HIV/AIDS Prisoners. Child Pornography
This is an excerpt from the paper...
When HIV/AIDS first appeared on the scene in the United States, the first response of prison officials was to segregate HIV-positive prisoners (Greenspan, 2005). They were housed separately from the rest of the prison population and did not receive the same services and amenities as the rest of the prisoners. They were not offered job and educational opportunities as the other prisoners were. In 1991, the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta upheld Alabama's state policy of segregating prisoners who had AIDS from the main prison population (Court, 1991). The Court found that the segregation was a reasonable response by prison officials to prison behavior which might cause a rapid spread of the disease if AIDS prisoners were allowed to remain in the general prison population. Alabama prison officials had defended segregation on the basis that the prevalence of high-risk behavior in prison, which included drug use and homosexual practices, would otherwise lead to the spread of AIDS (Court, 1991). Since 1987, all inmates have been tested for AIDS, and those who tested positive were housed in special units at Limestone Correctional Facility in northern Alabama and the Julia Tutwiler Prison for Women near Montgomery. The Court stated that because Alabama was trying to control the spread of AIDS, segregating the AIDS prisoners was a "reasonable infringement" of the rights of the infected prisoner, and found that the prison gave these inmates adequ
. . .
re HIV positive with 1.5 percent, followed by Connecticut and New York with 1.2 percent each. Twelve states had a prison population HIV positive of less than 0.1 percent. The rate of confirmed AIDS infection in prison inmates is 51 per 10,000, which is more than three times the rate in the general population, 15 per 10,000. One in 12 deaths in prison is from AIDS-related causes.
The above statistics show that although the rate of confirmed AIDS infection in the prison population is more than three times as high as that in the general population, the overall rate is very low. This is despite the fact that the prison populations are now all integrated. A policy of non-segregation is of more help than harm to both the prisoners and the staff. Fear of stigmatization, loss of confidentiality and discrimination deter prisoners from being tested, and the threat of segregation will only aggravate this situation (Lines, 1997). If a prisoner is segregated in one prison then released, and is imprisoned again for some reason, the staff of the new prison would know his record and know he had been segregated as being HIV positive at the previous prison, so his confidentiality would have been breached, and he may be stigmatized and disc
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Wilkins Trebilcock, Connecticut York, Montgomery Court, Integrating AIDS, HIV AIDS, Retrieved Feb, Circuit Atlanta, Supreme Court, , Decency Act, prison population, hiv positive, wilkins trebilcock, feb 18 2006, trebilcock 2001, feb 18, 18 2006, aids positive, retrieved feb, retrieved feb 18, wilkins trebilcock 2001, positive prisoners, body fluids, aids positive prisoners, prisoners hiv positive,
Approximate Word count = 1807
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
