Question:
Has anyone taken legal action??? Other than 2 women I have met and become friends with.

If you have, can you please tell me your story.... either here or in a personal message.

thanks!

Answer:
negligent transmission of herpes.... I was SHOCKED when I learned this. I read a stat online that said that 27 other states recognize this is a law or cause for action!!! 27!!!

Answer:
I don't have an experience to share, but I do have some thoughts on the matter, for what they're worth. It's an intriquing concept.

It seems to me that such a law would be nearly impossible to enforce or prosecute unless a positive blood or culture test taken prior to exposure could be subpoenaed and admitted as evidence. Otherwise, how could it be proven that the infected person had prior knowledge that he/she was a carrier? Since hearsay isn't admissable in court, if there is no concrete evidence (a prior positive test result), it would be almost impossible to legally dispute the "I didn't know" or "he/she has had other sexual partners and could have gotten it from someone else" defense in court, wouldn't it?

And, considering the stigma attached to the disease, I wouldn't want to depend on an almost certainly biased jury who probabaly have a preconceived notion of the type of people who get STD's. It makes me think back to the days when rape trials were as much a prosecution of the victim as the rapist. Every sexual encounter the victim ever had was dragged up and produced as defense evidence that they were promiscuous and probably as accountable for the rape as the rapist.

I wish you well, Angel Eyes, and I admire that you're committed to righting a wrong done against you, but I fear you have a rough road ahead of you. Then again, if those committed to changing the stigma once attached to rape hadn't persevered, it would still be the silent crime it once was, unpunished because the victims were too ashamed to subject themselves to the possible humiliation of a public trial. I suppose in order for anything to change, someone has to step up and say "that's enough." Good luck to you.

Answer:
Yes, writercll, you have many great points. So happy this is turning into a discussion :)

I actually learned yesterday, that this kind of case has been won in my state (through a trial process), and that the outcome just hadn't been revealed.

The way the law reads, is that the person "must know or should have known" that they had herpes and therefore transmitted it to a partner. The "know" would come about through, yes, a blood test somewhere in their medical past indicating that they were aware of their condition, OR somewhere in their prescription filling history.

The "should have known" would be any exgirlfriends/exboyfriends that test positive for the virus, and let's say they approached the defendent, and told them of their condition. Also, the "should have known" would be if someone can show by proponderance, that they had some sort of physical symptom in the past (i.e.they had physical symptoms, complained about it to someone or some people, but never went to the doctor--this is very hard to prove, but it is possible and does happen).

I am fortunate that in a civil case (which this is) , all I need is proponderance of evidence, which basically means that I need 51% (or more) evidence and he needs 49% (or less), in order for me to win. This is not a criminal case, where you are innocent until proven guilty.

And yes, I agree this will be an extremely difficult time.--it has been

Answer:
Angel Eyes,

I just want you to know that I am proud of you for standing up for yourself and thereby helping many others in the process.

You Go Girl!

Answer:
yeah, me too. You have "cajones" girl. You have taken on a big task, and I think from what you have shared with us before that you have a good case. I wish you the very best!

Answer:
I'm extremely interested to know what the outcome of your case will be. Not because i'm thinking of taking the same action, but for the community as a whole. Keep us informed, k?

Answer:
I will absolutely keep you up to speed on what happens. It will not be easy, and I may lose. If I do, I will at least know I went down with a fight.

Answer:
"It hardly needs repeating that infection rates for sexually transmitted
diseases (“STDs”) have reached epidemic proportions.
In response, courts have been increasingly willing to extend liability in tort for disease transmission in an effort to decrease the spread of STDs. Virtually every commentator has supported the courts’ willingness to extend liability, even to the point of advocating a judicial policy denying the primarily male defendants the use of traditional affirmative defenses, namely contributory negligence and assumption of the risk. Several courts have accepted a broad interpretation of the defendant’s “reason to know” that he may be infected. Despite a lack of supporting evidence, justification for such a policy stems from either using tort liability to deter harmful behavior or from the defendant’s position as “least-cost avoider.” Either way, the law is now placing
the entire burden of responsibility on the defendant, which rejects basic
notions of personal responsibility and may even increase the spread of sexual disease."

--taken from "TOWARD A MORE BALANCED TREATMENT OF THE
NEGLIGENT TRANSMISSION OF SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES AND AIDS" vol. 2, 2003 (www.law.gwu.edu)