PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 20, 1997
HIV Prevention Act of 1997 - Mandates that States require: (1) confidential reporting of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) positive results by the entity performing the test to the State public health officer; (2) notification by the State public health officer of individuals who may have been exposed to HIV and State cooperation regarding national notification; (4) mandatory testing of individuals indicted for a crime involving force or the threat of force to compel sexual activity, with related notification of victims and their attorneys, allowing use of positive test results, as relevant, in related judicial proceedings; (5) allowing a health professional to not perform a procedure that would place the professional at risk of becoming infected unless the patient undergoes the test and the health professional and the patient are notified of the results; (6) allowing a funeral services practitioner to not perform funeral procedures unless the body undergoes a test and the practitioner is notified of the results; (7) mandatory notification of a funeral service practitioner by a health care entity that knows the body is infected with HIV; (8) allowing a health insurance applicant, if required by the insurance issuer to undergo a test, to be notified of the results; and (9) allowing a prospective adoptive parent to choose to be informed of the adoptive child's HIV status (if known by the adoption agency). Expresses the sense of the Congress that: (1) with respect to health professionals with HIV disease, the professionals should notify their patients in circumstances that place the patients at risk of HIV infection by the professional; and (2) States should encourage the medical profession to develop related guidelines. Amends the Public Health Service Act to declare that compliance with certain provisions of this Act is not a violation of title XXVI (HIV Health Care Services Program) of that Act. Expresses the sense of the Congress that: (1) the States should make it a felony for individuals who know they have HIV disease to intentionally infect another; and (2) strict confidentiality should be maintained in carrying out certain requirements of this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Nickles, Don [R-OK] · R–OK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2675-2676)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.503 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.503 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.503 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.503 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.