The United Kingdom and Human Rights - College of Social ...

178 Values and Civil and Political Liberties
involving risks of infection. Companies are commercially
justified in adopting a restrictive approach to cover,
because issuing policies to persons with life-styles which
put them at risk would place a burden on all other
insured persons. Nonetheless, public awareness of
companies' attitudes now means that persons who are
potentially HIV positive are reluctant to take tests lest it
affect their ability to obtain life cover, especially as the
raising of mortgage finance for house purchase is often,
although not always, dependent upon taking out life
insurance. Conversely, to protect themselves from undue
liabilities, insurance companies require an individual
applying for a large life policy to take an HIV test. If the
United Kingdom's policy of voluntary testing for
Aids/HIV is not to be undermined, with persons
reluctant to take tests, it is prudent to establish a state
scheme offering life insurance at reasonable rates to
persons who voluntarily undergo a test, prove negative
and are declined cover. Of course, insurance is only for
unknown risks and there can be no new life cover for
persons who already are HIV positive. Fortunately,
because the National Health Service is not insurancebased,
such persons are at no time discriminated against
in the matter of health care—as they would be under a
private health insurance system of the kind which
operates in many countries abroad and has required
legislative intervention.
Difficult questions of weighing competing interests
arise out of dismissal from employment of homosexuals
and lesbians who work in proximity to children and
young persons. The same issues arise in relation to
parental rights and the welfare of children in custody
proceedings where a parent is not a heterosexual,
although some prejudice in this field may be dispersed
by a recent judgment by Mrs. Justice Booth: she granted
care and control to a lesbian mother, considering this