Recently, as I waited at a blood drive, I couldn’t help but notice who was there to donate. This was no formal survey, but nearly everyone there looked white, except for two individuals who looked Asian. This racial makeup was confusing, as our school is certainly more racially diverse than that. Why was this group of people not representative of Maryland’s racial makeup? According to recent statistics, 13 percent of students at this school identify as black. So why were there no black people donating?
The answer is within the system of the Red Cross. Some of the requirements of the Red Cross make sense – anyone who has ever had a positive HIV test is prohibited from donating, as is anyone who has had a blood transfusion in the past 12 months. These requirements have a clear purpose – to prevent potentially infected blood from being given to those who are receiving it.
But what doesn’t make sense is that all people who were born or have spent a significant amount of time in certain African countries are excluded, as well as anyone who has ever had sex with them. Due to no fault of their own, many blacks are not allowed to give blood. There is no 12 month policy that these individuals can donate after a certain time period. They will never be able to give blood.
While it is no secret that there is in fact an AIDS epidemic in Africa, it is completely ridiculous to exclude everyone from donating blood, implicitly assuming that everyone has AIDS. There are many other non-African countries with serious problems with the AIDS virus, such as Thailand and Brazil, but they are left unmentioned in the policy. Is this a coincidence, or does it reflect racist policy?
Race aside, gay men are also prohibited from donating. Any male who has ever had sex with another male, even once, since 1977 is not allowed to give blood. Yes, AIDS was once thought to only be a problem in the gay community, but that certainly is not true anymore.
The fact is this: AIDS is not a gay disease, and it is not an African disease. It is everyone’s problem, and everyone is at risk for contracting the virus. Unless the Red Cross wants to expand its questionnaire and requirements to exclude everyone who has ever engaged in “risky behavior,” this systematic exclusion of minorities reflects just a small way in which these people are discriminated against in supposedly “neutral” policies.
If anyone can demonstrate that engaging in unprotected heterosexual sex is safer than engaging in protected homosexual sex, I will drop my case. However, as it stands now, common sense is telling me that these policies reflect a larger problem. The stigma surrounding AIDS has not gone away.
Some may be wondering why I am still donating blood, even though I so completely reject these policies and the Red Cross’ support of them. The sad truth is that there is an obscene blood shortage right now in this country. Those who are suffering have nothing to do with the policies that restrict the availability of donated blood.
The Red Cross needs to seriously reevaluate its rules for donating blood. If its goal is really to save as many people as possible, it should start by letting the people who want to help do so. The answer is not to cling to outmoded superstitions and intolerance.
Rachel Miller is a senior anthropology and psychology major. She can be reached at rlmiller@umd.edu.
