A matter of public safety

Asking the politically incorrect question

Jesse Beach, Volunteer Staff

A university is defined as an institution of higher learning and research but it is also so much more than simply that. Not only are universities on the forefront of thought in the world, they have become a part of modern culture. The amalgam of diversity and multiculturalism which flourishes within out schools’ walls is not only a rich mix of culture but of thought and beliefs that we will develop into a new generation of societal freedoms. It is students just like us in schools just like the U of M that our ancestors fought to gain civil and social freedoms for. Now, however, like our forbearers before us, a new struggle has presented itself, begging for justice and equality against a radical, tyrannical despot. And that is why we must defend the Canadian Blood Services (CBS) and their right to selectively screen potential blood donors.

Yes, the Canadian Blood Services, whose not-for-profit charitable organization has the sole mission to manage the blood and blood products supply for Canadians. But why try to make life difficult for a seemingly worthy charitable organization? Well, that is exactly what our students’ union and our dear friends from the LGBTT community are trying to do.

If you have ever given blood, you may remember that, to be eligible, it is required that the potential donor fill out a long series of invasive questions about your health and sex life. This is because the CBS is obviously required to screen every donor and test each unit of blood or blood product collected for a variety of transmissible diseases. In the world we live in today, where drugs and sex are waged without thought or consequence (and occasionally combined), this is a necessary process. Just like most of us would not have unprotected sex with a new, unknown partner, the CBS cannot accept any blood that may have risk of infection. The result of infecting a poor victim with a blood transfusion is unthinkable, and rightly so. However, as a result of these questions, UMSU and the LGBTT community have ruled that the CFS — those righteous volunteers who devote their lives to helping others — a group of homophobic, gender-exclusive and discriminatory bastards.

The specific questions under attack are whether a man had engaged in sex with another man, even once, since 1977, and whether a woman had engaged in sex with a man who had done the aforementioned. Those who had done either were banned, for life, from donating blood. While this is a sensitive issue in our over-politically correct, can’t-offend-anyone society, this is going too far. We cannot, enlightened though we may be, debate what questions have to be asked for public safety. I am an English major and, though I may argue and debate any and all decisions ever made for the masterdebation column, I have no practical medical expertise that would allow me to question this matter of public health. And neither, I am assuming, do you or any of the UMSU board that determined the CBS was “homophobic.”

It is interesting to note that Ian Mumford, the chief operating officer of the CBS, wrote a stirring letter to the editor to the Manitoban a couple of weeks ago. In it, he outlined the policy with which the CBS made the offending questions. Of course, that policy, like any other within the CBS, was made in the best interest of patients and covers all people who may be at-risk members of the population regardless of their sexual orientation. Daniel Draper, representative for the LGBTT, has argued that this question is unnecessarily “homophobic” because the CBS tests all blood that it receives, making the questions about the patient’s homosexuality redundant. However, as Mumford details, there is a flaw in that test. In the early stages of infection, known as the “window period,” the HIV virus is undetectable. This means that, if prospective members were not required to answer such a question, there would be a risk of a unit of blood entering the system and infecting a patient — a risk that the CBS is not willing to take, regardless of a few peoples’ hurt feelings. While it may be unfortunate that some members of LGBTT community take offense to such a question, it is, I am afraid, necessary to public safety.

Jesse Beach is a fourth-year English student.





Volume 95 Issue 25	The Official University of Manitoba Students' Newspaper Website	March 26, 2008

Home About Us Advertising Rates Contact Staff Current Issue PDF Employment Letters to the Editor Meet the Staff Online Archives Volunteer Online Classifieds St. Vincent's Academy Diaries	Font Size Respond Email Print-Friendly A matter of public safety Asking the politically incorrect question Jesse Beach, Volunteer Staff A university is defined as an institution of higher learning and research but it is also so much more than simply that. Not only are universities on the forefront of thought in the world, they have become a part of modern culture. The amalgam of diversity and multiculturalism which flourishes within out schools’ walls is not only a rich mix of culture but of thought and beliefs that we will develop into a new generation of societal freedoms. It is students just like us in schools just like the U of M that our ancestors fought to gain civil and social freedoms for. Now, however, like our forbearers before us, a new struggle has presented itself, begging for justice and equality against a radical, tyrannical despot. And that is why we must defend the Canadian Blood Services (CBS) and their right to selectively screen potential blood donors. Yes, the Canadian Blood Services, whose not-for-profit charitable organization has the sole mission to manage the blood and blood products supply for Canadians. But why try to make life difficult for a seemingly worthy charitable organization? Well, that is exactly what our students’ union and our dear friends from the LGBTT community are trying to do. If you have ever given blood, you may remember that, to be eligible, it is required that the potential donor fill out a long series of invasive questions about your health and sex life. This is because the CBS is obviously required to screen every donor and test each unit of blood or blood product collected for a variety of transmissible diseases. In the world we live in today, where drugs and sex are waged without thought or consequence (and occasionally combined), this is a necessary process. Just like most of us would not have unprotected sex with a new, unknown partner, the CBS cannot accept any blood that may have risk of infection. The result of infecting a poor victim with a blood transfusion is unthinkable, and rightly so. However, as a result of these questions, UMSU and the LGBTT community have ruled that the CFS — those righteous volunteers who devote their lives to helping others — a group of homophobic, gender-exclusive and discriminatory bastards. The specific questions under attack are whether a man had engaged in sex with another man, even once, since 1977, and whether a woman had engaged in sex with a man who had done the aforementioned. Those who had done either were banned, for life, from donating blood. While this is a sensitive issue in our over-politically correct, can’t-offend-anyone society, this is going too far. We cannot, enlightened though we may be, debate what questions have to be asked for public safety. I am an English major and, though I may argue and debate any and all decisions ever made for the masterdebation column, I have no practical medical expertise that would allow me to question this matter of public health. And neither, I am assuming, do you or any of the UMSU board that determined the CBS was “homophobic.” It is interesting to note that Ian Mumford, the chief operating officer of the CBS, wrote a stirring letter to the editor to the Manitoban a couple of weeks ago. In it, he outlined the policy with which the CBS made the offending questions. Of course, that policy, like any other within the CBS, was made in the best interest of patients and covers all people who may be at-risk members of the population regardless of their sexual orientation. Daniel Draper, representative for the LGBTT, has argued that this question is unnecessarily “homophobic” because the CBS tests all blood that it receives, making the questions about the patient’s homosexuality redundant. However, as Mumford details, there is a flaw in that test. In the early stages of infection, known as the “window period,” the HIV virus is undetectable. This means that, if prospective members were not required to answer such a question, there would be a risk of a unit of blood entering the system and infecting a patient — a risk that the CBS is not willing to take, regardless of a few peoples’ hurt feelings. While it may be unfortunate that some members of LGBTT community take offense to such a question, it is, I am afraid, necessary to public safety. Jesse Beach is a fourth-year English student.


Terms of Use RSS Feeds © Copyright 2008 The Manitoban Newspaper Publications Corporation