BBC News
A 38-year-old man has been convicted of knowingly infecting a former partner with HIV. David Johnson, director of Waverley Care, which supports people in Scotland living with HIV, says we must all learn lessons following the case of Giovanni Mola and Miss X.
David Johnson says we all have a responsibility to look after ourselves
The case of Mr Mola potentially gives rise to a number of important issues for all people living with HIV.
Waverley Care works with more than 300 people annually living with HIV and one of the biggest challenges for them is public stigma and discrimination.
Taking people to court to investigate their sex lives does not feel a useful way to deal with such a sensitive public health issue and compounds the prejudices surrounding the illness.
People rightly ask why HIV is singled out for this kind of action.
The case clearly demonstrates the impact of an HIV diagnosis on many people - confusion, despair and possible denial.
How easy is it then for people to seek basic human needs for comfort, affection and relationships? From my experience it is not at all easy.
People can feel that the only thing that defines them is their HIV status and the rest of their humanity is denied.
Certainly most people living with HIV feel that the onus is on them to protect not only themselves but also their sexual partners. And most people do just that.
However, that does not absolve the rest of society from taking a similarly responsible approach to safer sexual practices.
We all have a moral responsibility to look after ourselves as well as others.
Anonymous testing
Every time a case such as this comes to court there is a danger that the principle of shared responsibility in sexual relationships is undermined as the focus is almost entirely on the person living with HIV.
For people living with HIV, disclosing their status is never an easy undertaking.
Once you divulge your status to a prospective partner you no longer have control of that information.
And at what stage do you trust someone enough to tell them? I suspect the law is never going to be helpful in answering these kinds of questions.
We are long overdue a renewed public health campaign reminding people that HIV has not gone away, there is still no cure and we all have a responsibility to protect
The danger exemplified by some of the statements made in this and similar cases is that we may well be moving to a situation where even the wearing of a condom is not seen as sufficient evidence of the intent to take safety measures.
The onus is on telling.
This will potentially lead to complacency amongst the "untested" population who will rely on the other person to tell them of their status.
This is not helpful when we know from clinical data on anonymous testing that a third of people can leave a clinic and not be aware of their HIV status.
We are long overdue a renewed public health campaign reminding people that HIV has not gone away, there is still no cure and we all have a responsibility to protect.
A 38-year-old man has been convicted of knowingly infecting a former partner with HIV. David Johnson, director of Waverley Care, which supports people in Scotland living with HIV, says we must all learn lessons following the case of Giovanni Mola and Miss X.
Waverley Care works with more than 300 people annually living with HIV and one of the biggest challenges for them is public stigma and discrimination.
Taking people to court to investigate their sex lives does not feel a useful way to deal with such a sensitive public health issue and compounds the prejudices surrounding the illness.
People rightly ask why HIV is singled out for this kind of action.
The case clearly demonstrates the impact of an HIV diagnosis on many people - confusion, despair and possible denial.
How easy is it then for people to seek basic human needs for comfort, affection and relationships? From my experience it is not at all easy.
People can feel that the only thing that defines them is their HIV status and the rest of their humanity is denied.
Certainly most people living with HIV feel that the onus is on them to protect not only themselves but also their sexual partners. And most people do just that.
However, that does not absolve the rest of society from taking a similarly responsible approach to safer sexual practices.
We all have a moral responsibility to look after ourselves as well as others.
Anonymous testing
Every time a case such as this comes to court there is a danger that the principle of shared responsibility in sexual relationships is undermined as the focus is almost entirely on the person living with HIV.
For people living with HIV, disclosing their status is never an easy undertaking.
Once you divulge your status to a prospective partner you no longer have control of that information.
And at what stage do you trust someone enough to tell them? I suspect the law is never going to be helpful in answering these kinds of questions.
The danger exemplified by some of the statements made in this and similar cases is that we may well be moving to a situation where even the wearing of a condom is not seen as sufficient evidence of the intent to take safety measures.
The onus is on telling.
This will potentially lead to complacency amongst the "untested" population who will rely on the other person to tell them of their status.
This is not helpful when we know from clinical data on anonymous testing that a third of people can leave a clinic and not be aware of their HIV status.
We are long overdue a renewed public health campaign reminding people that HIV has not gone away, there is still no cure and we all have a responsibility to protect.