What is the blood ban and why does it still exist?
We break down the policy that prohibits men who have sex with men from donating blood — and the years-long journey to try and end it.
Hey there, and welcome to the 33rd issue of The Supplement, a newsletter that fills in the gaps of your other news intake. This is Sierra, one-third of the Supplement team!
Each week, we pick a question submitted by you, our readers. If you’d like to submit a question, email us at thesupplementnewsletter@gmail.com. Befriend us on Instagram, and on Twitter. We could use more friends!
If you like what you read each week, consider buying us a coffee. ☕
This week, we’re tackling this question: What is the blood ban and why does it still exist?
TL;DR: A year ago, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he hoped to soon announce the end of the blood ban, a policy that prohibits men who have sex with men from donating blood. The policy began after a 1980s scandal, in which delays in screening and testing contaminated blood exposed thousands of people to HIV and hepatitis. But after many studies and technological advances, the policy is still in place as advocates press to eliminate what they call a discriminatory ban.
Pride month is getting started in Canada. And many are continuing the push for Ottawa to meet a years-long promise around Canada’s blood donation eligibility.
In June 2020, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he hoped to announce “very soon” the elimination of the blood ban. (His party had actually promised to do this way back in 2015.)
The blood ban refers to a policy that prohibits men who have sex with men from donating blood within three months of their last sexual encounter. Trans women who have not had lower gender affirming surgery and who have male sexual partners are also placed in “a higher-risk category.”
Unifor is currently running an end the blood ban campaign. (They note the ban also covers all tissue donation, including post-COVID plasma donation.)
Every blood donation is now tested for HIV. It is also worth noting that even during the pandemic, Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer Dr. Theresa Tam has been encouraging Canadians to donate blood to prevent shortages.
The policy began after the contaminated blood scandal of the 1980s. The predecessor to today’s Canadian Blood Services (CBS) did not properly test and screen donors, resulting in thousands of Canadians being exposed to HIV and hepatitis.
Starting in 1992, there was a lifetime ban. In 2013, it was shortened to a five-year ban. In 2016 the Liberals shortened the ban to one year. In 2019, they moved it down to the current three-month period.
These changes are always said to be supported by science, and there have been perpetual studies done. But blood regulations are made by the CBS, Héma-Québec and Health Canada, so all parties will need to act to make change.
In 2016, Christopher Karas filed a human rights complaint against Health Canada over the blood ban. Ottawa has been trying to block his case, saying that it doesn’t have the authority to change CBS’s rule. But this rationale is not entirely true, according to this article.
Conservative MP Eric Duncan, who is gay, told City News that the ban is harmful.
“A policy that makes determinations based on sexual orientation, as opposed to sexual practices … perpetuates stigmas that give rise to discriminatory behaviour against our community,” he said.
Duncan suggests getting rid of the abstinence requirement and says that instead asking participants about their sexual behaviour could have a big impact. Advocates say this focus on sexual behaviour should exist regardless of anyone’s background or sexual orientation.
Most recently, new documents published by CTV show that Health Canada ordered a two-year delay before the criteria could be updated again.
Earlier this week, to mark the beginning of Pride month, Conservative MPs Duncan and Michelle Rempel Garner presented Health Minister Patty Hajdu a draft order they feel could be enacted. In the document, they call the policy “blatantly homophobic.”
In response, a spokesperson said that Health Minister Hadju had asked blood operators about timelines and offered extra support around developing “a behaviour-based donation model.”
A last thought from us: it’s disappointing that the response to the failure of a health organization is a ban that targets specific groups of people who are already being stigmatized as being a risk to others.
Here’s someone to follow:
Niigaan Sinclair is Anishinaabe, and was born and grew up in Treaty One. He joined the Winnipeg Free Press as a columnist in 2018, and an old story of his came up on my timeline this week: “An everyday horror story” about a Brandon trailer park that stands on the site of an unmarked residential school burial ground.
Here’s a story to check out:
After learning about the remains of 215 children found at the former Kamloops Residential School, the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council’s tribal chief Wayne Christian spoke to The Toronto Star. “It was all of us. Our voices were broken when we tried to speak … because of the horrific nature of this.” He said the chiefs were told that even the specialist in ground-penetrating radar who had been hired to carry out the search at the site, a mother herself, had “wept continuously.”
More sites are believed to hold unmarked graves. Here’s what you can do.
The Toronto Star includes this at the tail of their coverage: The Indian Residential Schools Crisis Line is available 24-hours a day for anyone experiencing pain or distress as a result of a residential school experience. Support is available at 1-866-925-4419.