Blood donor rules slated

Policy on homosexuals still in force

THE fight to persuade the Australian Red Cross Society to change its policy in relation to homosexuals donating blood continues as the organisation completes a review of what some have called a “discriminatory” stance.

The society’s Blood Service says it wants to make it easier for more Australians to give blood, but also needed to fulfil its obligation to keep Australia’s blood supply one of the safest in the world for patients.

There are more than 500 reasons a person may be ineligible to donate blood, such as being under 50kg, having got a tattoo in the last four months or if you have given birth in the previous nine months.

Hobart homosexual man Benjamin Dudman, 21, said he was surprised when going to give blood to learn his sexual orientation placed him in an “at risk” category by the service’s online screening process.

In a letter to the blood bank Mr Dudman describes his dismay at the exclusion because he had participated in “oral or anal sex with another man, even ‘safer sex’ using a condom” within the past year.

“It is absurd that I can’t give blood despite practising safe sex,” he said.

“The current policy of excluding all sexually active gay men from blood donation limits the amount of safe blood available to those in need and stigmatises gay men as a threat to public health.”

The UTAS law student said the policy dated from a time when HIV was less understood.

“Since then, blood testing has improved immensely, rates of HIV infection among gay man have decreased, and Australians have shown they support inclusion and equality for LGBTIQ+ people,” he said.

The Blood Service said it was reviewing sexual activity deferral policies for blood donors and an external committee had been established to provide advice.

Its report has now been received and the service said its medical experts would now consider this advice, along with international and local evidence.

“Once complete, the service will consider potential options regarding sexual activity deferrals, before making a submission to the Therapeutic Goods Administration for its consideration,” a spokesperson said.

“Any future policy decisions will be a matter for governments.”

The fight for change goes back at least 15 years when another man, Michael Cain, launched legal action with the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commission and the Australian Human Rights Commission against the Red Cross policy.