Having a background in HIV education, testing and counseling i notice many of you are confusing what "reportable disease" means and how it relates to the health department and the criminality of this person's actions. When a person tests positive for HIV, the provider who tested them and provided them with those results is required to "report" to the health dept that "a positive" test has occurred. this is done to maintain an accurate count of HIV cases in the nation and it's what "reportable disease" means. "reportable disease" only refers to the responsibility of the provider who tested this person and only means that the provider MUST report that "a positive" has occured to their local health department. That is the extent of what "reportable disease" is and means. Now, if the person cooperates (yes they actually have the choice) it can facilitate notifying sex partners that may have been exposed. This depends on whether the person consents to have their name attached to those results in the first place which determines whether the health department is able to get in contact with the person and work with them in notifying sex partners that they may have exposed to HIV. At no time is the persons name divulged to any potential partners although im sure the persons partner can find out through process of elimination especially if that person only had the infected person as a sex partner. That's the extent of "reportable" and it ONLY happens when the person initially test positive.
Now, if this infected person later meets someone and becomes intimate with that person without divulging their HIV status then in many states that is considered a crime which means there are laws that require them to divulge their status prior to becoming intimate with someone, but those laws DO NOT protect you as a healthcare provider in "facilitating" the divulging of this persons status. Which means you can't think, "well since this person is "committing" a crime, i can tell on him/her." Unfortunately these laws are only in place to prosecute after the fact. You can and you will lose your license for violating a persons HIV status confidentiality and it is considered one of the severest violations of HIPPA! In fact their is no more severe violation of HIPPA than divulging a person's HIV status! Their may be some HIPPA violations that are comparable but no other violation surpasses it! So much so that many medical information release forms have a special box where the person has to specifically consent to an HIV status/HIV medical record so that those too can be included in the passing on of medical information. In other words, when you sign a medical release form it does not automatically include any and all HIV medical information including status, you have to sign an additional release specifically for HIV medical information or check the appropriate box. So even making the private MD aware of the persons status without the consent of the patient is a violation of HIPPA. Although one would think that a persons private MD would already know this but don't be surprised as many people will go get tested at the health department in order to purposely avoid involving their MD.
As for if this girl was my sister...I would hope that my sister had enough sense to have herself and her partner tested for HIV before becoming intimate with this person and to use protection until then. We all make choices here and even with paying due diligence to our matters (ex:getting tested, using condoms) we can never be 100 percent sure the other person is being true to us...life's a gamble.