Policy AIDS No One

AIDS HAS NEVER been just a medical issue. Whether policy-makers have responded to an actual threat or merely to a public panic, their legislative efforts to safeguard against the virus have sometimes resulted in discriminatory laws.

Although researchers and federal health agencies have declared repeatedly that AIDS cannot be transmitted by casual contact, cities throughout the country are establishing policies outlining procedures for municipal employees and for children with AIDS in public schools.

Last month, the City of Cambridge drafted a policy for all city employees who have been diagnosed with AIDS or have tested positive on the antibody screening test. Though city policy-makers have taken into account the interests of AIDS-afflicted employees and have calmed public fears, their policy singles out those employees to undergo unwarranted special procedures.

The Cambridge policy requires an employee carrying the AIDS virus to inform his boss, who in turn must inform the city manager and the health commissioner. Consulting with a team of physicians, the health commissioner has the final say on whether the employee can stay at his post.

The policy fails to reflect the evidence that there are no known cases of AIDS transmission by casual contact--especially significant considering the millions of hours of contact between AIDS patients and health workers, and between patients and their families.

Gay activists have complained that the city guidelines--though not as bad as other policies--discriminate against those with AIDS because they distinguish unfairly between sufferers of the disease and those who suffer from other chronic illnesses.

Not only does the policy violate medical confidentiality, but it opens the door for misunderstandings that could lead to discrimination. Instead of having a policy that singles them out, the city should treat those with AIDS similar to those with other serious illnesses, while educating all of us that there's no reason to panic.

EVEN THE MAKERS of the policy admit to its shortcomings. Essentially translated from a controversial policy established last fall for Cambridge public school employees with AIDS, the guidelines clearly were made in haste. Cambridge Health Commissioner Dr. Melvin H. Chalfen '55, who helped draft the policy, admits that it was not worded well.

The guidelines fail to articulate what Chalfen sees as the main point--that city employees with AIDS should be allowed to continue with their jobs. Chalfen and others still are waiting to learn the latest information about AIDS before changing or rescinding their policy--a possibility which they acknowledge.

But there comes a time when we know enough about the previously uncharted risks of an infectious disease to classify it with the long list of other communicable ailments.

Director of University Health Services Dr. Warren E.C. Wacker believes that policies such as Cambridge's are un-necessary, pointing out that cases of other diseases far more communicable are not required to be reported to public officials.

Clearly, some issues related to AIDS are necessarily complex--as the current debate on Beacon Hill over AIDS testing for insurance purposes demonstrates. But the policy to single out those with AIDS is not so complicated; it should just not be done.