While honesty and openness are the tenets that define ideal relationships, has anyone considered the extent of ‘baring’, mandated from partners, especially about past sexual relationships? The need for such revelations, assumes importance in this day and age of HIV.
Value system is one thing, but the dictates of law is another; the latter threatens dire consequences in the absence of toeing with legal procedures. So where is the threshold for privacy matters in such cases?The California court, is now mulling over one such case of an AIDS infected couple, where the woman has claimed that her husband has infected her with HIV, also accusing him of keeping her in the dark about his previous sexual escapades !.
The ruling expected to be out in the next 3 months, will throw light on the level of honesty expected from a partner and will rest the case on the grounds for taking action against non disclosure
The woman`s attorney said, “This is not a hooker and trick in some back alley -- or a sordid affair in a cheap hotel. This was a formal marriage. How can the state protect a wife’s contractual and property status in dealing with her husband, yet not protect her life? ``
An opposing school of thought from the lawyers of the woman’s former husband, has indicated that a legislation mandating a partner’s sexual past would tantamount to grave infringement of privacy for the persons involved down the line, and might not actually assist in taking the health issue forward.
