12 | HIV Australia, Volume 14, No. 1 Despite three decades of education and awareness-raising, misconceptions persist about the risk posed by people living with blood borne viruses (BBVs) in occupational settings. ese misconceptions most often surface in health care, sporting and emergency services environments, often in response to genuine and well-intentioned concerns for ensuring a safe work environment. In early 2015, Living Positive Victoria (LPV) was approached for advice on a draft Victoria Police (VicPol) policy that would have had the efect of restricting people with HIV, hepatitis B or hepatitis C infection from serving as sworn police oicers in Victoria. is article describes the successful policy intervention the organisation was able to undertake, which resulted in the draft policy being dropped from consideration. LPV was contacted by a member of the VicPol policy review group, who provided us with a draft Victoria Police Manual document entitled ‘Recruitment and Management of Employees with Blood Borne Transferable Diseases’. e document set out proposed procedures to be employed where a prospective VicPol recruit or serving member was diagnosed with a BBV. e policy would have required recruits and serving police to: mandatorily disclose any diagnosis with a BBV; undergo ‘ongoing medical risk assessments’ by the police medical oicer, including compulsory blood testing; and, where the medical oicer so advised, potentially be refused employment (in the case of prospective recruits) or be placed on ‘restricted non operational or alternative duties’ (in the case of serving members). e policy was contextualised in terms of meeting VicPol’s obligations to provide a safe working environment for its employees and minimising any risk to members of the public. It acknowledged the responsibility of VicPol to provide ‘an equitable, diverse and fair workplace’ as well as its obligation to comply with anti-discrimination laws. ese are laudable aims; however it was immediately apparent the proposed policy overstepped what would be reasonable or appropriate measures to achieve them. Occupational transmission of BBVs Police work is by its nature high-risk compared to many other professions, and serving police face signiicant occupational health and safety risks as part of their role, including possible assault, homicide, and mental health conditions arising out of stress, fatigue and trauma, as well as exposure to communicable diseases. 1 e risk of occupational transmission of BBVs in police settings has not been conclusively quantiied, but transmission via this route is exceedingly rare. More data are available relating to the risk of transmission in healthcare-related settings, which conirm the low level of risk for occupational exposure generally. 2,3 Numerous procedures and guidelines for minimisation of risk of occupational exposure exist, ranging from the use of protective barriers such as gloves and face masks to the implementation of post-exposure protocols including post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) in the case of possible HIV exposure. Overseas studies have shown strong evidence for the eicacy of PEP when used by police following blood exposure, but it is rarely used in this context due to the low level of risk of occupational exposure. 4,5 e draft policy included a requirement that all VicPol members who have been diagnosed with a BBV disclose this to their manager; it proposed to institute Watching the Detectives: a successful policy intervention in Victoria By Paul Kidd