Because HIV is often transmitted sexually, it is normal for healthcare workers to ask patients with HIV/AIDS about their sexual orientation and behaviour. Unfortunately, for many years healthcare professionals sought to notify and test previous and current sexual partners to try to understand the epidemiology. When compulsory, such “partner mapping” denies patients’ right to privacy, and in most parts of Europe it is now up to patients whether they inform their sexual partners about any infection discovered.
Surprisingly, much of the discourse in the UK about doctors discussing patients’ sexual orientation is about the embarrassment felt—by doctors and patients alike—when talking about sexuality. But healthcare professionals need to be able to talk about all sorts of sensitive things, such as pee, poo, and phlegm. It should come as no surprise, even to more conservative doctors, that people have sex—and in all sorts of ways.
The discussion shows that morality, as well as health arguments, continues to hold sway in this area. But sexual health is an integral part of general health. Non-heterosexual people are disproportionately affected by specific health problems, and admitting this is the start of constructive consultation about the reasons and solutions. Visibility and honesty can also eventually reduce stigma. HIV/AIDS activists have fought long and hard for evidence based sex education in schools.
Belonging to a sexual minority can be risky—being gay is associated with a higher risk of mental health problems, drug and alcohol misuse, and discrimination—even in societies that do not criminalise homosexuality. Asking about sexual orientation could and should introduce a longer conversation about sexual health. Patients and patients’ organisations should fight to ensure that sexual health related data are kept safe, because all societies discriminate against people on the grounds of their sexuality.
Provenance and peer review: Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.
Competing interests: I have read and understood the BMJ policy on declaration of interests and have no relevant interests to declare.

中文翻译：

---

评论：让我们谈谈性

由于艾滋病毒通常是通过性传播的，因此医护人员向艾滋病毒/艾滋病患者询问其性取向和行为是正常的。不幸的是，多年来，医疗保健专业人员一直试图通知和测试以前和现在的性伴侣，以试图了解流行病学。在强制性的情况下，这种“伙伴关系图”剥夺了患者的隐私权，在欧洲大部分地区，现在由患者决定是否将发现的任何感染告知其性伴侣。
令人惊讶的是，在英国，关于医生讨论患者性取向的许多讨论都是关于医生和患者在谈论性时感到的尴尬。但是，医疗保健专业人员需要能够谈论各种敏感的事物，例如小便，便便和痰。甚至对于比较保守的医生来说，人们以各种方式发生性行为也就不足为奇了。
讨论表明，道德以及健康方面的论点在这一领域继续占主导地位。但是性健康是整体健康不可或缺的一部分。非异性恋人群受特定健康问题的影响尤其严重，承认这一点是就原因和解决方案进行建设性协商的开始。可见度和诚实度最终也可以减少污名。艾滋病毒/艾滋病活动家为在学校进行循证性教育进行了长期而艰苦的斗争。
属于性少数群体是有风险的-同性恋会导致更高的精神健康问题，滥用药物和酒精的行为以及歧视的风险-即使在没有将同性恋定为犯罪的社会中也是如此。询问性取向可以并且应该引入关于性健康的更长的讨论。病人和病人组织应努力确保与性健康有关的数据得到安全保护，因为所有社会都基于性而歧视人。
种源和同行评审：委托；没有外部同行评审。
利益冲突：我已经阅读并理解了BMJ的利益声明政策，没有相关利益声明。