Victims Could Get Same Protections as Handicapped : U.S. to Rule on Job Rights in AIDS Cases

WASHINGTON —  William Bradford Reynolds, chief of the Justice Department’s civil rights division, said Sunday that he may determine “in the next couple of weeks” whether AIDS patients should be entitled to the same federal protections that bar employment discrimination against handicapped people.

However, Reynolds denied a published report that lawyers for the agency already have tentatively concluded that people who have contracted the fatal disease cannot be barred from the workplace at hospitals, schools, government contract sites and other facilities that receive federal funds.

And in a telephone interview, Reynolds cautioned that, regardless of how the department resolves the question, AIDS sufferers still could be barred from work sites if the disease is deemed to be contagious. “I’m not sure the medical world has decided on that,” Reynolds said.

Public Health Service

Despite that assertion, federal health officials have said repeatedly that AIDS cannot be spread by casual contact. Late last year, the Public Health Service recommended that people with AIDS not be barred from the workplace, saying there is no danger of infection in the normal place of work.

AIDS, or acquired immune deficiency syndrome, is transmitted through intimate sexual contact--with the exchange of bodily fluids such as semen and blood--and through the sharing of unsterilized hypodermic needles. It also has been spread through transfusions of contaminated blood or blood products, although a blood screening procedure begun last year has now made that risk slight.

The usually fatal disease cripples the body’s immune system, leaving it powerless against certain cancers, neurological disorders and otherwise rare infections. Those at highest risk include male homosexuals and bisexuals, intravenous drug users and their sexual partners. As of June 2, health officials had counted 21,302 reported cases and 11,645 deaths.

Office Has Authority

Betty Lou Dotson, director of the Office for Civil Rights at the Health and Human Services Department, said she had not been notified of any Justice Department ruling on the applicability of the handicapped definition to AIDS patients. Her office has the authority to investigate complaints and enforce the law.

“We’ve been waiting for their wisdom,” she said, explaining that the Health and Human Services Department asked the Justice Department for its opinion several months ago. “No one has told us anything--and I think we’d be among the first to know.”

She added: “All the executive agencies will be affected by the opinion--anywhere there’s a federal buck. The minute they make their decision, it will affect us all. There are people in government biting their nails to see what the decision is going to be.”

‘Several Memos’ Prepared

Reynolds said the lawyers in his department had prepared “several memos” exploring the question of whether those suffering from AIDS, as well as those who tested positive for AIDS antibodies but had not actually shown any manifestations of the disease, fit legal definitions of handicapped persons.

“The first question (to be decided) is whether someone with the AIDS virus has a condition that can be considered a handicap,” he said. “ . . . The second question is that, notwithstanding the handicap, can you remove them from the workplace, not because of the handicap, but because it might be considered contagious.”

Reynolds said the arguments raised in the department memos are still “under consultation” and insisted that no position has been decided upon.

Wary of Federal Actions

Homosexual rights groups have long pushed for such an anti-discrimination ruling, but conservative and fundamentalist organizations--which have considerable sway in the Reagan Administration--have been wary of federal actions they think may promote or defend homosexual behavior.

Many cities and states, including Los Angeles and New York, have responded to alleged discrimination against AIDS sufferers by approving ordinances of their own. The laws usually apply not only to those with the disease, but to those “perceived” to have or be at risk from the disease, such as homosexual men or lovers and family members of AIDS patients.