egafd.com

Hi all
It will be a shame if this thread ends in health and safety laws because there is so many good and interesting points here.
I am only on the fringe of this industry as a photogrpher.
But the points raised should not be ignored and should be taken seriously.
Tequila and Faye have some realy good observations here as well as the guys.
Tony

BigAl I aint posted on here in ages but having read your words of wisdom I had to dust of me old keyboard and give the old qwerty a bash. In the eyes of the No Win No Fee companies all things are fair game untill the highest of mighty court boffins rule it out but even then they'll have a go. Employment Law and H&S even applies to us in the Adult Industry and as you say how many producing porn have insurance but then again how many actually pay tax!
The best I can do is my level best and make sure I take the correct documention and record it during and on the shoot making it hard for any judge to give me a whopper of a fine for not using the old noggin.

I will finish by teaching my old gran to chew on eggs and point out that every cert has the clinics address and number at the top and in the bottom right hand corner there is a 6 digit BMA file ref. A simple call can then get the needed answer.

BillBXD

Oh by the way the Adult Industry in the UK is pretty big it's just most opperators keep shtumpum to keep their little empire's cushty........... so black listing models as did the Witch Finder General is a little Blip Bang Wing.

If i can have my say in all of this there are a number of factors which may have been overlooked by all

1/ Having 30 day certificates was never intended to get rid of all std/hiv risks, it was there to minimise them.

2/ STD's can vary from males/females with the incubation period being different. Thus naming persons previously worked with will not solve the issue in any way. I say this because if updated certificates were obtained a week back the incubation period may not have arisen after a scene done a few days beforehand. If an actor/actresses is doing several scenes per week they may have picked something up without their knowing which gets passed on innocently. Is it therefore fair to name and shame these people unless they knew not all was right with themselves and continued to perform.

see this website

3/ Volenti non fit injuria is nonsense, the acceptable standards would be judged by how the rest of the industry conducts themselves, thus if it can be shown performers were using fake certificates or none at all it would be very easy to prove negligence on their part irrespective of any performer consenting to act with another person. The tort of negligence is judged by that of the "reasonable man"

4/ Perhaps the way forward is for a producer/agent booking a performer is to insist they arrive at the shoot with genuine certificates only and maybe from only certain outlets, i.e NHS or private outlets, Medicare, Medilab, Bupa, Nuffield etc etc.

This will still not solve the problem and there will always be a risk however small/large of someone picking something up.

Some of the problems arising from the USA outbreak was the producers blaming the actors for not getting together and insisiting on changes and the actors blaming the producers for not policing enough. Perhaps a compromise can be reached to please all.

Bill - that strikes me as a very responsible attitude - "reasonable precautions" in fact!

But as you say, in these days of no win/no fee I guess we'll never really know unless the unthinkable happens.

I'm not having a go at the industry, which I'm sure operates almost without exception in a responsible manner...and provides the likes of myself with a lot of pleasure!!

I have to AGREE...

I honestly cannot see the HSE getting involved in this industry - I just can't see it happening - I genuinely think the authorities would rather pretend there isn't an adult industry in this country- but IF - and, ok, it's a BIG "IF" - but "if" a performer wanted to go down "that road" then I truly believe they WOULD have a case and a bloody good one if what we're seeing here is true - i.e. a lot of people KNOW that a LOT OF PEOPLE are NOT adhering to the "safeguards" yet producers are still prepared to give them a shoot...

By luck or by judgement - the UK industry has escaped the "worst case scenario" - but come on... just like the HIV breakout in the US was a wake-up call - this is another one...

The LOG BOOK proposal by Jim/Lara is sound and good practice.. it's not ideal and it is fraught with problems... but it's a "reasonable " safeguard... Performers - START doing it off your own backs - PRODUCERS - start asking perofrmers to show you their "work history since there last test" - or better still - going back 3 months... KEEP RECORDS....

H&S is all about covering your backs, taking "reasonable" precautions... Yes - as someone said - it would be sad if this thread became a H&S issue - H&S isn't the point here... but it is an important legal factor and worth considering alongisde the more genral issue of personal responsibility to yourself and others...

Think of it NOT as H&S - think of it as "looking after yourself" - whether it's gonna culminate in litigation or not - emulating a system like they have in the US through AIM is worth doing - whether it be informal and voluntary in the short term or COMPULSORY and FORMAL in the longer term....

Any further additions will be removed.

Saira, Your own Blacklist is a good idea. The problem is that you can end up working with models who have worked with Blacklisted models and though reduced you still have a risk of infection. Wish I could offer a viable solution but the only one I can think of is condoms.
Turning to earlier comments about parties I know one girl who has/is doing them she has done about 4 a year for the last five years and never caught anything, her argument is the guys tend to be married and that is her g'tee. Perhaps not the wisest way forward .
Talking to others it seems one gorl has tried to work with Gonerea and has also advertised for amateur shoots , but with the proffessionals sticking together work wise it again raises the question 'How does it get in to the industry'

i.e. performer X has performer Y "blacklisted", yet performer Z worked with performer Y a week or two back... If performer X then works with performer Z it's no better than if they'd worked with performer Y themselves...

True enough...

Which is where a log book would come into it's own! If performer X looks at performer Z's logbook and see's the name of performer Y - performer X would have to decide whether or not they felt comfortable working with performer Z!

I hope that isn't too hard to follow - lots of X, Y and Z int here - but that theory is one of the benefits of a log book system - i.e. seeing which individuals you are being "exposed to" by prior assosciation...

Why are we not tested for herpes and hepatitis as standard?