Quote Originally Posted by rdynow View Post
I agree with Dean why hasn't this been started a long time ago? If a studio bareback or otherwise claim they care so much about their models waiting for the results shouldn't matter.

I wonder if this is to try to head off mandatory condom useage, or has someone talked to their lawyer or insurance carrier and found out about the studios liability?
Sorry I haven't been on the board for a few days but had to make a fast trip to the midwest and just got back.

I can't speak for other studios but HDK did not decide to start testing due to an attempt to head off mandatory condom usage. To the best of my knowledge no one is talking about mandatory condom usage and if they were, I believe it would be directed more at the straight industry since they are much larger and most do not require or allow condoms in their films.

As for advice from lawyers, nope not that either. Actually, the model release we've been using since we started in business 10 years ago was created by one of our attorneys and pretty thoroughly covered the liability issues surrounding not using condoms.

In regards to insurance carriers, that brings up an interesting question, or perhaps many questions. To the best of my knowledge most adult studios consider their models to be independent contractors. As such, they do not cover their models under workers compensation insurance. Only their acutal W-2 employees are covered.

In California this is a big mistake. The EED has, in many rulings and appeals, determined that models are in fact employees. As such, they would need to be covered by workers compensation. Again, to the best of my knowledge, most studios in California, both gay and straight, still pay their models as independent contractors. I think it would be very difficult to even obtain workers compensation for models without having to go to the state pool to obtain it and, of course, it would be very costly.

Chip, why are you "amazed" that many of your models don't know much about "HIV risks, prevention, transmission, latency, etc. by their health teachers at school?" If they went to a public school, which is funded by state and federal funds, the health teachers are NOT permitted to discuss anything pertaining to sex education except abstinence. I have referred to this many times in many different threads. Thanks to the influence of the religious fundamentalist, or religious right or whatever you want to call them, the current administration refuses to allow public schools to teach anything except abstinence. If they do, they lost their public funding.

Unfortunately, those of us who live in the USA, live in one of the most sexually repressed nations in the world. Remember about 10 years ago when former Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders mentioned that she recommended that condom usage be taught in high school? The uproar was so great she was forced to resign.

Kushiel, AIM uses LabCorp for testing purposes. LabCorp has approximately 3,000 locations all across the US. It is our intention to have the model test at a location near where he lives and then come to the shooting location. As for locking them up, you are right, their is nothing we can do to prevent the model from testing and then having unsafe sex and then shooting for us. That is risk that we have to take. But, by testing, at least we minimize the risk. That's really about the best we can do. Fortunately, the turn around times for the test results are very quick.

James, we prefer to do our own testing and get the results directly as opposed to having a model provide us with a test which is less than 30 days old. Many reasons for this. It minimizes any chance the test result may be fake, plus we are testing for a number of STD's that most models would not pay to have done because of the expense. For a model walking off the street into a doctors office and being referred to the battery of tests we are testing for, the cost would average between $400 to $600 for the doctor visit plus testing. Most models cannot afford that type of expense. AIM, due to the economies of scale, can have the testing done much cheaper.

Also James, you asked about production costs and what a model gets paid. The pay for a model ranges all over the board based on many factors. How many times has he filmed? Is he well known? What will he be doing in the film? How many scenes, etc., etc. Most studios don't want to share what they pay models but I can tell you that at what most models are paid, they absolutely cannot afford to spend out of their own pocket between $400 to $600 for a doctors visit plus testing. And, you are absolutely correct, asking a model to do that places way to much burden on the model. And, as Chip pointed out, many models have never been tested. Chip refers to "twinks" but I can tell you it is also true for models in the 30's and 40's as well. I have always found that to be amazing, but it's true.

Alex, if you test a model that is only going to be in a photo shoot by himself, God bless you I suppose, but I really don't understand the rationale behind it.

Bill