The rights of blood recipients should supersede any asserted rights of blood donors

Abstract

Some gay men have argued that the laboratory testing of blood is so accurate that continued deferrals based upon sexual activity are unnecessary and unjust. They also assert that they have a right to donate blood. There has been much debate over altering the rule barring donation from men who have had sex with other men since 1977, with blood organizations disagreeing over the best course of action. Two studies have indicated that changing the rule would increase the risk of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission. This dilemma is part of a broader issue, namely: what are the responsibilities of blood services to blood donors and recipients? Blood services should base decisions regarding donor suitability on science rather than on their donors' desires. Blood services must recognize that the rights of blood recipients should supersede any asserted rights of blood donors.

Donor understanding and attitudes about current and potential deferral criteria for high‐risk sexual behavior

“…Donor deferral policies for MSM have generated much discussion and controversy in both the transfusion medicine community and the public at large 1‐6 . Most published studies to date have been modeling studies estimating risks related to change in criteria 13,17‐19 .…”

“…Eligibility criteria for men who have sex with men (MSM) have generated extensive scientific and societal debate 1‐6 . In many countries, a single lifetime MSM experience or a single MSM experience since 1977 will lead to indefinite deferral from blood donation 1 .…”

Compliance with the current 12‐month deferral for male‐to‐male sex in Australia

“…Deferral of men who have sex with men (MSM) has been the subject of ongoing debate since first application in the early 1980s in response to the observation that HIV disproportionately affected MSM . More recently, especially with the improvement in the variety and sensitivity of screening tests for infectious disease, opponents cite permanent deferral for male‐to‐male sex – which is currently based on risk behaviour, but not sexual orientation as discriminatory against gay and bi‐sexual men .…”

Blood Donation, Deferral, and Discrimination: FDA Donor Deferral Policy for Men Who Have Sex With Men

“…A rights variant of this paradigm sets up a straw contest between donor rights to give blood and recipient rights to receive safe blood (Franklin 2007;Brooks 2004): "straw" because while the "right to donate" has been occasionally employed as an activist slogan, it is rarely functions as an argument by MSM policy critics. Here the interests of each "side" are too narrowly cast because each individual donor with individual interests is also a community member with community interests.…”