Refusal to perform surgery due to HIV infection is discrimination
□ The National Human Rights Commission of Korea (hereinafter referred to as ‘NHRCK’) recommended that the medical professionals and staff of the respondent institutions (A and B) receive job training on treating patients with HIV and that measures be taken to prevent similar cases from recurring in the future, in response to two complaints of refusal to perform surgery due to HIV infection.
□ In July 2024, the complainant was scheduled to undergo surgery for cervical and thoracic stenosis at the respondent institution (A), but the surgery was refused on the grounds of HIV infection. The respondent institution (A) claimed that the complainant's condition did not require surgery and that, considering the patient’s safety, they recommended treatment at another hospital because they did not have medical staff specializing in HIV.
□ However, the NHRCK Discrimination Remediation Committee (Subcommittee Chair: Nam Kyu-sun) confirmed that the medical records contained information about the surgery and that the medical staff had consulted with the complainant in advance about the surgical method and schedule before booking the surgery. On the other hand, no objective evidence was found to support the medical judgment or discussion that the surgery was unnecessary. Therefore, the NHRCK determined that the refusal of surgery by the respondent institution (A) was discriminatory on the grounds of HIV infection.
□ In particular, according to the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency’s ‘2024 HIV/AIDS Management Guidelines,’ it is sufficient to apply the same standard guidelines as for general patients when treating or performing surgery on people with HIV infection, and no separate equipment or facilities are required.
□ Accordingly, the NHRCK found that the action of the respondent institution (A) in refusing surgery on the grounds that it did not have personnel specializing in HIV was discriminatory without reasonable grounds, and on 21 April 2025, recommended that the head of the respondent institution (A) provide job training and establish measures to prevent recurrence.
□ Previously, the NHRCK made the same ruling against respondent institution (B), which refused to perform surgery on a patient who had booked an appointment for septoplasty after learning that the patient was HIV-positive, and on 3 February 2025, issued a recommendation with the same content to the head of respondent institution (B).
□ In both cases, the NHRCK determined that the medical institutions’ unjustified restriction of medical services on the grounds of HIV infection constituted discrimination based on medical history, which is prohibited by Article 2(3) of the National Human Rights Commission of Korea Act.
□ The NHRCK expressed its opinion that this decision should serve as an opportunity to raise awareness of similar cases in the future and to enhance human rights sensitivity in the medical field. Given that there have been repeated complaints of unjustified refusal of medical treatment for people with HIV, the NHRCK plans to continue its efforts to eliminate discrimination based on medical history.
