Some diseases present a grave enough public health risk that proper diagnosis and treatment must override consent laws. HIV is one of those diseases as it progresses into AIDS, which leaves the patient with next to no functional immune system. This has implications for the patient and the people who have to care for them. Surgeries, injuries that pierce the skin, and even the common cold require more precautions for an HIV/AIDS patient.
Teenagers also start having sex in secondary school. If a child had undiagnosed HIV/AIDS, a large number of students could be exposed and infected before anyone realized something was wrong.
There is precedent for this type of action regarding deadly illnesses. Hospitals can quarantine patients with transmittable diseases. When one of my profs went to a BSL-4 lab, he said that he had to sign a waiver allowing the lab to quarantine him indefinitely if they believed he was exposed to a pathogen inside.
I really and truly think that both sides of this argument have both positive and negative effects.So I just wanna hear other people points so that I will have a better understanding as to which side have more benefits and which side do not.So I just hope you guys have some strong points to help me.