Good afternoon and thank you for allowing me the time to speak today.

My name is Maretta Short and I am the President of the National Organization for Women of New Jersey (NOW).  I am here to express our position regarding Mandatory HIV Testing for pregnant women and newborns.

Passing the “Mandatory HIV Testing for Pregnant Women and Newborns bill is not a “NO Brainer,” as publicized.

Bill 2704 gives the public the opinion that testing newborns will prevent them from getting AIDS.  Based on our findings the HIV status of a newborn cannot be accurately established until 15-24 months after birth, therefore, the testing of newborns effectively establishes only the HIV status of the mother.

Far reaching efforts at the federal, state and local levels target child-bearing women through their newborns for mandatory testing for HIV/AIDS, putting pregnant women in a category separate from all other individuals;

Through my personal opinion as a Black women I am concerned about this mandatory testing and the impact it will have on my younger pregnant black sisters and all younger women.

The groups most targeted will be women of color.  Black women have been historically abused by medical facilities in the United States and so have Black men.  For example, There were the Black men in Tuskegee Institute who were used to test serum to cure syphilis and died.  Years ago black women who lived in the south were sterilized without their permission and against their will.  Civil rights activist, Fannie Lou Hamer was the first Black Delegate to attend the Democratic Convention in Atlantic City New Jersey.  She went into a Mississippi hospital for a scraping and when she came out of the hospital room she was informed by the doctors that they had given her a hysterectomy without her permission and against her will.  Research has proven that voluntary testing is working.

Mandatory testing would discourage pregnant women from seeking medical attention.  75% of newborns testing positive at birth eventually shed the HIV antibodies and, therefore, are put in jeopardy because their mothers are afraid to seek routine health care and immunizations; meanwhile healthy babies are getting drugs that the medical community has not fully tested for side effects.

In addition, a clause in bill 2704 states that "A woman will not be denied appropriate prenatal or other medical care because she refuses to be tested for HIV."  Why include this clause if it's not going to be interpreted as something else later?  In some cases I have read about pregnant women who refused mandatory testing and they were sought after legally for being negligent and forced to give up custody of their children.

And there's another troubling line in the bill about collecting information about pregnant women who have given their written refusal to be tested.  What will be done with the information?

We hold that women's privacy rights and choices are as constitutionally valid as those of any other citizen, regardless of a woman's reproductive status.

Currently, a pregnant women in NJ is asked whether she wishes to "opt-in" for getting the HIV screening.  The women have been concerned and in agreement with the testing.  Voluntary testing is working.  Why make it mandatory and who's going to pay for the screening?

The main reasons for the increased rate of AIDS in our communities is the lack of access to quality health care.  Millions and millions of dollars were directed to low risk areas when the funding should have gone to high risk areas.  There are no women’s health clinics and hospitals are shutting down.

And according to the NJ Hyacinth Foundation “Since the reauthorization of the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Modernization Act of 2006, New Jersey has seen a 39% decrease in federal funding totaling 9 million dollars.  As a result, key supportive services for people living with HIV/AIDS that are critical to the access of care, such as case management and transportation, have been cut.  Across the state, several essential services have been eliminated, including meal delivery to 150 homebound patients, legal advocacy to 200 clients, mobile medical outreach to 300 high-risk patients, housing for 150 people, and residential substance abuse treatment for 120 patients.

We are opposing all efforts to introduce into state legislatures, city, county, or federal governments any bills or ordinances whose effect would be to limit the civil rights of persons with HIV/AIDS, persons with HIV antibodies, or persons in groups thought to be at higher risk of infection than the general population, including mandatory testing, reporting and quarantine.

The many variations of mandatory testing programs that have been proposed do not provide any necessary or useful information and/or medical services for women and newborns that could not otherwise be obtained voluntarily.

Mandatory testing places women and their newborns in an adversarial relationship with their physician(s), the medical community, and possibly the father of the child.

NOW reaffirms its emphasis and its opposition to mandatory testing, including what amounts to de facto mandatory testing of women through their newborns.  We will initiate a campaign through the media and NOW chapters to educate the public and members about the real issues and real dangers that mandatory HIV testing poses to the civil rights of women and newborns.  Mandatory HIV testing for pregnant women and new borns legislation may be a done deal but it is not “A No Brainer!”

Thank You for your time.