Here is another article from Mike Solis in regards to why foreigners should not be subjected to HIV testing in South Korea:
“My objection was to the fact that I was treated differently simply because I was foreign,” Lisa states. “To me, it’s not ‘just a test’. It’s perpetuating this absurd idea that foreigners are a danger to Korean society. When does this type of mass hysteria about the nature of foreigners stop and common sense prevail?”
“Stigmatizing those with AIDS and pushing it off as a ‘foreigner’s disease’ does nothing to stop its spread,’ Lisa adds. “It simply pushes the issue underground and discourages people from taking responsibility for their sexual health by getting tested regularly.”
Vandom echoes Lisa’s thoughts, supporting confidential counseling, education, and treatment in the case of an HIV-positive result.
“Making threats and ruining the credibility, careers, and lives of HIV carriers will only discourage testing and allow undiagnosed people living with HIV to continue spreading it,” Vandom writes. “This seems to be the approach the Korean Ministry of Justice has taken.”
Both Andrea and Lisa remain confident that the Constitutional Court will rule in favor of eliminating the current testing policies. It could take up to two years for the final decision on HIV-related travel restrictions to be made. If and when that happens, perhaps qualified teachers like Andrea and Lisa will consider returning to Korea to offer their much-valued skills. [Oh My News]
You can read Mike Solis prior article in the Huffington Post here.
I continue to maintain that if Korea is not violating any international treaties they have signed, they have every right to test foreigners for HIV just like the in the US foreigners entering the country are subject to fingerprints. Yes it is an inconvenience, but when living abroad you are subject to the host nation’s laws and regulations.
![[Valid RSS]](http://rokdrop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/valid-rss-rogers.png "Validate my RSS feed")
11:58 am on October 26th, 2009 1
IMHO, not only is "checking for fingerprints" needless waste and offensive — especially since the American INS can not tell if someone has really left the country — checking for HIV is like the French requiring foreigners, that desire a residence permit, to be tested for STD, as if only dirty foreigners have this problem. It assumes the worst and speaks volumes about attitudes. If there was honest concern with HIV, then all Koreans, as well as foreigners, would be tested.
A government may have the power and legal right to require any number of needless tests but such certainly demonstrates an unhealthy prejudice against foreigners if not the wasteful political face-saving that is often at the root of such.
12:10 am on October 27th, 2009 2
It's a long read, but you should read it:
http://2009hunma358.blogspot.com/2009/09/1.html
It's a full summation on the racist/hate group Anti-English Spectrum and how their anti-English teacher campaigns have now come to start influencing policy.
Testing people for HIV is a good thing, but the truth is that these "let's test all the English teachers for drugs and AIDS" campaigns/policies have been undertaken only to stigmatize foreigners as a dangerous threat.
12:55 am on October 27th, 2009 3
Why not test all non-korean, not just Englishee teachers? Maybe Tom has some answers.
I wonder what Tom would have to say about this considering korea is a "yellow" country and not a racist "white" country.
1:20 am on October 27th, 2009 4
Korea is not violating any international treaties, but its various HIV testing and exclusion regimes may violate its own Constitution. The Seoul High Court has agreed.
2:10 am on October 27th, 2009 5
Why they Just don’t give the test, make their money and than go away if they don’t like the country? I think it is more productive than arguing with Korean authorities.
If a Korean was asked to submit such test in a foreign country to be allowed to work, he won’t waste his time arguing, but rather make the test and submit it, and than make his money.
Arguing with korean authorities will only provoke the anti-foreign groups leading to more pressure against them. Xenophobia exists everywhere, and as many people here said, even in Korea.
3:11 am on October 27th, 2009 6
An informal and unscientific survey of English teachers over the last couple of weeks indicates that the HIV test isn't really the issue for most… the real worry is their blood being given a drug test.
Also, there is a larger percentage of teachers here than I had originally suspected who have legal problems Back Home… unpaid child support, low-level warrants for stupid stuff, running from civil judgments, etc.
It almost seems as if the Equal Checks is being pushed not to have "equal checks" in some noble stand against "discrimination" and "human rights"… but to make it an easier option for the government to have no tests than tests for all.
5:09 am on October 27th, 2009 7
Dr. Yu,
While I understand what you're saying, I'm afraid that I must disagree on a few points.
A. I interact with the Korean community in the US quite a bit, because I am married to a Korean woman. I hear PLENTY of complaints about some of the hoops immigrants are required to jump through, trust me. Or even just general complaints about US civil bureaucracy. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with their complaints – in fact, in many cases, there are plenty of Americans who would disagree.
B. Compelling arguments can be made that one doesn't solve xenophobia by calmly submitting to it. Those who are xenophobic will generally make this argument (I'm not implying that YOU are) about submission to authority and maintaining the status quo. I mean, in the USA it took National Guard and FBI involvement in some cases to achieve racial integration in the early 60's. I certainly don't see that kind of thing ever happening in Korea – instead, I think it will be resolved by stubbornly pointing out undue racism/xenophobia when it arises.
The idea that a non-citizen should just be quiet and keep their head down is, in my humble opinion, a flawed one when viewed against the facts of history.
Again, I'm in no way bashing Korea as a country or you as a person or a poster. I simply don't agree with your premise.
5:14 am on October 27th, 2009 8
Quoted from poster Chickenhead: "An informal and unscientific survey of English teachers over the last couple of weeks…"
I'm sorry, but this statement – while honest – fatally impugns the credibility of everything else that follows.
6:15 am on October 27th, 2009 9
It would have been more scientific but I couldn't find a non-pot smoking English teacher control group.
7:50 am on October 27th, 2009 10
I understand, Chickenhead. You are a troll. I will cease feeding you from this point forward.
11:05 am on October 27th, 2009 11
Well, Chicken is an id!ot anyway so I wouldn't pay much attention to his posts…
12:57 pm on October 27th, 2009 12
It is well known that the HIV tests for English teachers is for political reasons to show the ajummas sending their kids to hagwons that the government is doing something to address the supposed foreign English teacher problem. That is why I say this is just like fingerprinting foreigners at US airports, it is just something for the government to show they are doing something.
1:22 pm on October 27th, 2009 13
JustaGuy,
Thank you for letting me know your thoughts.
All I’m saying is that expats are doing so much noise for so little. All their yelling, confrontation, legal action, etc will attract negative attention from Koreans, risking to worse their reputation in Korea.
It’s just a test. Give it to them and that’s it. If they want to argue with Korean authorities fine, but they should try not to be so confrontational and in the end, if things doesn’t change, that leave Korea (yes, be objective, if they don’t find their place in Korea they can find it in another place), but fighting and bashing Koreans society as many expats do in expat blogs won’t make easy their situation.
I agree with you that expat should not tolerate xenophobia but I think this is not the case.
If they don’t have AIDS or don’t’ use drugs, what they are afraid of? Give them the paper and they will be working legally in Korea and nobody will disturb them, but if they have AIDS or use drugs, than they will be in trouble in their own country as well, so I don’t see violation of human rights here.
Regarding what Chickenhead said, I think he is not totally wrong. As you know, many expats in Korea where caught receiving marijuana by mail and others are caught by the police consuming them, so it is plausible that some of them are afraid to make the blood exam because of drug problem.
1:28 pm on October 27th, 2009 14
I recommend everyone read this story because it is pretty messed up:
http://forums.eslcafe.com/korea/viewtopic.php?t=1…
However, this story I think reflects more about professionalism in the health care industry rather then whether or not the Korean government has the right to make a foreigner take an HIV test.
4:20 pm on October 27th, 2009 15
You know who's at risk? Teachers who have students who come to class sick with the flu. (They were waiting for the test results, they assured me.
)
4:22 am on October 28th, 2009 16
I don't mind doing the AIDS test–once. It's when you have to do it every year, and often twice a year. Damn, I've had to do one three times in the last 18 months. That's fracking ridiculous. Especially when they don't test ajosshis going on 'golf trips' to Thailand several times a year. My wife used to work at a travel agency down south, and one of their big promos was along the lines of 'go to Thailand and bang as many chicks as you want–condomless!' Yes, that's right. They promoted sex tours where you didn't have to wear condoms. Filthy foreigners indeed. (As an aside, my wife worked there only as long as it took her to get another job. It's not like she agreed with it or anything.)
10:12 am on October 30th, 2009 17
Once again, America leads the way
The link is here http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/30/oba…
11:17 pm on October 30th, 2009 18
GI Korea – "I continue to maintain that if Korea is not violating any international treaties they have signed, they have every right to test foreigners for HIV just like the in the US foreigners entering the country are subject to fingerprints. Yes it is an inconvenience, but when living abroad you are subject to the host nation’s laws and regulations."
I appreciate your opinion and very much enjoy your blog but, respectfully, you are mistaken. Firstly, there are several strong international law arguments against these regulations. See for example the ICCPR and ICERD. And don't forget that article 6(2) of Korea's Constitution says the status of foreigners shall be guaranteed as prescribed by international law and treaties.
But you don't need to make an international argument at all. The fact is that the E2 requirements violate this nation's laws.
As you rightly point out: "when living abroad you are subject to the host nation’s laws and regulations." But of course this goes for any of us here in Korea, the Constitutional democracy. If you believe that the ROK Constitution is not a joke, then you accept the possibility that the Ministry of Justice is subject to this nation's laws and regulations and can violate the Constitution. No one is above the law.
If you understand that this is the substance of my complaint then you're halfway there.
Simply put E2 visa in country testing procedures are a violation of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea. The reason we have an opportunity to make this a domestic issue is because the tests are conducted here by the government on foreign residents.
I doubt anyone will take the time to read it but I spend quite a bit of time explaining why the tests are not entry requirements to the country within the scope of international law, but a purely domestic issue. (see page 37) http://www.scribd.com/doc/15768998/Nhrck-Report-2
Your mistaken is comparing it to the US system. (Happily President Obama has said the old system will be abandoned by next year but I’ll stick with it for this discussion) The United States does not test foreigners upon arrival for HIV. The US asks if you're HIV-positive, if you are you need a waiver to enter. For certain visas, however, the US does require an HIV test but that test is not conducted in the United States so the U.S. Constitution never enters into it.
You will take that test in your home country and submit it with your visa application. If you're negative you get your visa. If you don't want to take the test you don't have to, but you could never challenge it under the U.S. Constitution. This is what's called an entry requirement. International law allows countries to set up just about any kind of entry requirements they want subject to rules of discrimination. There's certainly an argument that setting up an AIDS screening for entry into a country is discriminatory and it's been made many many times. (see here for example http://www.jiasociety.org/content/11/1/8) I think it's a valid argument and it has won the day in the United States, but it was not the argument that I made with Korea. This has been misunderstood. I tried to correct that misunderstanding here http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/special/2009…
The E-2 visa AIDS tests and the tests required of “Lisa” however are not entry requirements. Does Korea have visas with HIV entry requirements? Absolutely, there is a firmly established procedure under Korea for testing foreigners who will be staying in Korea for a long time and may be a risk for HIV/AIDS. I spoke about this at the international AIDS conference here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6f4ngoXDBU This is the E-6 visa. I didn't challenge the E-6 visa.
GI Korea the E-6 visa is what you're talking about when you make comparisons with the states. The E-6 Visa HIV tests take place in the home country of the applicant, just like the US tests there is no way to challenge these tests under the Korean Constitution. It simply doesn't apply to a foreigner in a foreign land. But it certainly applies to foreigners residing in Korea.
Notice also that the E-6 visa follows Korean law (which I'm also not challenging), namely the AIDS Prevention Act and the Immigration Act, both of which perform a gate keeping function that says do not bring in diseased and dangerous foreigners. The E-2 visa breaks both of these laws. It is violation of the "host nation's laws and regulations" as you put it.
Mr. Yu – I assume you're Korean and if so your opinion is very welcome. Respectfully, I have to disagree with several of your comments. As JustAGuy points out Koreans are some of the most vocal advocates of human rights when living as noncitizens in countries all over the world. I could give you scores of example but let mention one I’ve discussed before.
Are you aware that there were several major human rights cases fought by Koreans in Japan over the right to have a golf membership at a private Japanese club? These were wealthy Koreans who could already play at the club, they just wanted membership rights. They made an enormous fuss. Perhaps your advice would be to tell these Koreans in Japan to just be quiet and play by the Japanese rules even if those rules are unjust. But I respectfully disagree. Koreans have the right to speak up when their human rights are violated. After all if humans can't make "a fuss" about human rights then what can we make a fuss about? I discussed the Korean gulf case in this article here. http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/NEWKHSITE/data/html_…
When you talk about people making a fuss over an AIDS test you’re not listening carefully to the objection. It's not simply a test, if it were then Korean teachers would take it as well and instantly quash the discrimination argument. But that's not going to happen because they care about their rights as they should.
Ask yourself why the test exists. In 1900 in the California during the bubonic plague all "Asiatics" were rounded up and put in quarantines because they were seen as more dangerous because of their race. Special precautions had to be put in place for Asians but not for whites. An Asian foreigner challenged the U.S. restrictions and won his case. The judge said the rules were "boldly directed against the Asiatic or Mongolian race as a class, without regard to the previous condition, habits, exposure to disease, or residence of the individual; and the only justification offered for this discrimination was . . . that this particular race is more liable to the plague than any other. No evidence has, however, been offered to support this claim, and it is not known to be a fact. This explanation must therefore be dismissed as unsatisfactory." Wong Wai v. Williamson, F. 1, 7 (N.D. Cal. 1900). The same is true of Korea creating requirements directed against non-Koreans and singling out foreigners as more liable to have the swine flu or AIDS “without regard to the previous condition, habits, exposure to disease, or residence of the individual.” This is wrong in the scientific as well as moral sense. That's what the fuss is about.
12:26 am on October 31st, 2009 19
> Happily President Obama has said the old system will be abandoned by next year <
Are you happy or is he? What is there to be happy about? Allowing diseased people to come to America and live?
Not sure I am following you on this…
1:21 am on October 31st, 2009 20
If you are interested in fighting the disease and believe that health experts know anything about how to do it, then abandoning HIV travel restrictions is a happy event because it means a better chance of fighting the disease. You can read what the experts have to say about it here for example http://www.jiasociety.org/content/11/1/8 (looks like link got broken above)
Scientific studies have shown that Nations which have abandoned the restrictions have not seen an increase in infection rates. Moreover, they have seen a decrease in stigma. Stigma, as Obama, and health experts everywhere explain is the biggest obstacle to fighting the disease. Lower stigma, lower AIDS infections. You can read why in detail elsewhere but it has to due with diagnosing people. Remember there are many people in the States who don't who they have it. Who's more dangerous? The foreigner who comes into the US with AIDS and knows it, or the American who has the disease and doesn't know it?
How do you get the local to come in to get tested when you keep focusing on it as 'foreigner disease' that we can stop at the border? You don't. He doesn't get tested and spreads it. But ease the stigma and there's a better chance he'll come in.
Here the false dichotomy that framed the issue in Korea: "검사 의무화는 인권침해" vs "자국민 위험노출 루트차단 필요"
Human rights of foreigner vs. Citizens rights to block exposure to the disease. That's the same argument you make. But what if protecting human rights was the way to block exposure?
That's what the Seoul High Court said in canceling the deportation order of a foreigner with HIV:
"From the perspective of HIV/AIDS prevention, the most dangerous thing for society is not persons who are infected with HIV and aware of their status, but persons who are infected with the disease and unaware of their status. A person who is aware of infection will be less likely spread the disease. In the final analysis, encouraging the public to voluntarily receive HIV testing by protecting the human rights of people living with HIV/AIDS is the most effective
policy for preventing the spread of the disease. The current policy of deportation, therefore, is not a sound method for protecting the public health."
6:04 am on April 6th, 2011 21
Excellent blog, bookmarked the blog in hopes to see more!