The Counterargument:
You decided not to implement quarantine. Before you make this choice, it is worth considering the vital role that quarantine can play in defending the public's health.
What about the greater good?
Just as the arguments against quarantine emphasize individual rights, arguments for quarantine also derive from a particular, though different, philosophical viewpoint. The theoretical rationale for quarantine emerges out of the utilitarian concept that members of a society do not have the right to impose significant health risks on others. Joseph Barbera, George Washington University professor of emergency medicine, writes:
The moral authority for human quarantine is historically based on the concept of the public health contract. Under the public health contract, individuals agree to forgo certain rights and liberties, if necessary, to prevent a significant risk to other persons. Civil rights and liberties are subject to limitation because each person gains the benefits of living in a healthier and safer society.
The United States Supreme Court has supported this premise, upholding a mandatory vaccination law in Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905). In his opinion on the case, Justice Harlan writes, "There are manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good. On any other basis organized society could not exist with safety to its members." Sometimes it may be necessary to place the good of the public over individual civil liberties.
Importance of Communication
In an epidemic, panic can spread quickly. Regardless of whether you choose to implement quarantine, you must ensure that the lines of communication between authorities and the public remain open. Clear and credible information is essential to disseminating instructions and controlling panic. When China curtailed reporting on the spread of SARS, it denied vital information both to its own citizens and to other countries, facilitating the spread of the disease and leaving neighboring territories unprepared.
The bottom line is that quarantine can and does save lives. In an epidemic, quarantine may be the only tool to halt the indiscriminate spread of devastating disease.
Although quarantine has been misused, in some instances it may be that the long-term benefit to the public health renders the short-term infringement on civil liberties worthwhile.
Read on for concluding remarks and to view how the panelists handled this issue.>>
