Originally posted by Duneknight
View Post
Originally posted by Puddle-Jumper
View Post
Originally posted by Duneknight
View Post
discrimination is actually acceptable where the issue would compromise the job - including the private sector.** if someone has an issue that prevents them performing day-to-day activities, and the company cannot make reasonable adjustments for the person concerned, the person cannot be employed.
in the case of the army, transfusions can need to be carried out on site or as soon as possible. likewise with transplants. both involve blood, one involves organ transfer. both carry a high risk/near certainty of HIV infection if received from a donor who is infected. hence, if a deployed soldier is infected, he's putting more lives at risk. furthermore, stateside deployment is not a reasonable adjustment, as if a soldier is otherwise healthy they should be capable of active, frontline service. which, in fact, they could be needed for if a conflict escalated far enough. to limit them to stateside deployment is to discriminate against soldiers without HIV, as the infected soldier is basically guaranteed personal safety unless the state is attacked.
*note this may vary by country; i'm talking about the UK here. and i'm talking from personal experience of both public and private sector jobs, and from having a disability which does not prevent me from performing most jobs. i don't have experience of the army, but it makes sense.
Comment