In line or out of sync? Science, criminal law, and HIV: An in-depth assessment

Shindel, Kimberly (2025) In line or out of sync? Science, criminal law, and HIV: An in-depth assessment. PhD thesis, University of Glasgow.

Abstract

Laws criminalising HIV transmission and/or exposure are controversial measures and the subject of frequent debate. Beyond the philosophical arguments for or against their utility, another controversy remains: are these laws leading to unjust outcomes by relying on outdated science? This is the primary question addressed by this thesis. In pursuing this question, the subsequent chapters break down the history of criminalised HIV exposure and transmission in England and Scotland as well as the elements of the relevant offences. Medical and scientific evidence is most pertinent in these cases when assessing causation, recklessness, and harm. This thesis argues that, particularly where recklessness and harm are concerned, there is a gap between the law and science. The reason for this gap, it is submitted, owes largely to a narrative that exists in much of the case law which emphasises the underlying betrayal of trust. This narrative can serve as both a distracting element and as a factor which can exacerbate cognitive biases people are prone to. These biases can impact how risk and harm are perceived. In support of this assertion, recklessness and harm will be discussed both generally and in connection to criminalised HIV transmission specifically. Other areas will likewise be drawn upon as a basis of comparison, including English civil cases involving HIV and the laws of other common law jurisdictions. It is argued that recklessness should be assessed in a two-pronged approach which considers both the objective risk and the defendant’s subjective stance, and that the harm of HIV should remain a live issue assessed on a case-by-case basis. This thesis aims to highlight the importance of the law adjusting to changing medical advancements in order to protect the rights of a group of people that are already highly marginalised.

• Item Type: Thesis (PhD)
• Qualification Level: Doctoral
• Subjects: K Law > K Law (General)
• Colleges/Schools: College of Social Sciences > School of Law
• Supervisor's Name: Chalmers, Professor James and Leverick, Professor Fiona
• Date of Award: 2025
• Depositing User: Theses Team
• Unique ID: glathesis:2025-85300
• Copyright: Copyright of this thesis is held by the author.
• Date Deposited: 04 Jul 2025 10:59
• Last Modified: 04 Jul 2025 11:15
• Thesis DOI: 10.5525/gla.thesis.85300
• URI: https://theses.gla.ac.uk/id/eprint/85300