Ask Me Help Desk - Genital Warts Question?

Quote:

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

Every lawsuit filed in NY has been thrown out or no caused. A case that was filed in Portland is meaningless unless you're in Portland.

There is also a difference between AIDS and HIV, which can be deadly, and genital warts.

Proof in these cases is almost impossible and turns into he says/she says. You told me you have genital warts. I say, "Okay" and we have sex. I get genital warts. I say you never told me. You say you did. Then what happens?
This thread isn't about the law, however.

That's where I'm having an issue. I haven't found a single case where someone sued for getting an STD, and won.

If there is a case that won, I'm interested.

But you're right, this isn't about the law. It shouldn't be about the law, because frankly, the law has nothing to do with this, that I could find. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alty

That's where I'm having an issue. I haven't found a single case where someone sued for getting an STD, and won.

If there is a case that won, I'm interested.

But you're right, this isn't about the law. It shouldn't be about the law, because frankly, the law has nothing to do with this, that I could find. :)

Absolutely, and basically I could sue you because I don't like the color of your shoes (and, by the way, I don't like the color of your shoes). I might even find an Attorney to represent me. My chances of winning are slim to none.

There was a case in Jamestown, NY where a man in his 20's infected a large number of teenage girls with HIV. Several of the parents sued on behalf of their daughters. The guy was already a felon. When push came to shove it was their word against his that he told them (and we all know he didn't) but there was no proof. The cases were dismissed PLUS the publicity was deadly for everyone.

This is a legal argument inside a health thread - maybe it should be moved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bryanviper

Seems like my question got cut off...

""
About 1 year ago I realized I had genital Warts however i only got it treated about 9 months later because at first i did not realize what it was & i had read that it would go away overtime. So I got them treated end of April where my doctor froze them & they fell off after a week or so, i was also given something to rub in the effected area which was pretty expensive.

about a month later they re appeared and i went to another doctor and they cut the warts off with some electrical thing. That was at the begining of June.

It is now end of sept & i have not had anymore warts come back. Im wondering is it safe to have Sex with a condom? can my partner still get it from me? Since its been a year is it probably out of my system now?

thanks for the help.
""

All in all you can infect sexual partners with or with out a condom, to be on the safe side either find someone who has it to or get acquainted enough for you to be comfortable enough to tell them your situation. Better safe then sorry :)

An Attorney friend pointed me in this direction. This is a US Court of Appeals case (interesting concept as it all boils down to assault). Good reading.

Now, the US Government was one of the parties, but it is good fodder for discussion:

"Catherine Leleux of Louisiana was barely 18 years old in 1995 when she was seduced by her Navy recruiter, Petty Officer Paul Sistrunk. Several weeks later, she came down with a case of genital herpes.

Leleux sought out a personal injury lawyer, Lamont Domingue. Struck by her calm, affable demeanor, he agreed to take the case, even though he knew that a sex-related lawsuit in politically conservative Louisiana would be "ugly and hard-fought."

In filing suit, Domingue sidestepped Sistrunk and went after his employer, the federal government. After all, it had the deepest pockets, and it was vulnerable: Navy officials had discharged Sistrunk under "less than honorable conditions" after Leleux's complaint came to light. Domingue thought she could collect a half-million dollars.

But it was not to be: Last July, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that Leleux didn't have a case.

Technically speaking, the court said, Sistrunk's failure to disclose his herpes made the sex he had with Catherine nonconsensual, because she would not have agreed to it if she had known about his disease.

Reasoning further, the court held that if the sex was nonconsensual, it was battery. And because battery is intentional, under federal law the U.S. government could not be held liable (as it would have been if the sex had resulted from its negligence)."