The territorial Justice department's newest piece of draft legislation is "ripe for constitutional challenge," says the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

The Mandatory Testing and Disclosure Act was released for public comment on Tuesday.

Commonly known as the Good Samaritan Act, it would give police and other emergency personnel the power to demand a blood test from anyone whose "bodily substance" they have come in contact with.

That power is also extended to victims of crime and anyone who gives emergency first aid.

"I think it's a really good news story," RCMP spokesman Sgt. Mark Groves said today.

"It just gives us the peace of mind that we can go home without wondering, 'Am I infected?' when you kiss your kids at night."

Similar acts have already been passed in Ontario, Alberta, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, and are supported by police, fire and ambulance services around the country.

But the reaction has been very different from civil liberties and HIV/AIDS advocacy groups.

"This is an unnecessary intrusion on rights and it serves no purpose," Micheal Vonn, policy director at the B.C. Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA), said in an interview today.

"There is no compelling evidence we have to force testing," she said, because the vast majority of people give blood samples voluntarily.

Furthermore, there have been no documented cases of emergency personnel contracting a blood-borne illness from someone they are assisting as of 2007.

Chief medical officer Brendan Hanley agreed that all but a tiny minority of people are willingly tested when requested, but defended the act as "giving peace of mind" to emergency personnel.

"I think anything that supports the work of emergency responders is a good thing," he said today.

Vonn said even if a person were possibly infected in the line of duty, he or she would have to take preventative measures immediately. Getting a positive or negative test result a few days or weeks after the fact wouldn't be any help.

Vonn is correct about the immediacy of the medical attention, Hanley said. However, the test results help doctors to decide on what continuing medical care their patients might need, he said, whether it be staying on an anti-HIV drug regime or knowing they can stop.

But the price is too high for this peace of mind, according to many, including the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, the BCCLA and Whitehorse's Blood Ties Four Directions.

"It's very troubling," Blood Ties director Patricia Bacon said today. She echoed Vonn's concern that acts like this one only serve to perpetuate myths about how HIV can be passed on.

"It further stigmatizes people living with AIDS," Vonn said. "What constitutes risk is usually highly exaggerated."

Hanley said that even the riskiest scenarios, like being pricked with a needle previously used by someone who has a blood-borne illness, are unlikely to result in infection.

"It's about a one-in-300 chance you'll actually contract the illness," he said. "Usually the chances are in the thousands."

Bacon said she is reviewing the act and will be commenting on it during the public consultation period, which goes until Feb. 6, 2009.

The act will likely be tabled in the legislature's spring session.

The motion to draft the act was unanimously accepted by Yukon's MLAs when it was first put forward in November 2005.

"Emergency workers and enforcement officers put their health on the line every time they respond to a call," Justice Minister Marian C. Horne said in a statement.

"This act would ensure their peace of mind if and when they come into contact with bodily fluids in the line of duty. It also gives victims of crime access to important information about their health."

A draft of the act is available on the Department of Justice website.