Composite courtesy of Daily News

 

Thailand’s LGBT+ community is once again at the forefront of a legal battle, taking a significant step on 19th September to challenge blood donation restrictions. This marks the third notable fight for equality, following previous successes in changing military draft terms for transgender people and securing marriage equality. The case centres on allegations of discrimination by the Thai Red Cross, which bars LGBT+ individuals from donating blood due to perceived high HIV risks.

 

Historically, the Red Cross's stance is based on screening methods that many argue are outdated and discriminatory. A trans woman, with support from the Committee for Considering Unfair Gender Discrimination, filed a lawsuit claiming the screening process is ineffective and unfairly targets LGBT+ individuals. The Administrative Court, however, sided with the Red Cross citing global data supporting the exclusion based on risk behaviour, not identity.

 

The court maintained that current policies are there to ensure public safety. They stated no sufficient measures have been set in place to safely include those with high-risk behaviours in the donor pool.

 

While the Red Cross claims these practices protect recipients, the issuing of temporary rejection cards to LGBT+ individuals has sparked criticism for potentially damaging reputations by implying these individuals are unsafe donors.

 

In light of this controversy, it is evident that a revised approach is needed, focusing on risk behaviours rather than sexual orientation. Advocacy groups propose updated screening questions about recent unprotected sexual activities rather than blanket exclusions. Current policies remain in place, but there is potential for future changes that align with international standards defining safe periods for donation after risky activities.

 

Moving forward, it is crucial to promote institutional and societal shifts toward a more inclusive system while maintaining safety. The Red Cross, a central figure in this matter, may eventually consider revising its criteria as other countries have. The outcome of this legal struggle could set a precedent and push towards more equitable practices.

 

Key Takeaways

 

• Thailand’s LGBT+ community challenges Red Cross's blood donation policy.
• The court supported Red Cross’s risk-based exclusions for donor safety.
• Revised screening practices could potentially change future donation policies.

 

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from Daily News 2025-09-25

 

 

Transgender rights vs Transfusion rights.

 

Interesting one. 🤔

Oh this is homophobic, the law must change like it has with every other country 

9 minutes ago, GanDoonToonPet said:

Transgender rights vs Transfusion rights.

 

Interesting one. 🤔

 

My biological blood type is O positive but I identify as O negative.

Quote

In light of this controversy, it is evident that a revised approach is needed, focusing on risk behaviours rather than sexual orientation. Advocacy groups propose updated screening questions about recent unprotected sexual activities rather than blanket exclusions.

Um, how about NO? Gays are significantly more likely to have hiv and aids. I don't care how badly homos want to donate blood, it isn't safe.

No Blood Donations from Gay Men: Thailand's Ongoing LGBT+ Fight

 

And rightly so. They should add people who got covid or the covid shots.

 

But why this complaining in the OP ?

They are upset because they can't give blood ?

OMG.

 

Maybe be upset if that minority group can't get blood.

Ok , let the thumbs down begin. 😄

 

 

1 minute ago, captain_shane said:

Um, how about NO? Gays are significantly more likely to have hiv and aids. I don't care how badly homos want to donate blood, it isn't safe.

As safe as a straight person's blood, as all should be tested anyway.  They may have more failed test, but to be realistic, I think the RC offers free testing anyway, so not actually costing them anything.

 

If they pop in for free HIV test, and pass, then probably safer if they come back in say 3-6 months and donate blood, then again every few months, than the straight guy, newly infected, donating for the first time.

Just now, KhunLA said:

As safe as a straight person's blood, as all should be tested anyway.  They may have more failed test, but to be realistic, I think the RC offers free testing anyway, so not actually costing them anything.

 

If they pop in for free HIV test, and pass, then probably safer if they come back in say 3-6 months and donate blood, then again every few months, than the straight guy, newly infected, donating for the first time.

No. Homos are SIGNIFICANTLY more likely to have hiv than straight people, that's not even arguable.

2 minutes ago, FlorC said:

No Blood Donations from Gay Men: Thailand's Ongoing LGBT+ Fight

 

And rightly so. They should add people who got covid or the covid shots.

 

But why this complaining in the OP ?

They are upset because they can't give blood ?

OMG.

 

Maybe be upset if that minority group can't get blood.

Ok , let the thumps down begin. 😄

I'm a bit miffed I can donate, and couldn't since 60+ yrs old.   As I was a regular back in USA.  That's another silly rule, unless I'm missing something.

1 minute ago, captain_shane said:

No. Homos are SIGNIFICANTLY more likely to have hiv than straight people, that's not even arguable.

Evidence?

In fact it would be less because gay people are using prep more than straight people and drug users 

6 minutes ago, captain_shane said:

No. Homos are SIGNIFICANTLY more likely to have hiv than straight people, that's not even arguable.

Again ... all get tested, so just as safe.   Sure there's plenty of 'straight' people, that ain't so straight, donating.   Really is a stupid rule.   

 

If I needed blood, and all they had was infected blood or die, just give it to me, and some Truvada 

 

Really not surprised all the bigots and hate on AN.  New version comes out of the closet every now & then.   Shameful as people die for lack of blood when needed.

3 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

I'm a bit miffed I can donate, and couldn't since 60+ yrs old.   As I was a regular back in USA.  That's another silly rule, unless I'm missing something.

Why do the rich have transfusions with children's blood and plasma ?

Our 60 + years old blood is not as good.

 

Just now, KhunLA said:

Again ... all get tested, so just as safe.   Sure there's plenty of 'straight' people, that ain't so straight, donating.   Really is a stupid rule.   

 

If I needed blood, and all they had was infected blood or die, just give it to my, and some Truvada 

 

Just now, georgegeorgia said:

Evidence?

In fact it would be less because gay people are using prep more than straight people and drug users 

Are you two gay by chance? Otherwise, why support such a dangerous practice?

 

1 minute ago, captain_shane said:

 

Are you two gay by chance? Otherwise, why support such a dangerous practice?

 

 

What don't you understand about all donated blood being tested ????

 

Am I gay ... NO

 

Are you stupid ???

Just now, KhunLA said:

 

What don't you understand about all donated blood being tested ????

 

Am I gay ... NO

 

Are you stupid ???

You can have all the gay blood you want dude, at least make it optional for those of us who don't want it, same as covid blood.

4 minutes ago, FlorC said:

Why do the rich have transfusions with children's blood and plasma ?

Our 60 + years old blood is not as good.

 

 

Tell that to the person who needs it, when the blood bank is empty.

7 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

I'm a bit miffed I can donate, and couldn't since 60+ yrs old.   As I was a regular back in USA.  That's another silly rule, unless I'm missing something.

Sorry for your disappointment. Have heard this previously. It depends upon the Red Cross officer on the day. I became a Thai blood donor at 63 on the strength of having donated previously anywhere in the world. I'm still going to our local mobile sessions at 69. Unfortunately, I will have to accept being sacked off at 70.

Just now, captain_shane said:

You can have all the gay blood you want dude, at least make it optional for those of us who don't want it, same as covid blood.

 

Yea, I'd take gay blood over covid blood any day ... 

 

That's a sad state of healthcare, 'safe & effective' my A$$ 

Can you imagine getting blood and it was from a person who had just gotten a Covid booster? 

On 9/24/2025 at 9:30 PM, KhunLA said:

 

 

That's a sad state of healthcare, 'safe & effective' my A$$ 

 

Freudian slip ?

 

 

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Again ... all get tested, so just as safe.   Sure there's plenty of 'straight' people, that ain't so straight, donating.   Really is a stupid rule.   

 

If I needed blood, and all they had was infected blood or die, just give it to me, and some Truvada 

 

Really not surprised all the bigots and hate on AN.  New version comes out of the closet every now & then.   Shameful as people die for lack of blood when needed.

True. I wish there was a test for bigotry. Plenty here would be positive. 

1 hour ago, captain_shane said:

You can have all the gay blood you want dude, at least make it optional for those of us who don't want it, same as covid blood.

You do realize there's no such thing as "gay blood". Yet bigoted minds do exist.

1 hour ago, captain_shane said:

You can have all the gay blood you want dude, at least make it optional for those of us who don't want it, same as covid blood.

So, you're on your deathbed needing an urgent blood transfusion or you'll die and the only blood available is fully tested blood from a gay person. You'd refuse it and die? 

2 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

So, you're on your deathbed needing an urgent blood transfusion or you'll die and the only blood available is fully tested blood from a gay person. You'd refuse it and die? 

From search assistant :

Donor blood is used in various medical situations, including surgeries, trauma care, cancer treatments, and for patients with anemia or blood disorders. It can be transfused to replace lost blood during operations or to treat patients who need specific blood components like red cells, platelets, or plasma.

 

So not always in a life threatening situation.

But I get your point , tough decision.

Just after the tsunami I went to donate blood at Siriraj.

I filled out a questionnaire (falsely) answering questions like have you been with a hooker, banged a man (I haven't), and some others.

Even though I answered no to all the ones I thought would make a difference, they rejected my donation on the grounds that I had been to (lived in) The UK in the 1990s.

 

When I pushed for an answer and good reason, I was told it was because I might have Mad Cow Disease!

You couldn't make this sht up!

3 minutes ago, FlorC said:

: , tough decision.

Live or die is hardly a tough decision to be honest. 

19 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

So, you're on your deathbed needing an urgent blood transfusion or you'll die and the only blood available is fully tested blood from a gay person. You'd refuse it and die? 

We can live in hope.

So what I get from this article is ... If you want to encourage more people to give blood , simply restrict more people from doing so ?

How many of these gays would donate if allowed?  my guess is very few, they are just moaning for the sake of it. 

 How do the nurses taking blood know if the donators are gay or not? If really wanted to donate they could always just keep quiet,  much more fun having a hissy fit though (and no need to actually donate either)

30 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

So, you're on your deathbed needing an urgent blood transfusion or you'll die and the only blood available is fully tested blood from a gay person. You'd refuse it and die? 

many refuse blood in urgent situations who ever it comes from , jehovah's witnesses are an  example

I think Thailand has learned from the chaos of the start of the HIV virus. How many of you remember Chulalongkorn Hospital passing on HIV to blood donors as it used to share needles? They learned from that.