Darrah

Thank you to Sam who sent me this!


There is a lot of concern in the adult industry these days about health, safety, and std?s. A few months ago a performer tested positive for HIV. There was much discussion about AIM not making the positive result public, and the industry only learned of it when the producer who used the infected talent tried to accuse AIM of giving the person a clean bill of health. As a result of the publicity, OSHA began looking for the employer who used the infected performer. In their efforts to identify the employer, they attempted to get information about ?patient zero? from AIM. AIM refused, and patient zero filed a suit against AIM and OSHA from seeking information about her. Patient Zero was successful, and an injunction was put in place against OSHA and AIM from disclosing information about her.

AIM claimed this was a victory, but in reality it was far from it. The ruling ordered AIM not to release any information about any infected performer, unless there is written permission from the patient in accordance with existing law. Many in the adult industry think that the waiver signed at AIM is in compliance with the law. IT IS NOT. The law requires a written waiver for every single disclosure of patient results to a third party, and that waiver must include the name of the person to whom the result are being given. It is very clear that the AIM waiver does not come close to meeting this criteria.

In 2004, AIM published, on the internet, the name of every person on a quarantine list, and the name of every performer who tested positive for HIV. They did not print legal names, but the law prohibits releasing any identifying information about a patient. A stage name is more than enough to identify a person. As a result of the publicity, OSHA was able to identify the employer in this case. Two companies were identified (TTBOY) and citations were issued for health and safety violations. The citations were appealed, to no avail, and TTBOY paid the fines and agreed to restrictions on future productions. According to industry insiders, TTBOY packed up his shop and moved to Florida. The precedent was set, performers were deemed employees, and the producers were deemed liable for what happens on their sets.

Armed with these new precedents, OSHA began to step up its investigations into the adult industry, by going after agents in order to identify the employers of those who were reported to the County Health Department as being positive for std?s by AIM. They used legal theory that the agents were acting on behalf of the employer. OSHA has the right to inspect employers, and those who act as agents for the employers. Some in OSHA think that this also applies to AIM. When Steve Hirsch states that any performer must have a valid test from AIM or they will not get hired, the case can be made that AIM is acting as an agent of the employers in the adult industry.

In 2004, the privacy issue was not an issue at all for AIM. Under the pretense of doing what had to be done, the privacy of every performer on that quarantine list was violated. Darren James eventually sued AIM, and an out of court settlement was reached. Why nobody else sued AIM is a good question. They all certainly had ample grounds to file suits. It was because of this 2004 outbreak that AIM changed their protocol, and when the latest patient zero was identified there was no published quarantine list. But the reason for the change had NOTHING to do with protecting the privacy of AIM patients. The new protocol is all about protecting the identity of the employers (producers).

Look at the current articles on AIM?s website. They all talk about OSHA attempting to find the employers, and holding them responsible for the cost of any ramifications of the std exposures. AIM has spent tens of thousands of dollars, most of it from the ?donation? the talent pays for their tests, to keep OSHA form learning the identities of the producers. The law requires employers to pay for follow-up testing and treatment for any disease contracted in the the workplace. In this time of economic downturn, these costs would certainly cripple the industry, and that means the identity of employers must be kept secret from OSHA.

AIM is even going so far as to make statements such as ?More importantly for you (producers) they are trying to get information about what performers have worked for which companies and when. They want to force your company to take the blame if a performer in one of your movies contracts an std without any evidence that the illness was acquired on your set.? This one paragraph alone is full of holes. It is the fact that the person had an std on your set, and exposed others to it during their course of employment. And AIM is even now, it seems, trying to say that the std?s come from outside the industry and are NOT being spread on the sets. How AIM can deny that stds are being transmitted on porn sets is is beyond absurd.

Several questions still remain unanswered. Has the company that hired patient zero reported the workplace exposure of HIV to OSHA, as is required by law? Exactly what is AIM?s protocol for handling HIV positive patients? Is there a written policy at AIM, and are the talent, who they are supposed to work for, aware of the protocols?

The bottom line is AIM is not concerned with patient privacy. For a monthly donation any porn company can get a password that gives them access to every performers medical records, not just those that they hire. This is in clear violation of the injunction won by patient zero, and the LAW that states that every single third party notification requires written consent from the patient that includes the NAME of the individual to whom the results are being given. Now AIM is raising the rates for talent to get tested in order to help protect the identities of the employers who should be paying for the tests in the first place.

The fundraisers AIM has scheduled have nothing to do with helping the talent. AIM, and agents (LATATA) are also telling talent that they do not have to give any information to anyone who contacts them about their positive std tests. One can only imagine what would happen if a performer named their employer. This is ALL about protecting the producers from the financial responsibility of the diseases that are contracted in their workplace. Read the articles on the AIM website for yourself.

DON?T BE FOOLED. AIM has raised prices on the talent to cover the legal bills to protect producers. It has NOTHING to do with performer privacy,They will give your medical information to anyone who says they are in the adult industry. If you know a performers real name you can call AIM and they will tell you their test result over the phone. SO much for privacy and HIPPA regulations. It is about protecting producers at all costs, and those costs are being paid by the performers. Performers need to tell AIM to not spend their ?donations? to pay legal bills to protect producers.