HB 109 An Act relating to blood tests for persons charged with sex offenses; and providing for an effective date. CS HB 109 (JUD) was reported out of Committee with "no recommendation" and with fiscal notes by the Department of Health and Social Services, the Department of Law and the Department of 1 Corrections dated 3/19/93. HOUSE BILL 109 "An Act relating to blood tests for persons charged with sex offenses; and providing for an effective date." JACK PHELPS, AID TO REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, stated that the purpose of HB 109 is to provide an avenue of relief for 4 victims of sexual assault. The threat of HIV infection and of infection from other sexually transmitted diseases is a serious complicated side-effect of being victimized by sexual assault. The State has a compelling interest in assuring innocent victims of crime, timely relief from the anxiety that may result from sexual assault. HB 109 allows the victim of sexual assault to petition the court to require a blood test on the defendant. The legislation also provides that the State must make it available to both the victim and the alleged perpetrator, upon their request, counseling relating to HIV and AIDS which is medically appropriate for those persons, and referrals for medical and support services. The legislation is designed to minimize the cost to the State for implementing the program. If the defendant is convicted, he or she must reimburse the state for the cost of the test. The court may order the Department of Corrections to provide for the reimbursement through garnishment. The Federal Crime Control Act of 1990 specified that states must have a law such as HB 109 adopted or they will lose part of their law enforcement assistance grants. The deadline established by Congress is October, 1993. If the bill fails to pass, Alaska's Department of Public Safety will lose approximately $185 thousand dollars in FY 94. The bill can satisfy the federal requirement and simultaneously form an integral part of an effort by the State to ensure that victims of crime in our state are afforded every opportunity to receive appropriate relief. He concluded, the legislation tried to balance the rights of the victim against the rights of the defendant. He pointed out that cause finding is required which will require the State to demonstrate that there is a probable cause. The court is now required to provide a confidentiality statement. There are portions of the bill which protect the clients privacy. He added, the purpose of the exemption for disclosure by the victim would allow those persons, who the victim has close associations with to be given the information. He reminded the Committee that the subject matter contains the potential for disease and that the victim has the right to tell those who they are close with. Representative Brown pointed out that a test does not assure if a person is infected. It could take from a six to eight month period for the presence of HIV to appear, even though continuing to transmit the virus. She recommended providing services to help the victim address their situation. The test would not solve the problem. 5 CINDY SMITH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA NETWORK ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT, JUNEAU, ALASKA, stated that the network has been investigating and discussing the issue of mandatory STD testing for persons charged with sex offenses for over two years. The issue is complex and emotional. Literature on the subject is minimal, occasionally contradictory, often defending one position or the other in the competing social interests of protecting a rape victim and protecting the persons infected with the sexually transmitted diseases, especially HIV. Transmission of STD's as a result of rape is not uncommon. It is currently standard procedure at most hospitals to provide a rape victim with a course of antibiotics as an automatic measure without waiting for information as to the status of the offender. The Center for Disease Control, AIDS Epidemiology Division estimates that the chances of a rape victim contracting HIV as a result of an assault to be very low but admits that the figure could be higher in multiple exposure and that even single rapes may constitute a greater hazard because of the rather common occupance of tearing of vaginal surfaces. In 1990, the first documented case of HIV transmitted rape was recorded at a hospital in London. She explained that the initial assumption behind the first HIV testing laws was that if a victim knew the status of the offender, she would therefore know whether or not she had been exposed to HIV. This is not the case. Particularly with a single test. An offender may test negative and still be carrying HIV. Conversely, a positive test does not mean that a victim will contract HIV. In other words, in order to determine her own status, a victim will have to get tested every three months for a year. Ms. Smith summarized that if the testing was performed at the time of charge, the Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault would support the legislation, however, if it were at the conviction, the testing would serve no purpose. Representative Martin MOVED to report CS HB 109 (JUD) out of Committee with individual recommendations and with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTIONS, it was so ordered. CS HB 109 (JUD) was reported out of Committee with "no recommendation" and with fiscal notes by the Department of Health and Social and Services, the Department of Law and the Department of Corrections dated 3/19/93.