As the “Get the Red Out” blood drive went on in the
James West Alumni Center, students from the “Fight to Give
Life” campaign protested outside what they call
discriminatory measures by the Food and Drug Association.
Students protested the current blood donation eligibility
guidelines which ban men who have had sexual contact with another
male at least once since 1977 from donating blood. Women who have
had sexual contact with one of those men in the last 12 months are
also restricted from donating blood.
According to the FDA Web site, the current ban was set up in
1983 to prevent individuals who are at a higher risk of
transmitting HIV from donating blood.
At the Undergraduate Students Association Council meeting
Tuesday, the council voted unanimously to pass a resolution in
support of the Fight to Give Life campaign. The resolution stated
that due to a shortage in blood donations, “all able-bodied
individuals should be allowed to donate blood without being
selectively marginalized by the federal government.”
“The policy is socially unjust in that it impedes the
ability of gay students on campus from donating blood,” the
resolution continued.
At the meeting, councilmembers voiced their concerns regarding
the policy.
“This policy makes people feel uncomfortable with
themselves,” said Carlos Saucedo, a USAC general
representative and protest organizer. “The blood is tested
regardless of sexual orientation. This policy is blatantly
discriminatory and perpetuates homophobia,” he said.
But because infection may not show up on HIV-antibody tests for
up to two months, the FDA Web site says recently infected blood may
pass tests.
“We want the blood to be as safe as possible. We follow
the guideline of FDA,” said Khacho Shahnazarian, a Registered
Nurse working at the blood drive.
Another protester, Diana Aldapa, a fifth-year Chicana/o studies
student has had friends try to donate blood who were told they
could not donate because of their sexual orientation.
“When they tell you that you can’t donate blood, you
feel inferior if it’s for a reason you can’t
control,” Aldapa said.
The protesters spoke to students and asked them to sign a
petition which they will send to the FDA, asking them to repeal the
ban.
Aldapa said some people from the blood drive wanted them to move
their booth, because they thought it would discourage people from
donating.
“We are not trying to discourage people from donating
blood. We are encouraging people to donate,” Aldapa said.
The FDA Web site also states that this policy has been discussed
and evaluated by the FDA Blood Products Advisory Committee. In
1997, the committee recommended that the FDA “reconsider the
current recommendations for the deferral of men who have sex with
other men,” but no specific recommendations were given for
what should be done.
Jennifer Partnoff, a fifth-year women’s studies and
history student, said she disagrees with the policy because now
people are more aware of STIs and how to avoid them. Partnoff also
takes issue with the ban because it prevents certain people from
ever donating blood.
The FDA Web site acknowledged that some excluded individuals may
take precautions to avoid transmission.
“Although a potential individual donor may practice safe
sex, persons who have participated in high-risk behaviors are, as a
group, still considered to be at increased risk for transmitting
HIV.”
But the Fight to Give Life campaign argues that though this
policy may have initially been warranted, it is now outdated.
“When this policy was first put in place, more people were
HIV positive. Now people are more aware and take more safety
measures,” Partnoff said.
According to its Web site, the FDA continues to review the
donor-deferral policy.
“(The) FDA is very much aware that strict exclusion
policies eliminate some safe donors in the attempt to maximally
protect the nation’s blood supply by deferring the largest
number of donors at increased risk for HIV infection.”