Ph 715 Assignment 3

In ethics, the balance between the safety of the people and the respect for an individual's rights can oftentimes be imbalanced. Government intervention in epidemics continues to be highly debatable as it has lead to decisions that tend to favor one side over the other. "Typhoid Mary", a healthy carrier of the typhoid fever, is an excellent example of government intervention that resulted in the obvious favor of collective security. In the field of Public Health and Ethics, Collective Security refers to the safety of the public whereas Individual Liberty refers to the inherent rights and freedoms of an individual. By analyzing the public health measures set in place prior to the outbreak and the disease's immediate biological impact, it is

Case Scenario 1: It has become necessary to ration a vaccine for a contagious disease. There is only enough vaccine available to cover 75% of the U.S. population. It is necessary to determine an appropriate method for doing this. Analyze this case by applying each of the theories of Utilitarianism, Rights-based, Justice-based and Virtue-based ethics as discussed in Module 2. (20 points)

In the medical thriller, The Hot Zone, Preston states that flawed decisions in outbreak situations are a threat to human survival. Ebola is known by many to be lethal and in recent years, has caused an interest within the public. Many in the United States have shown fear towards the threat of Ebola in the country, which has caused many to also research the effects of Ebola on the human body. Moreover, Ebola poses a threat to the safety of medical professionals; doctors must be able to safely help patients without high risk of exposure to the hot virus. Of equal importance, medical professionals involved with the treatment of hot viruses must be trained properly in order to effectively make decisions and protect all patients and

This Points of View article was written by Eric Badertscher and Rosalyn Carson-Dewitt, a medical doctor and scientific writer, and published in 2016 for Points of View: Smallpox Vaccinations, a section of the Points of View Reference Center. The purpose of this text is to convince the audience consisting of U.S. parents and health legislators that smallpox vaccines should be mandatory due to the threat of biological warfare, but that exceptions should be made for certain groups. Carson-DeWitt is credible because she is a medical doctor and has much experience with medical writing; she was editor-in-chief for two publications. This article was published in 2016 making its argument more relevant to modern-day issues such as bioterrorism and need for vaccines. Also, the accessibility of the publication venue allows for anyone to understand the need for vaccines; readers do not need much prior knowledge because the article itself contains a small background on the issue.

Scholars a the Harvard School of Public health developed a Public Health- Human Rights Impact Assessment Instrument to evaluate possible human right violations that occur when governments take action in the name of public health that limit individual right. They argue that such actions must be takes as a last resort and must only occur when they meet follow specific, stringent human rights conditions. Now, if we apply these eight core human right principles as they apply to the mandatory vaccination policies in the United States, there are major problems. With the first rule since mandatory vaccination represents a restriction of a right the UN charter would require a thick review of any public health policy. The second rule questions whether the current measures by the government are excessive. The third

“Quarantine is the controlling of the important or export of animals, plants, and other products for the purpose of controlling the spread of disease.”

However, we must understand that only one disease - smallpox – has been completely erased from this planet. “From around the world in 2011 there was around 350,000 cases of measles, with outbreaks in the Pacific, Asia, Africa, and Europe." With this ever-growing sense of safety, small groups of anti-vaccine have begun to sprout and even our very own president has refused vaccines. Even though it may seem as though we are safe from the vaccine-preventable diseases, if we become too vulnerable due to no vaccinations there is a chance that a case that will start an outbreak of some disease that is now under control is just a plane ride

Mill was actually an advocate for autonomy—thus being consistent with the argument of this paper—but his views had an important stipulation: the patient must not be causing harm to others in carrying out their wishes (Alzheimer Europe, 2009). He also stated that it was not unethical to interfere in a decision that was made without knowing all of the facts (Alzheimer Europe, 2009). An example of Mill’s Principle in action is forcefully containing a person with a contagious and deadly disease (Pecorino, 2002). This action would prevent others from contracting the illness but would severely restrict the freedom of the patient. This is reminiscent of the recent forced quarantines of those who were in close contact with Ebola patients during the recent outbreak of the disease. The quarantines were in effect because the people in question may have contracted the disease and may be in the incubation period (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2014). Under Mill’s Harm Principle, a forced quarantine on these people would be the right thing to do, as it would restrict the quarantined person’s autonomy but ultimately reduce the risk of them causing harm to others by passing on the disease. However, these forced quarantines were met with a great deal of speculation and backlash, including by the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and an American judge who presided in the case of an

“Weee Woo, Weee Woo, Weee Woo,” is the sound outside as an ambulance arrives to take away your coughing daughter. The ambulance, as well as you and your wife or husband, head to the hospital where you see your daughter being taken to the E.R. Your daughter looks extremely fatigued. She keeps coughing and scratching as a red rash over takes her back and arm. Doctors are wearing protective gear trying to lessen the girl’s symptoms, while you and your wife or husband are placed into quarantine. You cry your eyes out and ask, “Why did it have to happen to her?!” Well, this entire situation could have been entirely avoided. Although, it may seem a bit dramatic, this is very real, and a similar situation happened early February in 2014 when a UC Berkeley student was infected with measles due to his parents denying doctors to vaccinate him as a child. This incident caused panic as possibly thousands were possibly exposed to the virus, but most likely they would be safe, except for the student of course due to him now having to deal with an

On one hand, “the state has a duty to treat each and all of its citizens impartially,” allowing the government a level of power maintenance via respect from those it serves (Wardrope 2012). On the other hand, this complete impartiality may not be the most effective solution. Wardrope explains this argument by presenting a model that consists of two groups, group A and group B, with a handful of vaccines able to be awarded to only half of the combined population. Supposing group A lives could only be exposed to the disease via group B, it makes little sense to randomly distribute a limited supply of vaccines among both groups. With this information, the most logical solution would be to vaccinate the entirety of group B, which would consequently also protect group A (Wardrope 2010). As a result, the concept of “equal lottery for vaccine distribution entails an unequal lottery for state financial expenditure on vaccination” (Wardrope 2012). The morality of the lottery system for vaccine distribution is blurry, for the government treats its citizens, save the scientists and authorities imperative to the survival of the nation, with genuine impartiality, which appears just. However, as Wardrope would argue, this may not be truly the most ethical decision in that it is inefficient, and may conversely hurt those it aims to protect in attempt at being just.

Brazil has seen a recent rise in cases with the Zika Virus which has caused much concern (Centers for Disease Control, [CDC], 2016a). This essay will discuss the role of the Brazilian Government and two obligations associated with this role in the recent crisis of the Zika Virus. The first obligation for the government is to loosen its laws surrounding abortion. The second obligation is the duty to require all citizens who have been exposed to the virus, to quarantine themselves. Having set out these obligations, this essay will discuss the parameters of John Mill’s ethical theory of the Harm Principle to justify why such obligations are required of Brazil’s government and whether exercising them is harmful.

This paper is outlined in strategic order of the occurrences, which identify three different situations related to health.

The important concept in the constitutional basis for public health action is protect the community and rebalance that against the need of individual rights. States take responsibility and authority to provide public health and public safety: inspection and regulation of commercial and residential facilities; restaurant, hotel, motel, or swimming pool inspection; regulating drinking water. They do so through the Tenth

In this argument it states that the people in the area where the disease is detected and the that area includes a big part it's not possible by the authority to keep them constantly under observations. Vaccination is a part which comes under the part how much people knows about it and understands the importance of it.Government or any administration authority can provide just facilities to get them vaccinated , but it's up to the civilization that how much to take it seriously.

Paternalistic policies can be effective in preventing injuries and deaths in the population (Gostin, 2008). Paternalism exists throughout Contagion. In order to keep the masses safe from contracting the MEV-1 virus, public health agencies initiated safety guidelines for the general public to follow. From a public health aspect, individual interests must yield to those of the wider community to facilitate the public’s health, safety, and well-being. The public health tradition values prevention and views its successes or failures based on the benefits and burdens that accrue to populations rather than to individuals. This