Hiv-Positive Restriction on Immigrants

1699 Words7 Pages
There has been a ling history of segregation, fear of the unknown, and stigmas placed on people with HIV/AIDs. Policies that exclude people with the disease, in hopes to limit the spread of it. This epidemic has lead to very controversial policies, such as the migration policies some countries have. There are currently 58 countries that have been under this policy of restricting visitors visas to whom are HIV positive. This policy leads many people to an even bigger fear of the disease. While there is no cure, there has been some proven success with antiretroviral therapy and the transmission of HIV/AIDs. Policies like theres are to help with the transmission from person to person. Recently the US has taken away this policy, allowing HIV-positive people to legally visit and migrate here. The Utilitarian Approach While Human Rights groups would argue against this approach, some ethicists would emphasize that a policy like this, restricting HIV-positive people and having HIV screening on immigration, should be required because it does the most good for the general population. That this would help with making the numbers of HIV-positive people go down within their country. One might say that having this is morally right because it produces significant balance of benefits over everyone. The moral stand point of having restrictions like this, goes with the view that this will help with the spread of the disease. An approach like this, lacks the correct moral stand point in some eyes. Leading to a very discriminatory society. The Right Approach This Approach can be viewed on that it is the individuals right to move freely from place to place without having to be tested. The stigma or discrimination that this policy brings along with it, does more harm than good on an individual level. Restrictions like these interfere with basic human rights policies, i.e:

More about Hiv-Positive Restriction on Immigrants

Open Document