Ethical discussion about blood donation.

xtxrn, ASN, RN · Jul 20, 2011

I didn't read the article, but saw it listed.... I was horrified. That tells me that NO blood is adequately tested if they're "profiling" people who donate (or try to)...

Yeah, I have a problem with the lying part- if he's got no reason to NOT donate, then (except for the morons who profile, or the general inadequate testing for all blood donors) why lie? It's got to be horrible to want to help out, and be judged.

It's so easy to test the blood (and cost can't be an issue with safety).... I got 25 units of PRBCs/platelets last spring when I was diagnosed with leukemia, and am so thankful for the donors. I always hated having to give blood to patients (nothing 'wrong' with it, just grossed me out to be swapping body fluids), but when it was get it or die, there wasn't much to decide.

Whispera, MSN, RN · Jul 20, 2011

If someone is in a high-risk group, then I think blood banks are thinking if they pay to have the blood drawn, for staff, equipment, and testing, and then the blood is positive for what they test for, they've spent money for nothing. That could be part of the rule.

The profiling bothers me, along with the assumptions it includes. Your friend's lying bothers me too. I have to wonder why he wants to give his blood if he has to lie to do it. That seems like it would bring about at least a bit of inner conflict that wouldn't be too comfy.

True story: I give blood regularly. One day, I went to give my quarterly blood and I had a ripped hangnail that had been bloody. The nurse or technician doing the pre-screening knew I'm a nurse. She kept poking at my hangnail, looking at me with a snide look, and said that nurses who have hangnails should not give blood because they're probably infected with whatever their patients have. She said they'd "take" my blood "anyway" and would do extra testing on it, but she recommended I not try to give blood again. It was as if she thought she was doing me a favor, not the other way around. I was very offended, and her logic, considering universal precautions, was pretty faulty. I felt like walking out. I wondered if she'd just dump my blood after I left, since she felt it was so "contaminated." My offended-ness kept me from donating again, for a pretty long time. I never went back to that particular blood bank to donate. I can only imagine how someone in your friend's shoes would feel..

classicdame, MSN, EdD · Jul 20, 2011

I do not understand why we rely on what people tell us anyway, as they may not know themselves if they are infected, and as you say, do not need to be gay to be infected.

However, I wish your friend had been more forthright. What was his motive? Money for donation or just wanting to deny his sexual orientation or flipping off the Feds?

xtxrn, ASN, RN · Jul 20, 2011

Whispera- OMG- that is so nuts that a hangnail got that sort of response.

I'd always understood that blood donations were tested for HIV, HepB, HepC.....is this not the case? After all of the transfusions I got last year, I wonder if I should be tested (I still am on oral chemo, and get monthly liver/kidney/basic chem done....). People actually find out from blood donation tests that they have stuff going on- so they must be doing something...

I also know the chance of getting something from a transfusion is minimal.... :idea:

Rob72, ASN, RN · Jul 20, 2011

I noticed a friend of mine (who is gay) made a facebook post stating that he was giving blood and alluded to the fact that he lied during the candidate screening phase.

Passive-agressive retaliatory behavior. Screening is better than it used to be but still "problematic." IV druggies, homosexuals and promiscuous heteros should not be donating, period.

I've had ED patients(syphyllitics tended to be the worst, tho' some HIV+ individuals did/do it as well) who bragged about sticking the happy stick into anything they could, in a demented hate-the-world-share-the-joy pattern. I don't have much patience for that behavior, personally.

Yes, odds are "minimal", but as noted about many events, it sucks if you are the 1%.

Rephrase the statement: "Pedophiles should not be barred from working in childcare because that is discrimination." Sorry, a high-risk minority cannot dictate acceptance of their high-risk behavior to the larger society, if the society is to continue to function.

ChristineN, BSN, RN · Jul 20, 2011

Passive-agressive retaliatory behavior. Screening is better than it used to be but still "problematic." IV druggies, homosexuals and promiscuous heteros should not be donating, period.
I've had ED patients(syphyllitics tended to be the worst, tho' some HIV+ individuals did/do it as well) who bragged about sticking the happy stick into anything they could, in a demented hate-the-world-share-the-joy pattern. I don't have much patience for that behavior, personally.
Yes, odds are "minimal", but as noted about many events, it sucks if you are the 1%.

Actually we should not be screening pt's based on sexual preference. If we can test the blood for blood born pathogens like HIV, who cares if they are a gay man or a promiscuous heterosexual? In a day and age where all you hear about is how short the blood bank is for various blood types, our country would be wise to quit excluding 100,000's of perfectly healthy members of society.

NurseLoveJoy88, ASN, RN · Jul 20, 2011

Your friend should not have lied about being gay. If he gay they may not allow him to donate due to risk factors just like a friend of mine could not donate due to being in a certain part of Africa. It's not a big deal and to lie about it is wrong on so many levels.

I'm glad the blood donor companies are strict and have strict guidelines.

xtxrn, ASN, RN · Jul 20, 2011

A lot of the PSAs out there talk about the huge increase in the AA community- so do we now tell anyone of color to keep their blood?? That makes no sense... :uhoh3:

Rob72, ASN, RN · Jul 20, 2011

Actually we should not be screening pt's based on sexual preference. If we can test the blood for blood born pathogens like HIV, who cares if they are a gay man or a promiscuous heterosexual? In a day and age where all you hear about is how short the blood bank is for various blood types, our country would be wise to quit excluding 100,000's of perfectly healthy members of society.

We are not and do not test, based on sexual preference. Sexual preference carries elevated risk of undetectable infection, in particular and noted instances, however. An "Uncomfortable Truth", though Brother Al will never state it.

If you work in BB or virology, the statement of "wisdom" might have some validity, but I have not worked with any BB staff or Virologists calling for rescinding that restriction, over the past 20 years.

Rob72, ASN, RN · Jul 20, 2011

A lot of the PSAs out there talk about the huge increase in the AA community- so do we now tell anyone of color to keep their blood?? That makes no sense...

Correlate that with the incidence of homosexuality and incarceration rates. It is not an issue of race but high-risk behavior. It is politically expedient to attempt to make it a "discrimination" issue, tho'.

ChristineN, BSN, RN · Jul 20, 2011

We are not and do not test, based on sexual preference. Sexual preference carries elevated risk of undetectable infection, in particular and noted instances, however. An "Uncomfortable Truth", though Brother Al will never state it.
If you work in BB or virology, the statement of "wisdom" might have some validity, but I have not worked with any BB staff or Virologists calling for rescinding that restriction, over the past 20 years.

Yes the activities of gay men or promiscuous people in general does carry some risk. I get that. What I don't get is why we don't admit that we can screen for these diseases. Sweden, as well as other countries will now allow gay men to donate blood, yet America is still debating this?