I need to educate myself on, which is one reason I came here. But It's obvious whos fighting their own guilt here and whos not, and it's obvious who REALLY needs counseling. Murder and attempted murder are crimes, doesnt matter if it happens become some stupid asshole doesn't lock their door at night or not.

 

I'm prosecuting because he shouldn't be allowed to do this to others. I'd hate to see someone else get sick and have to try to unguilt themselves so they could have sex and lie.

 

As for me, I've learned. I'm HIV negative and I stay that way. That's my responsibility alone now. Got it!! Thanks

[+ Lucky]

"I definitely can be an opinionated asshole, subject to rants and rages, and I too think it is amusing and part of the fun of an internet board!"

 

WHO YOU TALKIN' ABOUT?!

[Guest Bitchboy]

I certainly never said that someone should be prosecuted if they are HIV+ and continue having sex. If it came across that way, it is poorly worded. But I do think it's a crime that should be prosecuted whenssomeone plays on the trust of another and continues to have unprotected sex with the knowledge that he is putting the other party's life at risk. Even stupid people have a right to be protected by the law. If only smart people were allowed to be victims of crimes I guess it would help in the overcrowded prison population, but it sucks in the humanitarian department.

[+ Charlie]

Do you really believe he was trying to MURDER you? Or murder your friend, or anyone else he sleeps with? He may be a selfish asshole who doesn't care about the consequences to others. He may even believe that what he is doing will not actually injure anyone--the level of ignorance about AIDS and medical matters in general is appalling, even among those who are HIV+. The fact that he hurt you badly, emotionally and potentially physically, does not mean that was his intention. I still think you are hiding a personal vendetta behind an expressed selfless desire to protect others, and you need to deal with that before you can decide with a clear mind on a course of action.

[Luv2play]

I have come to the conclusion, after rereading this thread, that we have been had by our friend here. First he comes across as all naive about AIDs and HIV and now he tells us he is regularly tested "because of my lifestyle, regardless of the circumstances".

 

Well, I get regularly tested too and have been tested in a number of different states and in the US and Canada. And each time I am offered counselling and given lots of information. The whole field has changed an incredible amount since I first started getting tested in 1990.

 

So my question is;how did this guy from Wisconsin remain such a naive person after going through what I have. Something is fishy here. I don't think it will take a defense lawyer too long to pull apart his story. Good luck to him in his prosecution. I think he'll need it x(

[guyinsf]

I agree. Certainly public health testing sites are going to give counseling in conjunction with HIV testing. I suppose some private doctors might not do this, but I find it hard to believe that a doctor would test someone repeatedly without providing information about HIV/AIDS, especially with respect to what the test results mean. It seems like it would be medical malpractice to not give at least a cursory explanation; someone could get a negative result and then infect someone because he was so recently infected it wasn't detected in the latest test. Talk about a lawsuit waiting to happen.

 

>I have come to the conclusion, after rereading this thread,

>that we have been had by our friend here. First he comes

>across as all naive about AIDs and HIV and now he tells us he

>is regularly tested "because of my lifestyle, regardless of

>the circumstances".

>

>Well, I get regularly tested too and have been tested in a

>number of different states and in the US and Canada. And each

>time I am offered counselling and given lots of information.

>The whole field has changed an incredible amount since I first

>started getting tested in 1990.

>

>So my question is;how did this guy from Wisconsin remain such

>a naive person after going through what I have. Something is

>fishy here. I don't think it will take a defense lawyer too

>long to pull apart his story. Good luck to him in his

>prosecution. I think he'll need it x(

[guyinsf]

It sounds like you are making assumptions that certain posters here are HIV-positive simply because their positions/opinions are contrary to yours.

[+ Lucky]

"pardon my ignorance"

 

I wish I could!

[Guest]

First of all, this is absolutely not your fault. Not only did your partner deceive you about his HIV status, but he also brow-beated you with guilt over how you might not trust him in your "committed relationship." It's not as if you had an encounter at the baths or in the gym restroom. I don't think I would have unprotected sex even if I were in a committed relationship, but that should certainly be a valid choice. The only reason you were put in harm's way is that your ex was a liar and a cheat. To suggest that you had even 1% responsibility in this matter is purely sociopathic. It's no different than suggesting that a woman is responsible for her rape because of what she was wearing, etc.

With respect to whether to cooperate with the DA or not, I think it's a moral imperative to cooperate. Quite obviously, your ex will continue to do this to other guys if nothing happens. Although he may not spend much time in jail for this offense, he'll certainly be in great trouble if he messes with someone else again. If someone else gets infected because you wouldn't help the DA, their death will at least partly be on your conscience.

Quite frankly, you should pursue not only this criminal case, but a civil one as well. This freak ex of yours who was supposed to be your lover obviously had no consideration for your life or health. If he can't be made to "get it," he should at least be made to pay. Had I been in your shoes, and I got infected with HIV, he'd be lucky to get nothing worse from me than a civil suit.

So my take on this is that you should not only cooperate with the DA, but consult a personal injury attorney as well.

[woodlawn]

I don't see anyone here providing you with any practical advice about the decision you've been asked to make. What a surprise.

 

Before deciding, you should know a couple of things. First, the prosecutor doesn't need your permission to bring a criminal charge against this guy. In a case like this, where a trial probably can't be won without the victim's testimony, a prosecutor would be reluctant to proceed without the victim's cooperation, but he might do so if he feels the defendant is a sufficient danger to public safety. That's a judgment call on his part. If he decided to proceed without your support he could have you called to testify before a grand jury, and if you refused to talk he could have you jailed until you changed your mind.

 

If you decide to cooperate, know that unless there is a plea bargain before trial you will have to testify in open court about everything that happened. And the defendant's lawyer will be cross-examining you about your relationship with this guy and will be able to introduce evidence about other aspects of your personal life that might cast doubt on your testimony. If you have any skeletons in your closet, you should expect them to come tumbling out.

 

Know also that if the case goes to trial, and probably even if it doesn't, it will be reported by the local media. You should be prepared to have everyone you know find out all the details of this matter. No way to avoid that.

 

Above all, you should make sure you understand exactly what the prosecutor wants from you and what your rights are. For example, will he feel free to offer the defendant a plea without your consent? If there is a conviction will you have any input on the issue of sentencing? These are the kinds of questions you should ask.

[Guest Bitchboy]

I'm gonna try one of those rants real soon. They're always fun, and I don't get enough use out of my exclamation point key as it is. However, this isn't one of them. I do feel (and everything I said in my posts in this thread was predicated on whether the poster was telling the truth - and I said that often) that anyone who knowingly has unprotected sex with someone, stupid or not, is a mean mother fucker criminal. Now, I have to go see the shrink and find out why it bothers me that an anonymous poster doesn't like what I said. Such is life, I guess.

[Luv2play]

I think Unicorn is not looking at this issue very objectively. This is 2003, Wisconsin's relationship started with his ex 2 years ago. Aids has been around over 20 years and it's causes and means of prevention have been known for 18 years. Where has this guy been all this time?

 

People of my generation who came of age before Aids saw a whole generation of gay men decimated by a disease that came out of no-where and infected them before they knew what had happened. This is no longer the case. We now know. We know that barebacking is risking getting HIV. If ANYONE, lover or pick-up in a sauna, suggests barebacking, we know this is RISKY. A verbal assurance does not change the facts. As another poster said, "trust but verify".

 

I think Wisconsin should reflect on the fact that he emerged sadder but wiser, not infected, and just move on with his life. A court case may come back to bite him in the rear!x(

[VaHawk]

This truly is a lost cause, man, as some people just don't want to see the light!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(sorry haven't used the old exclamation key lately). IMO, what is the most incomprehensible, is that all this vindictiveness and cries of "foul play" are coming from gay men, who despite all the warnings, despite all the deaths, despite all the information so readily available, are naive enough to blindly put their faith into someone else rather than being responsible enough to look out for themselves. I truly wonder if all those doing so, ever get tested, or are like so many I have known in life "just don't want to know, because to do so would be too hard to deal with". After all, even a child is admonished by his mother "that just because your friends do it doesn't mean you can do it". After all, this is not a case of a junior high school student caving in to peer pressure.

[Guest Love Bubble Butt]

>As I stated before, and I

>am always willing to admit, I definitely can be an opinionated

>asshole, subject to rants and rages,

 

Uhhh ... as a fellow opinionated asshole, I prefer "passionate in our beliefs!"

[Guest Love Bubble Butt]

It's interesting how different people can look at the exact same issue and come to completely different conclusions. But Unicorn, I generally agree with yours.

[Guest]

>I think Unicorn is not looking at this issue very

>objectively. This is 2003, Wisconsin's relationship started

>with his ex 2 years ago. Aids has been around over 20 years

>and it's causes and means of prevention have been known for 18

>years. Where has this guy been all this time?

>

 

Now that's just silly. By your logic, there would be no births in the last 18 years because sex transmits HIV. I have a 9 year-old niece. Presumeably, my brother and his wife had sex because they've been monogamous, and my sister-in-law trusted my brother enough to have sex without a condom. If a person is in a sexually monogamous and trusting relationship, sex without condoms is a safe option. I don't think anyone reading this string doubts for a second that the original poster would not have had unprotected sex with his ex if this ex had told him he had HIV.

The ex didn't expose the original poster with the clap, for God's sake. He exposed him to a fatal, incurable, contagious illness. And why? Just so he could enjoy sex a tad more. If this isn't sociopathic, I don't know what could be. If you see someone stone drunk trying to get into his car, you take away his keys before he puts others' lives at risk. Likewise, the origianl poster has a duty to do what he can to protect others from his ex's sociopathy.

[Luv2play]

Au contraire, my friend. Your ignorance is astounding. The riskiest forms of Aids transmission are anal intercourse and sharing needles. Why is this? Because the chances are highest for the virus to come into contact with blood which is the route required to pass the virus. Heterosexual AIDs transmission is very much lower in North America because the conditions required for transmission are not present. In Africa, by contrast, heterosexual transmission of AIDs is high because of untreated sexual diseases which create open sores.

 

I agree there may be circumstances when two gay men may engage in unprotected sex. If they have tested negative over a six month period (at least 2 tests) and are in a monogamus relationship then theoretically they could forego the condoms. BUT, there must be complete fidelity. In the case of Mr Wisconsin, he entered into a risky behaviour without even ascertaining the HIV status of his sexual partner.

 

Also he was in a relationship of relatively short duration, just 2 years. Trust does not materialize overnight. It is based on a pattern of behavior of many years. Did our friend know how many sexual partners his ex had before him. Did he bother to ask? We don't know because we are only getting one side of the story. But given what we have to work with, it is obvious he took an incredible risk and is lucky things turned out as favorably as they did. He should be grateful for this and get over his bitterness.

[Guest]

I don't buy your argument that one can't trust a partner one hasn't lived with for over 2 years. Nor do I agree that one has to automatically assume one's lover lies, and therefore personally inspect test results. Your explanation for the difference between the heterosexual-predominance in other countries vs the homosexual-predominance in the US also doesn't hold water with me (or a majority of experts). While the presence of co-infection of other STD's probably plays a role, other factors probably play a greater role. Other factors implicated have included different HIV strains, differences in circumcision rates, and, most probable, the increased incidence of extramarital affairs (with prostitutes in particular).

Do you really think that most straight couples wait for two years after marriage, and personally inspect their spouses' HIV results twice over a period of 6 months before having sex without a condom? With or without STD's, and regardless of HIV strain, I don't think you'd argue that male to female transmission in this country is difficult--especially when you're having sex with the guy on a regular basis. The bottom line is that the original poster's ex lied to him, intentionally put him at risk for a deadly disease, certainly had no regard for his well-being, and obviously has no remorse whatsoever. I have no concept of how one can condone such behavior.

[+ Charlie]

How do you know he has "no remorse whatsoever"? We have heard nothing of the ex's side of the story, so we not only don't know what his motivations are, we don't even know how accurate the facts are. As several posters besides myself have pointed out, the objectivity of the person who started this thread is not exactly unquestionable. I don't think it is wise to cheer him on to a course of action with serious consequences for everyone concerned, if we have heard only his account of what happened, and why.

[Guest]

Obviously one can only answer a question accurately if one has the facts straight. I believe the original poster. What's the point of asking for advice if one is going to give bullshit premises?

[trilingual]

I'm surprised by the number of posters here whose instinct is to blame the victim in this scenario. (For the sake of argument, I'm assuming the truth of wisconsinguys description of what happened.)

 

I also think that if this happened to any of the guys who are busy blaming the victim, they'd very quickly change their tune. I notice that nobody here has posted anything along the lines of "You know, the very same thing happened to me, and I've decided to be holier than Mother Teresa and just blame myself for having trusted my lover and allowing him to deliberately give me a fatal disease without my knowing he was infected, even though HE knew. . ." I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for that posting! :o

[Guest JT]

Mr. Wisconguy,

 

I'm terribly sorry to hear about your situation. However, I do have a number of questions that will help me understand better what had happened in your previous relationship and that in turn, may help me provide you some objective advise. I hope you don't find my questions intrusive but if you do, I'd like to apologize in advance.

 

But before I ask my questions, I do find your following statement objectionable,

 

"Its obvious that people with HIV out there don't want to take their responsibility. They want to say it's everyone's responsibility to protect themselves. then they can feel better and still have sex without guilt."

 

Your sweeping statement denounces ALL people with HIV and accuses ALL of them irresponsible. IMHO, we're going to find bad apples among both HIV+ and HIV- people while many others are responsible and caring individuals.

 

Here are my questions:

 

1. I assume that you didn't ask for your ex's HIV test results before engaging in unprotected sex with him. According to your post, you believed what he said at the time. So how did you find out he is HIV+ after the breakup? Did you once again just believe what he told you? Did you verify his claim with any test results? You may wonder why I ask this question. But if you feel that he cannot be trusted, why would you believe him this time? When people broke up, sometimes they said things to hurt their partner. It's also possible that he claimed to be HIV+ (prior to your relationship) just to upset you so much that you would break up with him. Motive? He could just move on to someone else...

 

2. According to you, your ex has been positive several years before you two became "committed". Did you two live together?

 

3. Was his health generally good during the two years you were together?

 

4. If his health was good, did you notice that he was taking any medications on a regular and daily basis? If yes, did you ever notice what were those meds?

 

5. Last but not least, were both of you versatile regarding anal intercourse in that relationship? If not, who was top/bottom?

 

Thanks in advance for your patience and understanding. Hope to see your response soon.

 

JT