By: Nicole Knauer
FRESNO, CA –– On Thursday, Feb. 17th, the Justice Department announced a filing of two proposed consent decrees against obstetrician-gynecologists Umaima Jamaluddin, MD, and Chibuike Enyereibe Anucha, MD, PC under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) due to their refusal to treat a patient with HIV.
Consent decrees are legally defined as agreements or settlements which resolve disputes between two parties without admission of guilt or liability, and it is a court order to which all parties have agreed. The consent decree was filed by the Department of Justice due to Jamaluddin’s and Anucha’s violation of ADA’s Title III, which prohibits health care providers from refusing medical attention to people with disabilities, HIV included in the term.
One lawsuit which the ADA filed explained that the patient with HIV was turned away by Dr. Anucha when requesting a Pap smear, and the other lawsuit stated that Dr. Jamaluddin would not allow the patient to schedule routine visits due to her condition.
Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division explained the filing, stating that “people with HIV have the right to equal access to doctors and medical services…The Justice Department remains steadfast in our commitment to eradicate discrimination against people with HIV and combat the spread of unfounded stereotypes and misinformation.”
U.S. Attorney Phillip A. Talbert for the Eastern District of California also voiced support for the consent decree, “Of all people, medical providers should understand that erecting barriers to basic medical care based on an individual’s HIV status is unconscionable…In 2022, it should not take a federal lawsuit to break down such barriers, however, the U.S. Attorney’s Office and our partners in the Civil Rights Division stand ready to litigate to vindicate the rights of individuals with disabilities.”
To resolve the consent decree and prevent violation of Title III in the future, Jamaluddin and Anucha have each agreed to pay 37,500 dollars to the patient and a 5000 dollar civil penalty; train their staff; utilize a non-discrimination policy in their facilities; and maintain record-keeping obligations, in which they regularly provide reports to the department.
The history of discrimination against people with HIV is a long one, and the public seems far from informed on the actual contageousness of HIV positive individuals.
A survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation in 2009 of 2554 adults across the US found that one out of three Americans were uncomfortable drinking out of a shared glass, using the same toilet, or swimming in the same pool with someone who was HIV positive for fear of transmission. Half of the surveyed adults were uncomfortable having an HIV positive person cook their food, 42% would not be comfortable sharing a room with someone HIV positive, 23% would be uncomfortable having an HIV positive coworker, and 35% would be uncomfortable having their child taught by an HIV positive teacher. In reality, HIV can only be transmitted through the exchange of certain bodily fluids, the most common ways being sex and the sharing of needles, syringes, or drug injection tools.
This misinformation on HIV, its contagiousness, and its moral implications create “HIV stigma and discrimination—fed largely by ignorance and animus” which “persist and continue to have a forceful impact on people living with HIV” says the AMA Journal of Ethics. However, they note that “advances in treatment have dramatically transformed the lives of many people living with HIV.”
The journal addresses healthcare professionals telling them that they have “an ethical duty to avoid engaging in stigmatizing behaviors and a legal duty not to discriminate. To provide maximally effective and ethical HIV testing and care, health care personnel also need to recognize and take into account the realities faced by people living with HIV.”
