- Joined
- Dec 15, 2012
- Messages
- 19,717
- Reaction score
- 12,265
- Location
- Lawn Guyland
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
Re: New York doctor cleared of Ebola, which means there are no known Ebola cases in t
Given that quarantine is a restriction of one's liberties without due process it is as much a legal question as a medical one. The Federal government and the states certainly have the legal authority to quarantine people but that doesn't mean that power can go unchallenged. It was completely appropriate for Hickox to challenge the order if she felt it wrong. I'd further point out that generally speaking Federal law here trumps state law here so the CDC saying that the quarantine isn't medically necessary is legally significant.
I don't know anything about the issue from a medical standpoint and I don't know what protocols the CDC uses and under what circumstances they're used. If they say they weren't needed, and I have to assume that the CDC is run by rational people who really don't want to see an ebola outbreak here, then for the time being that's good enough for me. If you can point me to evidence to the opposite I'd be more than happy to read it.
Yes, by studying the infectious control protocols developed by the CDC itself. I don't know why the CDC makes such protocols if they're going to abandon them in the face of politics but they have become a political org over the years I've subscribed to JAMA. Don't know why we would trust a trial judge to judge medical necessity in the first place. In this case the state medical board should have made the determination. Which btw they did when they quarantined her.
Given that quarantine is a restriction of one's liberties without due process it is as much a legal question as a medical one. The Federal government and the states certainly have the legal authority to quarantine people but that doesn't mean that power can go unchallenged. It was completely appropriate for Hickox to challenge the order if she felt it wrong. I'd further point out that generally speaking Federal law here trumps state law here so the CDC saying that the quarantine isn't medically necessary is legally significant.
I don't know anything about the issue from a medical standpoint and I don't know what protocols the CDC uses and under what circumstances they're used. If they say they weren't needed, and I have to assume that the CDC is run by rational people who really don't want to see an ebola outbreak here, then for the time being that's good enough for me. If you can point me to evidence to the opposite I'd be more than happy to read it.