The Instigator
Humblehheartk
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
v1nce
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Pregnant women should be required to be tested for HIV/AIDS.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/3/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 333 times Debate No: 70955
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Humblehheartk

Pro

It should be mandatory for pregnant women to be tested for HIV/AIDS. Early detection of the disease during the first trimester of a pregnancy will help decrease passing the virus to the baby if treatment is taken.
v1nce

Con

No, it should not be mandatory under any circumstance to require HIV/AIDS testing for pregnant women. This is a matter of privacy therefore requiring this type of test to be performed is a serious invasion of privacy and overstepping of authority. Although the Constitution does not explicitly state a "right to privacy", there is a presumed notion of privacy seen through various Amendments that limit the scope of government intrusion (Griswold v. Connecticut's - penumbra in the 1st Amendment which protects government censorship, 4th Amendment's search and seizure, and 5th Amendment's protection from governmental intrusion and self-incrimination. Also, Griswold's establishment of marital privacy [1]). There is not evidence to support the mandate of HIV testing. Yes, on one hand there is the need to protect the health of the baby, but on the other hand, isn't it already too late if the woman was pregnant? If, in fact, you are proposing to protect the health of the baby, you enter a slippery slope where one may argue that HIV testing is required for all individuals wishing to procreate. Must the government, therefore, regulate sex? Case law has established that the government cannot regulate sex (Lawrence v. Texas: sodomy laws are not constitutional [2], Buck v. Bell: sterilization of mentally ill is unconstitutional [3], New Jersey v. Saunders: prohibiting sex between unmarried people is unconstitutional[4]). The intentions behind this are benign, obviously, however the government cannot regulate HIV transmission by forcing tests upon women. Instead, the government should focus on structuring sex education and implementing HIV/AIDS testing and treatment centers.

[1] Griswold v. Connecticut (1965). https://www.law.cornell.edu...
[2] Lawrence v. Texas (2003). https://www.law.cornell.edu...
[3] Buck v. Bell (1927). https://www.law.cornell.edu...
[4] New Jersey v. Saunders (1977). http://law.justia.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Humblehheartk

Pro

Humblehheartk forfeited this round.
v1nce

Con

v1nce forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Humblehheartk

Pro

Humblehheartk forfeited this round.
v1nce

Con

v1nce forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Humblehheartk

Pro

Humblehheartk forfeited this round.
v1nce

Con

v1nce forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.