USA Travel Restrictions
You can read more about travel restrictions in general here
AIDS Activists Laud Lifting Of US HIV Travel Ban. 2/11/09
NAIROBI, 2 November (PLUSNEWS) - A 22-year-old ban on people infected with HIV entering the US was officially lifted on 2 November, with the new rules taking effect in 60 days. AIDS activists have hailed the move as a major coup in the fight against stigma.
"This comes as very good news for us," Michael Angaga, regional coordinator for the Network of African People Living with HIV/AIDS (NAP+), told IRIN/PlusNews.
"For so long HIV-positive people have felt isolated by one of the greatest nations in the world, which should be spearheading human rights." Angaga said he looked forward to seeing the new rules rapidly implemented in US embassies around the world.
In 1987 HIV was added to the list of communicable diseases that could prevent infected immigrants, students and tourists from obtaining visas to enter the US without special permission. President Barack Obama's announcement on 30 October marked the end of a process started in 2008 by then US President George W. Bush, who signed a law repealing these restrictions.
"We lead the world when it comes to helping stem the AIDS pandemic, yet we are one of only a dozen countries that still bar people from HIV from entering our own country. If we want to be the global leader in combating HIV/AIDS, we need to act like it," Obama was reported as saying.
Samuel Kibanga, national coordinator of the National Forum of People living with HIV/AIDS Networks in Uganda, commented: "This shows that America can now see the reality that people living with HIV are just like any other people, deserving of the right to free movement - the travel ban was discrimination of the highest calibre."
The UNAIDS International Guidelines on HIV/AIDS and Human Rights state that any restriction on liberty of movement or choice of residence based on suspected or real HIV status alone, including HIV screening of international travellers, is discriminatory.
Governments usually give two main reasons for imposing travel restrictions on HIV-positive people: to help control the spread of HIV, and save host countries the cost of HIV-related treatment, but Kibanga said these regulations merely drove the problem of HIV underground.
"People fear to reveal their status when travelling. It is better to be with someone who feels free to be open about their status than one who is hiding it," he said. "That way we can all fight AIDS as partners."
A June 2009
report by watchdog organization Human Rights Watch, found that immigration laws and stringent requirements for accessing free health care often created insurmountable barriers to treatment and care for migrants living with HIV.
Kibanga said he hoped the US's move would serve as an example to other nations. According to UNAIDS, 59 countries impose some form of travel restrictions on people living with HIV.
Obama Announces Lifting of HIV/AIDS Travel Ban. 30/10/09
October 30, 2009
FoxNews.com
President Obama overturned a decades-old policy Friday that he said was "rooted in fear rather than fact," when he announced the lifting of a rule barring HIV-positive people from entering the US.
"Now, we talk about reducing the stigma of this disease -- yet we've treated a visitor living with it as a threat," the President said.
"[W]e are one of only a dozen countries that still bar people [with] HIV from entering our own country. If we want to be the global leader in combating HIV/AIDS, we need to act like it."
Mr. Obama touted the move just before signing the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act Of 2009, a bill that provides treatment and support to low-income people affected by the disease.
It was named after 13-year-old Ryan White, who was stigmatized by his Indiana community after he contracted the disease in 1984 from a blood transfusion. He died in 1990. Ryan's mother, Jeanne White-Ginder, attended the bill signing.
In 1987, the Senate unanimously passed a ban on visitors or immigrants who have HIV or AIDS from entering the US.
But just last year, the Senate voted to overturn that ban and President George W. Bush signed it into law.
The publication of the rule Monday is the final step in the process. There will then be a 60-day waiting period before the ban is implemented.
People Living With HIV Celebrate United States Lifting HIV Travel And Immigration Ban. 30/10/09
The Deutsche AIDS-Hilfe, European AIDS Treatment Group (EATG) and the Global Network of People living with HIV (GNP+) congratulate the United States Government.
Amsterdam, Berlin, Brussels, October 30, 2009
The United States Government today announced the lifting of HIV related entry, stay and residency restrictions. The ruling confirmed that HIV infection will be officially removed from the definition of communicable diseases of public health significance as of January 1st, 2010. The Deutsche AIDS-Hilfe (DAH), European AIDS Treatment Group (EATG) and the Global Network of People living with HIV (GNP+) congratulate the United States Government on fulfilling its promise and completing the legal procedure that was started by former President Bush on World AIDS Day 2007.
“This is a great victory for the fight against the worldwide discrimination of people living with HIV”, says Peter Wiessner from the Deutsche AIDS-Hilfe: “I remember times where we never thought that this would happen. This is an emotional moment and it feels a bit like the fall of the Berlin wall.”
DAH, EATG and GNP+ have long argued that HIV specific restrictions on entry, stay and residence are not only stigmatizing and discriminatory, but are also ineffective for public health protection and prevention purposes.
“Lifting the ban is a great step forward in the battle against stigma and discrimination against people living with HIV,” stated Kevin Moody, International Coordinator and CEO of GNP+.
“This groundbreaking move is the result of joint advocacy efforts by countless activists in the United States and around the globe over many years,” reported David Haerry of the EATG. “It is a strong message to other countries maintaining stigmatizing restrictions today, such as Russia, China, Australia and Canada.”
DAH, EATG and GNP+ commend the United States Government for its commitment to lead diplomatic efforts to lift HIV specific entry, stay and residency restrictions in other countries. There are multiple countries that could be spurred to deliver on their commitments: For example, China never delivered on the promises made in 2007 to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria to lift immigration restrictionsi and both Namibia and South Korea have not yet fulfilled their promise to review their restrictive legislationsii.
“Let’s not forget that even after the United States decision, we count more than 60 countries having stigmatizing entry or residency restrictions, including some in Western and Eastern Europe,” Peter Wiessner said: “27 countries deport people on the grounds of having an HIV infection.”
While the lifting of the United States entry ban is an important decision, there remain many loose ends. According to DAH, EATG and GNP+, the United States government should direct its immigration services to protect privacy and erase all information with regards to the HIV status of people from its immigration databases.
In addition, it is hoped that the United States criminal justice system is paying close attention. Kevin Moody: “We hope realistic information on the ways HIV gets transmitted will also filter through to United States criminal justice system, where saliva of a person living with HIV is still regarded as a deadly weapon, often resulting in ridiculously long prison sentences for spitting or biting.” iii
DAH, EATG and GNP+ want to recognize the enormous efforts by activists and diplomats inside the United States as well as outside to change these legislations. Precious support was provided by Congress woman Barbara Lee (California) and Senator Kerry. Special mention should be made of the Government of Norway and UNAIDS , that jointly led the International Task Team on HIV-related Travel Restrictions.
For more information contact:
Deutsche AIDS Hilfe: Peter Wiessner, +49-221-80 14 96 36 (German, English)
European AIDS Treatment Group: David Hans U. Haerry, +41-31-352 3210,
david@eatg.org (French, English, German, Spanish)
Global Network of People living with HIV: Martin Stolk, Communications Officer, +31-6-1991 2406,
mstolk@gnpplus.net (Dutch, English)
The Deutsche AIDS Hilfe and EATG collaborate with the International AIDS Society IAS on the Global Database of HIV-specific Travel Restrictions
www.hivtravel.orgDAH, EATG and GNP+ have been regular partners advocating against HIV related discriminatory measures such as travel restrictions.
iii On October 27, 2009, a woman living with HIV in Pennsylvania got sentenced for up to ten years imprisonment for spitting at another person. Last year a person living with HIV got sentenced to thirty years imprisonment for the same offence. More cases can be found at: http://criminalhivtransmission.blogs
CDC Hears Loud and Clear: HIV Travel Ban Should Go 20/8/09
Majority of 20,000 Comments to CDC Support Lifting Travel Ban; Activists Rally at Canadian/U.S. border.
In Surrey, British Columbia and Niagara, New York last Sunday dozens of Canadians and Americans joined in solidarity to support lifting the U.S. ban on travel and immigration by people living with HIV. The views of the ralliers were buttressed by the incredible volume of comments made to the CDC in favor of its proposal to lift the ban: By the comment period deadline on Monday, the CDC had received 20,000 comments, the vast majority in support of ending the despicable policy -- though some health departments pushed for mandatory testing of immigrants.
"We were all incredibly energized around eliminating this policy that creates so much stigma," said Doulton Wiltshire of AIDS Niagara, the Canadian AIDS organization that helped organize the rally in Niagara. Wiltshire collected 300 signatures of people supporting lifting the ban on a giant petition, which was submitted to the CDC. At both the rally in Niagara and in Surrey, speakers talked about how the ban is discriminatory.
"If the U.S. wants to be a leader in the fight against AIDS, it has to start by eliminating any type of restriction on people with HIV status," Housing Works President and CEO Charles King said at the Niagara rally.
Mandatory HIV Testing
While the end to the ban will certainly face bureaucratic obstacles, the good news is that the comment period yielded comments overwhelmingly in favor of fully lifting the ban (The Human Rights Campaign helped corral 17,663 of the 20,000 comments through national action alerts to their lists). According to an analysis by Immigration Equality, no organizations or government entities suggested keeping the ban in place (though some individual commenters issued terse statements such as "NO HIV Immigrants!").
However, there were a few comments from state and municipal governments that suggested retaining mandatory HIV testing from immigrants. These comments, which came from the California Department of Social Services, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and Multnomah County, Oregon were responding to CDC's statement in the resolution that "although the approach of removing HIV from the definition of communicable disease of public health significance but maintaining the mandatory testing component of the medical examination was not selected for this proposal, HHS/CDC welcomes public comment on the advantages and disadvantages of this or alternative approaches, such as (non-mandatory) testing ( i.e., opt out/opt in approach)."
Experts agree that mandatory testing would be disastrous -- and possibly illegal.
"Obviously everyone supports the goal that people with HIV should know they're positive, but the immigration system is so ripe with stress, abuse and sensitivity. It is not the proper venue for testing," said Immigration Equality Legal Director Victoria Neilson. "In addition, if the ban is lifted, it's legally shaky ground if the U.S. even has the authority to test for HIV."
Nancy Ordover, founder of the Lift the Ban Coalition, agreed that mandatory testing would create new problems. "If the CDC removes HIV from its definition of 'communicable disease of public health significance' but maintains mandatory testing for people trying to immigrate/adjust their residency status, HIV will be the only nonexcludable health condition with a mandatory test."
Is This Really the End?
While the end of the ban looks promising, immigrants with HIV trying to get green cards, and travelers from throughout the world who just want to visit the U.S. should know that nothing is a done deal.
What is the next step now that the comment period is over? The CDC will develop responses to the comments and a final regulation will be drafted and submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for up to 90 days for a second review before the CDC publishes the final review. If the ban is then lifted, there will be many bureaucratic hurdles ahead, particularly the process of reviewing greencard requests for the backlog of HIV-positive immigrants living in the United States.
This isn't the first time the CDC submitted comments to lift the ban. In the early 1990s, the CDC solicited comments but when the ban looked like it might be lifted, Sen. Jesse Helms championed a 1993 law preventing HIV-positive people from entering the U.S. The 1993 law was repealed in July 2008 by Congress and President Bush as part of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).
"We've reached this threshold before. A lot of people are feeling like it's a done deal. What I did find gratifying was that the rule that the CDC put out, I think is good," Ordover said. "But I won't say I'm optimistic until the ban's lifted."
Faith Groups Applaud Proposed US Rule To Lift HIV Travel Ban 17/8/09
EAA Press Release
Introduction
Fifty-four churches and Christian organizations, networks of people living with HIV and individuals have sent a letter to the United States’ Department of Health and Human Services welcoming a proposed revision to current US regulations that ban people living with HIV from entering or transiting through its borders without a special waiver.
The US currently is one of 13 countries that essentially bar people living with HIV from entering their borders. In July 2008, the US Congress requested that the Department of Health and Human Services remove HIV from an official list of communicable diseases that disqualify foreigners from entering the country. Public comment on the proposed revision closes today.
Explaining their support for the proposed change, the church organizations emphasize that the current ban “serves no justifiable public health purpose” and rather “entrenches discriminatory practices against people living with HIV who wish to travel to the US”.
Linda Hartke, coordinator of the Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance (EAA), noted that civil society organizations, including the EAA and its members, have campaigned vigorously for two years for countries to remove travel restrictions against people living with HIV. There are still about 60 countries worldwide with such restrictions.
“These restrictions should be a relic of our past irrational fears about the spread of HIV,” Hartke states. “Preventing people living with HIV to travel for work, visit family, or enjoy a holiday has no impact on public health or the provision of health care, “ she emphasizes, “but it does have a huge personal toll and contribute to people hiding their status or going off their treatment for fear of discrimination.”
The EAA letter also notes that “the ban has been a significant barrier to churches, mosques, temples and people in the U.S. having the privilege to engage directly in dialogue and action with people living with HIV from other countries.”
In the US, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America took the lead in submitting a letter signed by 21 faith-based organizations.
“The fear that once surrounded the spread of HIV that paralyzed the response of the international community, including many faith organizations, has been replaced by facts,” states the ELCA letter. “Informed by our work both domestically and internationally in the fight against AIDS, we believe that eliminating the HIV-specific grounds for inadmissibility to the United States will help reduce stigma and discrimination against HIV-positive persons, enhance U.S. leadership in the global fight against AIDS and allow our ministries to more effectively partner with those most severely affected by HIV and AIDS in the world.”
For the full text of the letter and list of signatures, contact Sara Speicher, +44 7821 860 723 (mobile),
sspeicher@e-alliance.ch
Ban on Travelers with HIV to US Is Partly Lifted. 31/07/08
Streamlined Process Announced for Otherwise Eligible HIV-Positive Individuals to Enter the United States
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Waiver Final Rule, a regulation that will streamline the issuance of certain short-term non-immigrant visas for non-U.S. citizens who are HIV-positive.
Streamlining the Process
-
Under the new regulation, U.S. Department of State consular officers overseas will now have the authority to grant non-immigrant visas to otherwise eligible HIV-positive people who meet certain requirements, instead of waiting for a special waiver from DHS.
-
In fiscal year 2007, the average processing time for DHS to make decisions on such consular recommendations (for the issuance of non-immigrant visas and authorization for temporary admission) was 18 days. The final rule streamlines this process, and will make visa authorization and issuance available to many otherwise eligible HIV-positive travelers on the same day as their interview with a U.S. Consular officer.
- The final rule applies only to foreigners who are HIV-positive and seek to enter the United States as visitors for up to 30 days; these individuals still must meet all of the other normal criteria for the granting of a U.S. visa. The issuance of visas under the rule will also be subject to certain criteria designed to ensure an HIV-positive person’s activities while in the United States do not present a risk to the public health.
- Visas issued under this final rule will not publicly identify any traveler as HIV-positive.
Previously, the U.S. Department of State had to make individual recommendations on HIV-positive travelers to DHS, which then conducted a case-by-case evaluation to determine an applicants temporary admission to the United States. The State Department would occasionally recommend, and DHS approve, group waivers for events at the United Nations or other international gatherings in the United States.
Alternative Procedure
-
The HIV Waiver Final Rule will speed up the application process by making it easier for those HIV-positive individuals who meet the requirements to get a short-term, non-immigrant visa.
-
However, those who do not meet the specific requirements of the rule, or who choose not to use the streamlined process, may elect the existing procedure for a case-by-case determination of their eligibility for a visa and admission authorization.
Background
-
Since 1952, U.S. law and regulation have made persons “who were afflicted with any dangerous contagious disease” ineligible to receive a visa to enter the United States. People infected with HIV have been inadmissible to the United States since 1987, when Congress directed the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to add HIV to its list of diseases of public health significance.
-
Accordingly, foreigners infected with HIV have been ineligible to receive U.S. visas without a waiver by the U.S. Government.
- The United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, which President Bush signed on July 30, 2008, removed the statutory requirement that mandated the inclusion of HIV on the list of diseases of public health significance that made any person infected with those conditions ineligible for admission to the United States. The legislation did not, however, automatically change the existing regulations, administered by HHS, that continue to list HIV as a “communicable disease of public-health significance.” HHS is currently beginning the rulemaking process to remove HIV from the list.
- In the meantime, the DHS HIV Waiver Final Rule fulfills the President’s promise to create a streamlined process for otherwise eligible HIV-positive individuals to gain temporary admission to the United States. On Dec. 1, 2006, President Bush directed the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to initiate a rulemaking that proposed a categorical waiver for otherwise eligible foreigners who are HIV-positive and who seek to enter the United States on short-term visas.
- DHS published a notice of proposed rulemaking on Nov. 6, 2007, and welcomed public comments for 30 days thereafter. The final rule adopts the proposed amendments to the regulations, and simplifies the process for the authorization of admission, with some modifications, in light of the public comments received.
Barring None: Overturning HIV Related Travel and Immigration Restrictions 20/7/09
Global Health Magazine
Lyndel Urbano and Nathan Schaefer reflect on the implications of travel and immigration restrictions for HIV positive people
Twelve countries around the world, including the United States, have HIV related travel restrictions in place that ban or make it extremely difficult for HIV-infected people to travel, even for a short time, to these countries. They are: Armenia, Brunei, Iraq, Libya, Moldova, Oman, Qatar, the Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Sudan, and the United States. Sixty-seven countries make it impossible for HIV positive people to change immigration status.
Depending on the country, the restrictions target individuals who plan to come to the country as tourists, for business, to visit family, or other short-term personal reasons. In some cases, they target HIV-positive people seeking longer stays for educational purposes, employment or those seeking to become permanent residents or citizens of the countries. These restrictions have been found to harm public health and economic efforts and have grave implications for the human rights of people living with HIV/AIDS.
The United States travel and immigration ban disallows the entry of HIV-positive non-citizens into the country and prohibits HIV positive non-citizens from becoming permanent legal residents. Implemented in 1987 at a time when discrimination drove public health policy, the bar actually leads to more cases of HIV among immigrants. The ban also serves as a disincentive for immigrants to test for HIV, as a positive result could mean deportation.
People living with HIV/AIDS should have full enjoyment of their human rights, including the right to privacy, confidentiality and protection from stigma and discrimination. HIV-related travel restrictions infringe upon these and other human rights in multiple ways. The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service currently conducts the largest mandatory HIV-testing program in the world. Every applicant for permanent residence over the age of 15 undergoes HIV testing, and largely without informed consent. In many instances, these mandatory tests are done without appropriate pre- and post-test counseling, or safeguards of confidentiality.
The United Nations International Guidelines on HIV/AIDS and Human Rights note that:
There is no public health rationale for restricting liberty of movement or choice of residence on the grounds of HIV status...Therefore, any restrictions on these rights based on suspected or real HIV status alone, including HIV screening of international travelers, are discriminatory and cannot be justified by public health concerns.
The personal impact of HIV-related travel restrictions can be devastating. The candidate immigrant, refugee, student or other traveler may simultaneously learn that he or she is infected with HIV, that he or she may not be allowed to travel, and possibly that his or her status has become known to government officials, or to family, a community, and employer, thus exposing the individual to possibly serious discrimination and stigma.
The HIV travel and immigration ban stymies HIV prevention efforts by perpetuating the myth of the HIV-infected immigrant. However, studies based on experiences of people with HIV traveling to the U.S. under current policy have shown that laws restricting entry on the basis of HIV status have not been effective in keeping people with HIV out. Instead they have been counterproductive by pushing the issue underground, as many choose to lie about their status rather than risk being turned away. The fear of being caught at the border with HIV medication in their luggage may also lead people with HIV to discontinue use of their medication while traveling. Such interruptions of treatment increase the chances of developing new or further viral mutations, which can lead to drug resistant strains of HIV, with risks of possible treatment failure. A community health survey conducted by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) in 2006 found that foreign-born New Yorkers were less likely than U.S. born New Yorkers to be tested for HIV (29 percent vs. 32 percent). Foreign born New Yorkers also find out their HIV status later since they are much more likely to be dually diagnosed with HIV and AIDS than U.S. born New Yorkers (32 percent vs. 24 percent).
The restrictions also have negative economic consequences for the countries implementing them. Since 1993, the International AIDS Society (IAS), which convenes the International AIDS Conference, has refused to hold its biennial meetings in the United States. In July 2007, the its governing council adopted this additional restriction to its previous policy: "The IAS will not hold its conferences in countries that restrict short-term entry of people living with HIV/AIDS, and/or require prospective HIV-positive visitors to declare their HIV status on visa application forms or other documentation required for entry into the country." Therefore, the U.S. fails to profit from such a large gathering.
After 22 years of implementing this discriminatory policy, the United States has finally taken steps to remove its travel and immigration ban. In 2008, then President George W. Bush signed into law reauthorization of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief that included language to repeal the HIV entry ban. This action removed the statutory ban from the Immigration and Naturalization Act and opened the door for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to determine whether HIV should remain on a list of "communicable diseases of public health significance." On July 2, 2009, HHS issued a long overdue proposed regulatory change to remove HIV from a list of communicable diseases for which people are barred from traveling or immigrating to the United States.
This proposed rule does not change the underlying requirements for legal entry into the United States. Instead it makes in optional for HIV-positive people to apply. If implemented, mandatory testing for HIV infection would no longer be required and HIV-positive people might be able to adjust permanent resident status as long as they meet all other conditions for admissibility. All immigrants will still be required to complete the complicated and arduous application process to change permanent legal residence.
In proposing the change, HHS maintains that "HIV/AIDS should not be considered a condition that poses a threat to public health in relation to travel because, although infectious, the virus cannot be transmitted by the mere presence of a person with HIV in a country or by casual contact."
Individuals and organizations have until Aug. 17, 2009 to submit public comments in support of the proposed regulatory change. The rule can be accessed on the CDC
website. Supportive public comments will ensure the prompt implementation of the long overdue reversal of the U.S. HIV travel and immigration ban.
Read more about the public health and human rights implications of the travel and immigration ban.
Lyndel Urbano is the manager of government relations and Nathan Schaefer is the director of public policy at the Gay Men's Health Crisis
America To Remove HIV Visa Ban After Briton's Protest 5/7/09
Campaigner persuades Washington to alter laws that forced travellers to lie on entry forms
A law that has in effect banned people with HIV from visiting America for two decades is to be overturned after a Briton with the virus accused the US of hypocrisy and discrimination during a major health conference.
Paul Thorn should have spoken at the Pacific health summit in Seattle last month, but was refused entry to the country after admitting hisHIV status on his visa-waiver application.
He sent a powerful statement to be read out in his place. The message accused the US of having an HIV policy rooted in fear and said it had no right to call itself a world leader in the fight against the disease.
In the days after the conference Thorn's case was taken up by politicians including US congressman Jim McDermott. He wrote a letter to the Obama administration citing what had happened to Thorn and another case where people were turned back at the Canadian border. "Now is the time to repair our nation's standing as the leader in the treatment of the Aids epidemic," wrote McDermott.
Last week - less than a fortnight later - the US government decided to bring the ban to an end. Its proposal, "to remove HIV as a 'communicable disease of public health significance'," is likely to be in place by the end of the year.
"A lot of people have worked on this but it seems this was the straw that broke the camel's back," said Thorn, 38, a writer and adviser on TB and HIV issues from Brighton, who described the policy as grotesque. "I have lied in the past on the visa-waiver form, but this time I wanted to make a stand."
His statement read: "The US government gives people who have HIV one of two choices. The first is to actually be dishonest on the visa application or visa-waiver form, commit a felony by lying to US immigration, and become a criminal. The second choice is to be honest, and have a visa rejected because you are considered an undesirable person, and unfit to enter the US. To my mind either being a criminal or an undesirable isn't much of a choice. I don't want to be either."
Michael Birt, executive director of the summit, said he had been "saddened" by the news that Thorn was unable to attend. "However, his absence made an even greater statement about the challenges we still face to addressHIV policy. And the impact, it seems, is that real change is under way so that perhaps others will not face a similar predicament in the future."
McDermott, a Democratic party representative for Washington state, acknowledged that George Bush had begun the process of repealing the law while president, but said the changes had never been implemented. "I am very pleased with this decision because it enables the
United States to fully assume its proper leadership role in combating the scourge of HIV/Aids," he told the Observer, praising the work of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Clinton Foundation.
Thorn, who campaigns for HIV and TB sufferers to gain access to treatment, said that he was amazed how quickly things had moved: "I am an advocate and I am used to advocacy being a very long process." He said he had written the statement in anger: "I tried to keep it as unemotional as possible, but it is quite barbed in places and it was clearly designed to cause embarrassment."
As someone who has been HIV positive since 1988, Thorn said he found the policy undermining: "I want this legislation to be in its grave for good." He pointed out that the question asking whether he wasHIV positive on the visa-waiver form was alongside those asking if he was a terrorist or Nazi.
Rowan Harvey, parliamentary and campaigns manager at the Terrence Higgins Trust, said the law was unfair. "Imagine if you're HIV positive and you've not told your employer and you are then required to travel for work purposes," she said. She described one case in which a group of activists who wereHIV positive were even banned from changing flights in the US.
Harvey said no other western countries imposed such a ban. However, China, Iraq, Sudan and Yemen were among a handful of countries that discriminated. "The idea that the ban might go within a couple of months is absolutely fantastic," she said.
U.S. to (Finally) Begin Removal of Ban on HIV-Positive Visitors 1/7/09
The Body
Could the U.S. finally be on the verge of eliminating its ban on HIV-positive visitors? The U.S. government has formally begun the process of removing HIV from an official list of communicable diseases that you're not allowed to have if you want to enter the U.S., whether it's as a visitor or an immigrant.
It's still likely to be months before the so-called "HIV travel ban" is completely off the books. However, it looks like the sun has finally begun to set on a rule that many in the HIV community feel is an embarrassment."
The U.S. HIV travel ban has been on the books since 1987, but has been strongly opposed for many years. The issue was brought back to forefront on World AIDS Day in 2006 when former U.S. President George W. Bush
promised to issue an executive order removing a requirement that HIV-positive people from other countries apply for a special waiver before they could receive short-term visas. Unfortunately, that executive order never actually happened. But in July 2008, Bush did
sign a law that lifted some HIV-related travel restrictions.
Arguably, those changes only fueled the dissatisfaction of HIV advocates who felt that any restrictions on travel by HIV-positive people were silly, if not downright discriminatory.
If you think that sentence was confusing to read, welcome to the dizzying rules of U.S. government lawmaking. Here is the sequence of events that now has to unfold,
as reported by Advocate.com:
- The OMB says it's OK for DHHS to change the rule. (This is done.)
- The DHHS has to formally propose changing the rule. (This should happen soon.)
- Once the rule change has been posted, the U.S. voting public then gets 45 days to offer comments on it. (We'll let you know when this comment period begins!)
- Once 45 days have passed, the DHHS makes additional changes to the rule based on those public comments.
- Once those final changes are made, the DHHS sends the revised rule back to the OMB for final approval.
- Once the OMB approves the final rule, it goes back to the DHHS for entry into the Federal Register, which is the official home for all U.S. agency rules.
- Once it's in the Federal Register, another review period (of a month or two) goes by where people can offer new comments or Congress can try to block the rule change from going into effect.
- After that review period is over, the new rule becomes law.
Piece of cake, right? One immigration activist -- Steve Ralls, the communications director for Immigration Equality -- was quoted as saying he hopes the new rule will take effect by the end of the year. That may or may not be in time for the International AIDS Society (IAS) to decide whether the U.S. should play host to an International AIDS Conference, the world's largest meeting of HIV researchers and activists, for the first time in two decades. (Just last month, IAS
suggested it would hold its 2012 conference in Washington, D.C., provided the ban were lifted.)
Although it will take some time for the gears of government to grind out the rule change, advocates and activist groups have expressed happiness that it's in the works. "We are thrilled to hear that these proposed rules will be published," said Scott Schoettes, the HIV Project Staff Attorney as Lambda Legal,
in a statement. The new rule would "once and for all eliminate the regulation that has prevented people living with HIV from visiting and immigrating to this country," he said.
The Human Rights Campaign
echoed the sentiment: "This regulation is unnecessary, ineffective and lacks any public health justification," said the organization's president, Joe Solmonese. "We are confident that this sad chapter in our nation's treatment of people with HIV and AIDS will soon be closed."
In the meantime, however, we can perhaps expect to see more of the events that happened this spring. In May, as many as
60 HIV-positive Canadians were refused U.S. entry for an HIV housing summit unless they completed a long, rigorous and expensive visa approval process. (They ended up not completing the process after they determined there was no way they could carry out all of the requirements before the summit took place.)
When the rule change is complete, only eight countries will remain in the world that ban visits by HIV-positive foreigners. Brunei, China, Oman, Qatar, South Korea, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen currently stand alongside the U.S. on that list, according to the International AIDS Society.
This article was provided by
The Body. You can find this article online by typing this address into your Web browser:
http://www.thebody.com/content/art52524.html
General Disclaimer: The Body is designed for educational purposes only and is not engaged in rendering medical advice or professional services. The information provided through The Body should not be used for diagnosing or treating a health problem or a disease. It is not a substitute for professional care. If you have or suspect you may have a health problem, consult your health care provider.
An End to the US Ban on HIV-positive Visitors? 30/6/09
Sciencespeaks
The Obama administration is poised to lift a two-decades-old ban on travel and immigration to the US by HIV-positive foreigners, which has long been criticized as unnecessary and discriminatory.
When Congress reauthorized the PEPFAR program last summer, lawmakers included a provision overturning the ban that barred HIV-positive visitors from the US. But the prohibition remained in effect because HIV was still on a list of “communicable diseases of public health significance,” allowing US officials to bar entry into the country.
Tomorrow, the administration is expected to publish a
proposed regulation that would remove HIV from that list of diseases, a move hailed by leading HIV/AIDS advocates who say the ban perpetuated the stigma and discrimination surrounding HIV. Among other effects, the ban has meant the US was unable to host the International AIDS Conference despite its leading role in combating the deadly epidemic.
Once the administration’s proposed regulation is published, there will be a 45-day open comment period before the Department of Health and Human Services can make it final.
HHS To Propose Removal Of HIV From List Preventing Foreigners U.S. Entry 30/6/09
Kaiser Daily U.S. HIV/AIDS Report
HHS this week will issue proposed regulations that would remove HIV from the list of "communicable diseases of public health significance," effectively lifting the ban on HIV-positive foreign residents from entering the country, the Long Island Newsday reports (Reddy, Long Island Newsday, 6/29). In 2008, former President George W. Bush signed into law a bill that removed the statutory ban on foreign travelers and immigrants with HIV from entering the U.S. HHS then needed to remove HIV from the list of inadmissible conditions. The proposed rule will be published in the Federal Register this week and then undergo a 45-day comment period before it can become final (Hsu, Washington Post's blog "44," 6/29)
SA: Disease Experts Applaud Move to Overturn HIV Entry Ban 30/6/09
AIDSPortal
Discriminatory Rule Has No Medical or Scientific Basis
The Infectious Diseases Society of America, the HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA), and the Center for Global Health Policy strongly support the Obama administration’s move to lift the two-decades-old ban on travel and immigration to the U.S. by HIV-positive individuals.
“This rule is unnecessary and discriminatory,” said HIVMA Chair-elect Michael Saag, MD, FIDSA, professor and chair of the Division of Infectious Diseases at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. “There is no scientific or public health rationale for excluding people with HIV infection from the U.S. HIV infection is a manageable condition not transmitted through casual contact. The travel ban actually serves to undermine public health by discouraging people from determining or disclosing their HIV status.”
Overturning the ban would simply put HIV-positive people on a level playing field with any other foreigner wanting to visit or immigrate to the U.S. This long-overdue move would bring the U.S. in line with current science and international standards of public health practice and diminish the stigma and discrimination suffered by HIV-positive people.
At issue is a prohibition on travel and immigration to the U.S. by people with HIV, put in place in the late 1980s. Congress overturned this law last summer, in legislation signed by President George W. Bush that also reauthorized the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Despite that move, the ban has remained in place because HIV is still classified by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as a “communicable disease of public health significance.”
In the coming days, the Obama administration is expected to publish a new regulation that would remove HIV from that list of diseases. The CDC supports the move, saying that HIV does not pose a risk to the general population and that removing it from the disease list reflects “public health best practices.”
“These changes reflect current scientific knowledge and public health best practices and will have the benefit of removing stigmatization of and discrimination against people who are HIV infected,” the CDC states. “While HIV infection is a serious health condition, it does not represent a communicable disease that is a significant threat for introduction, transmission, and spread to the United States population through casual contact. An arriving alien with HIV infection does not pose a public health risk to the general population through casual contact.”
For more information on this topic or to arrange an interview with an HIV/AIDS expert, please contact Deirdre Shesgreen at 703-740-4954 or dshesgreen@idsociety.org.
The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) is a professional society representing more than 8,600 infectious diseases physicians and scientists devoted to patient care, education, research, prevention, and public health. The HIV Medicine Association (HIVMA) is the professional home for more than 3,600 physicians, scientists and other health care professionals dedicated to the field of HIV/AIDS. Nested within IDSA, HIVMA promotes quality in HIV care and advocates policies that ensure a comprehensive and humane response to the AIDS pandemic informed by science and social justice.
The Center for Global Health Policy is an organization of physicians and scientists dedicated to promoting the effective use of U.S. funding for addressing the global HIV/AIDS and TB epidemics by providing scientific and policy information to policymakers, federal agencies, non-governmental organizations, and the media. The Center is a project of IDSA and HIVMA. All three organizations are based in Arlington, Va.
Obama Takes Steps to End the HIV Travel Ban 29/6/09
Poz.com
The federal Office of Management and Budget posted a notice on its website June 26 saying that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) could take steps to remove a travel regulation that prohibits HIV-positive travelers from entering the United States,
The Advocate reports. Specifics about the regulatory change will be available in the next few days.
“We won’t know all of the details until the HHS regulation is posted,” said Steve Ralls, communications director for Immigration Equality. “Congress’s intent was clear that this should be a clean lift of the ban—our hope is that will be reflected in the HHS regulation.”
Former President George W. Bush signed into law a measure to remove the HIV travel ban last summer, but HHS has yet to put the new policy into effect. After a substantial public comment and approval phase, the new travel regulation could go into effect in the fall.
Removal Of US Entry Ban For People With HIV Moves A Step Closer 29/6/09
Aidsmap
Hopes that restrictions on entry to the US for people with HIV will finally be removed were raised when the US government indicated that it had completed a review of the removal of HIV from the list of communicable diseases that prevent entry to the US.
Once the regulations have been removed, HIV will no longer be a bar for entry to the US for visitors or migrants.
There will now be two periods of consultation, which could see the ban finally removed by late 2009.
“We are only one important step closer to finally ending this discriminatory ban once and for all”, said Joe Solmonese of Human Rights Campaign, a New York-based advocacy organisation.
Almost a year ago, legislation that bans HIV-positive non-US citizens from entering the United States in all but exceptional circumstances was repealed. However, separate regulations dating from 1987 remained in place.
This meant that HIV-positive individuals could not enter the US even for travel without first obtaining a visa.
The process for obtaining a visa was recently streamlined, but there have been numreous reports of visas being refused and people with HIV being refused entry to the US if they travelled without the correct documentation.
Earlier this month British TB activist Paul Thorn, who is HIV-positive, revealed that he had been refused a visa after an invitation to speak at the Pacific Health Summit in Seattle.
It now looks likely that the regulations prohibiting entry to the US for HIV-positive travellers and migrants will removed. On June 26th the Office of Management and Budget said that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) could move forward with the revision of the regulations.
These revised regulations have not yet been published. Once they are, there is a lengthy and complex period of consultation and review. Firstly they will be open for public consultation for 45 days. The regulations can be amended by the Department of Health and Human Services to reflect comments. The revised regulations will then have to be returned to the Office of Management and Budget for approval. A further period of review lasting between 30 and 60 days will then follow, after which the revised regulation will come into effect.
Until this process is complete, individuals with HIV will still need to obtain a visa to legally enter the US.
HIV Entry Ban Undermines Public Health. 18/03/09
GMHC Report Claims Immigrants Diagnosed With HIV Later Than Native-Born
March 18, 2009
New York, N.Y. -- Today Gay Men's Health Crisis (GMHC) released a new report, Undermining Public Health and Human Rights: The United States HIV Travel and Immigration Ban. The report details the history of the U.S. HIV travel and immigration ban, including its public health, human rights, and economic tolls. The report also highlights new research that analyzes HIV-related disparities experienced by immigrants.
According to New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene data, immigrants are more likely (32%) to be diagnosed with both HIV and AIDS than their native born counterparts (24%), a marker of both late diagnosis and poor access to healthcare. HIV incidence among foreign-born New Yorkers steadily increased from 2001-2006. In 2001, they accounted for 15% of new HIV diagnoses in New York City versus 24% in 2007.
Although the HIV entry ban was adopted in 1987 to ostensibly keep HIV out of the country, research shows that, in fact, most immigrants contract HIV after entering the U.S. This research is presented in the GMHC report.
"Our report documents the devastating impact of the discriminatory U.S. travel and immigration ban that has for decades contributed to HIV-related stigma and the proliferation of HIV in immigrant communities," said Marjorie J. Hill, Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer of GMHC. "We call on the Obama administration to expeditiously repeal the HIV travel and immigration ban."
Congress and President Bush repealed the statutory HIV ban in July 2008. However, the Department of Health and Human Services must now remove HIV from a list of communicable diseases in order to completely repeal this discriminatory policy.
HIV Entry Ban Undermines Public Health. 18/3/09
GMHC Report Claims Immigrants Diagnosed With HIV Later Than Native-Born
March 18, 2009
New York, N.Y. -- Today Gay Men's Health Crisis (GMHC) released a new report, Undermining Public Health and Human Rights: The United States HIV Travel and Immigration Ban. The report details the history of the U.S. HIV travel and immigration ban, including its public health, human rights, and economic tolls. The report also highlights new research that analyzes HIV-related disparities experienced by immigrants.
According to New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene data, immigrants are more likely (32%) to be diagnosed with both HIV and AIDS than their native born counterparts (24%), a marker of both late diagnosis and poor access to healthcare. HIV incidence among foreign-born New Yorkers steadily increased from 2001-2006. In 2001, they accounted for 15% of new HIV diagnoses in New York City versus 24% in 2007.
Although the HIV entry ban was adopted in 1987 to ostensibly keep HIV out of the country, research shows that, in fact, most immigrants contract HIV after entering the U.S. This research is presented in the GMHC report.
"Our report documents the devastating impact of the discriminatory U.S. travel and immigration ban that has for decades contributed to HIV-related stigma and the proliferation of HIV in immigrant communities," said Marjorie J. Hill, Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer of GMHC. "We call on the Obama administration to expeditiously repeal the HIV travel and immigration ban."
Congress and President Bush repealed the statutory HIV ban in July 2008. However, the Department of Health and Human Services must now remove HIV from a list of communicable diseases in order to completely repeal this discriminatory policy.
US Relaxes Visa Rules for HIV+ Travellers. 01/10/08
Washington - United States immigration officials on Monday announced moves to ease and speed up visa-processing for HIV-positive visitors to the United States, months after a 21-year entry ban on people with the virus was lifted.
Under the new rules, US consular offices overseas will have the authority to grant temporary, non-immigrant visas to HIV-positive applicants who meet "all of the other normal criteria for the granting of a US visa", the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said in a statement.
Previously, people with HIV were banned from entering the United States unless they obtained a special waiver.
"We're also accelerating the process by providing an additional avenue for temporary admission while maintaining a high level of security at our borders," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in the statement.
Visas issued under the new rules will "be subject to certain criteria designed to ensure an HIV-positive person's activities while in the United States do not present a risk to the public health," the statement said, without going into detail.
President George Bush signed legislation in July which removed HIV from a list of diseases "of public health significance" that effectively barred any person infected with the virus that causes Aids from entering the United States.
The ban on HIV-positive foreigners entering the United States had been in place since 1987. – AFP
US Lifts Travel Ban on HIV-Positive People. 21/07/2008
Ban on Travelers with HIV to US Is Partly Lifted.
Los Angeles Times (07.31.08)::Vimal Patel
On Wednesday, President Bush signed into law a measure that provides $48 billion to combat HIV/AIDS and other diseases globally, and ends a longstanding policy banning HIV-positive people from travelling to the United States. However, the repeal of the 1993 travel ban does not remove all impediments for HIV-positive foreign visitors and immigrants.
Since 1987, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has had HIV on a list of diseases barring entry into the United States, a prohibition that is separate from the congressionally imposed ban. But now that legislators have repealed the overarching travel ban, federal health officials are no longer legally bound to keep HIV on the list, which also includes tuberculosis, gonorrhea, and leprosy.
In 1991, HHS proposed removing HIV from its list but the move drew outrage from religious conservatives and the effort was derailed, said Victoria Neilson, legal director for Immigration Equality, a New York-based group. A similar public comment period would be likely if HHS revisited the proposal.
Attitudes about HIV/AIDS have changed, and the debate may be different today, said Neilson. "People understand it's a virus, not a black plague or something. There's no reason for a disease that isn't airborne to be on the list," she said.
Waivers are available. A short-term waiver permits visitors to enter the United States temporarily if they can show they do not have HIV symptoms, do not pose a threat to public health, and can pay for their medical care, if necessary.
Senate Repeals HIV Travel Ban. 17/07/08
Bay Area Reporter (07.17.08: Bob Roehr)
AIDS advocates applauded the Senate's 80-16 vote on July 16 to repeal the longstanding ban on travel and immigration by non-US residents with HIV. The provision overturning the 20-year ban, sponsored by Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), was included as an amendment to the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. A bid by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) to reinstate the ban never materialized; he accepted a substitute amendment instead.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated the cost of lifting the restrictions would amount to $83 million in additional medical costs over the next 10 years. To offset the cost, visa application fees were raised by $1 and immigration application fees by $2.
"For those of us who have long dreamed of becoming Americans, and have been prevented by the 1993 law from ever being able to enter or leave the US without waivers or fear of humiliation, this is a massive burden lifted," said Andrew Sullivan, a conservative gay commentator.
"It is gratifying to know that my HIV-positive colleagues from other countries will finally be allowed to come to the United States to share their expertise," said Michael Saag, vice chair of the HIV Medical Association.
"We applaud the Senate for rejecting this unjust and sweeping policy that deems HIV-positive individuals inadmissible to the United States," said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, which lobbied to lift the ban.
The restrictions originated in 1987 and were codified by Congress in 1993.
Immigration law excludes non-citizens with any "communicable disease of public health significance" from entering the United States. However, only HIV is explicitly named in the statute.
Momentum Builds to Eliminate Travel Restrictions Against People Living with HIV. 30/3/08
Bulletin no. 01/2008
Keep the Promise, HIV AIDS AND CAMPAIGN
When the HIV and AIDS epidemic was identified in the early 80s, countries began establishing travel restrictions in an effort to prevent the virus from entering their borders. Such measures include mandatory HIV testing for persons seeking entry to the country and that would-be entrants declare themselves to be uninfected.
Based on these mandatory tests and declarations, a number of countries have excluded from entry people living with HIV or people suspected of being infected. Restrictions have been imposed upon people wishing to enter the country for short-term stays such as for business or personal visits or tourism, or for longer periods such as for study, employment, refugee resettlement or immigration.
Despite the medical advances that have made HIV a more manageable disease, most countries still impose travel restrictions on people living with HIV and cite two main reasons – to protect the national public health and to avoid the economic costs of providing health care and social assistance to people affected by HIV and AIDS. Over the years, many international organizations, including United Nations agencies and programs, the International AIDS Society and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, have strongly opposed the use of HIV and AIDS-related travel restrictions, noting that there is no public health rationale for such restrictions and that the practices are discriminatory, increase stigma, and prevent people from seeking available treatment and support.
A briefing paper on travel restrictions will soon be available (Stories are needed! See below). There are also a number of recent steps being taken to address the restrictions.
To search a country by country database of HIV-related travel restrictions visit:
http://www.eatg.org/hivtravel/
International Task Team on HIV-related Travel Restrictions convened
UNAIDS has set up an international task team to work toward the elimination of HIV-related travel restrictions towards people living with HIV. The group includes representatives of governments, inter-governmental organizations, civil society groups, the private sector and networks of people living with HIV. It held its first meeting in Geneva at the end of February, co-chaired by UNAIDS and the
Norwegian Government.
The Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance is represented on the task team by Peter Prove, of The Lutheran World Federation, who is a lawyer specializing in human rights (he is also a member of the EAA Global Trade Strategy Group).
“Travel restrictions based on HIV status again highlight the exceptionality of AIDS, especially short-term restrictions,” said Dr. Peter Piot, Executive Director of UNAIDS. “No other condition prevents people from entering countries for business, tourism, or to attend meetings. No other condition has people afraid of having their baggage searched for medication at the border, with the result that they are denied entry or worse, detained and then deported back to their country”, he added Recent studies indicate that 104 countries have some form of HIV-specific travel restrictions, including 12 which ban people living with HIV from entering for any reason or length of time.
Most of the restrictions require people to indicate their HIV status before entering or remaining in a country, with some countries requiring them to undergo mandatory HIV testing, without privacy safeguards.
“Addressing the issue of travel restrictions related to HIV status helps us to confront the larger issue of systemic discrimination towards people living with HIV and AIDS”, said Peter Prove. “In the case of travel restrictions, the policy of discrimination is often shockingly explicit”.
The next meeting of the task team will be 31 March to 2 April in Geneva.
For more information, see:
http://www.unaids.org/en/KnowledgeCentre/Resources/FeatureStories/archive/2008/20080304_HIVrelated_travel_restrictions.asp