We were given an appeal to read of the Supreme Court of South Carolina. KIRK versus WYMAN et al., board of Health from August 19, 1909. The appeal dealt with isolation of an individual, Mary V. Kirk, who was isolated due to her found leprosy.
The CDC defines the difference between quarantine and isolation as follows. “quarantine applies to those who have been exposed to a contagious disease but who may or may not become ill.
isolation applies to persons who are known to be ill with a contagious disease.” 1 Interpreting this definition of quarantine and isolation, from a public health standpoint I would define quarantine as a precautionary measure to protect the public from potential harm and isolation as a more of a secondary measure because the disease has definitely already set in.
I believe that is up to public health officials in the medical field to decide whether or not an individual needs to be quarantined. In that way they would have interest of the health of the surrounding population weighing heavily upon their decision and with medical knowledge they would have the capability to discern what diseases and afflictions warrant quarantine and to what extent. I do not believe that the judiciary system should play a major role in these decisions because the health matters concerning a population overrides what an infected or potentially infectious individual believes their rights should be in terms of avoiding quarantine.
Since democracy is the employed method of government I believe that the government should have the power to balance the right of the individual versus the community but those decisions should be influenced by proposal by officials and leaders and different areas, like the medical and public health branches for examples. As a population we elect government officials because we expect them to make the correct decisions for the benefit of our societies, because of this we should trust their judgement of how to balance individual rights with communal rights.
In my personal opinion it is definitely more important to make decisions to protect the rights and health of a community as opposed to solely protecting the rights and health of an individual. To state it in a simplistic manner, there are more individuals in a community than in one individual, therefore the precedence lays in the security of a population. In the case of Mary V. Kirk, if her individual wants were treated with more importance than the needs of her community then a potential outbreak could have erupted in the community. Though it is unfortunate to be forced to disregard the wants of an individual it is the government's first and foremost responsibility and obligation to protect the entire community.
Sources:
1. "Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - Controlling the Spread of Contagious Diseases ." Controlling the Spread of Contagious Diseases: Quarantine and Isolation. 02/23/2006. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Web. 26 Feb 2010.
Excellent synopsis and argument. Good definitions and interesting rationale. Nice work.
ReplyDelete