U.S. Constitution
See other U.S. Constitution Articles
Title: CDC Seeks Controversial New Quarantine Powers (72 hrs without approval)
Source:
NPR
URL Source: http://www.npr.org/sections/health- ... ntine-powers-to-stop-outbreaks
Published: Feb 2, 2017
Author: Rob Stein
Post Date: 2017-02-02 15:41:58 by Hondo68
Keywords: greatly enhanced powers, new r, fever, headache, cramps, definition of ill, wider swath
Views: 3665
Comments: 11
CDC Seeks Controversial New Quarantine Powers To Stop Outbreaks Under the old rules, the CDC's authority was primarily limited to detaining travelers entering the U.S. or crossing state lines. With the new rules, the CDC would be able to detain people anywhere in the country, without getting approval from state and local officials. Federal health officials may be about to get greatly enhanced powers to quarantine people, as part of an ongoing effort to stop outbreaks of dangerous contagious diseases. The new powers are outlined in a set of regulations the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published late last month to update the agency's quarantine authority for the first time since the 1940s. The outlined changes are being welcomed by many health lawyers, bioethicists and public health specialists as providing important tools for protecting the public. But the CDC's increased authority is also raising fears that the rules could be misused in ways that violate civil liberties. The update was finalized at the end of the Obama administration and was scheduled to go into effect Feb. 21. But the Trump administration is reviewing the changes as part of its review of new regulations. So the soonest the changes could go into effect has been pushed to the end of March. Under the old rules, the CDC's authority was primarily limited to detaining people entering the country or crossing state lines. The agency was also limited to quarantining people who had one of about a dozen diseases, including cholera, diphtheria, tuberculosis, plague, smallpox and yellow fever. Yet even then, the CDC rarely exercised these powers and generally deferred to state and local health officials. With the new rules, the CDC would be able to detain people anywhere in the country without getting approval from state and local officials. The agency could also apprehend people to assess their health if they are exhibiting medical problems such as a high fever, headache, cramps and other symptoms that could be indicative of a dangerous infectious disease. "Because of the breadth and scope of the definition of ill persons, CDC can target a much wider swath of persons to assess and screen," says James Hodge Jr., a professor of public health law and ethics at the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law at Arizona State University. Hodge says the new rules are "really necessary," given the potential threat that infectious diseases pose. Some others who have studied the issue agree. "The CDC has been operating its infectious disease powers under really antiquated regulations," says Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University. But other attorneys say they fear the new rules give the CDC too much power — with insufficient safeguards to protect an individual's rights. "It could represent a great danger to Americans' health and civil liberties," says Wendy Parmet, a health policy lawyer at Northeastern University. For example, she says, the rules would allow the CDC to hold someone in quarantine for 72 hours before their case is subject to review. And that review would be conducted by the CDC itself instead of an outside, objective entity. "The concern," Parmet says, "is that unless these regulations are carried out with care, and by people who [base their actions] on science, they can be used to trammel the civil liberties of Americans." Parmet is especially concerned that the CDC's enhanced powers would take effect just as the Trump administration is assuming control over the agency. "A lot of the signals we've received from President Trump suggests he may be inclined to not always listen to the science," Parmet says, "and to ground policy in what I guess we're now calling 'alternative facts,' instead of scientific facts. That's scary." When contacted by NPR, officials at the federal Department of Health and Human Services would only confirm that the new rules are under review; they declined further comment. NPR also contacted the CDC, but the agency has not made anyone available to discuss the new quarantine powers. Poster Comment: Quarantine if you look bad, pale? Officers discretion. 
Mark Wilson/Getty Images
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 8.
#4. To: hondo68 (#0)
People should be required to be quarantined for 10 days before they can enter the US. WHY NOT? If it saves one child, it doesn't matter the cost.
People should be required to be quarantined for 10 days before they can enter the US Perhaps arrivals from some place where there's a nasty epidemic, but it should be a very rare thing. Someone going to Canada to shop probably doesn't need a quarantine coming back to the US.
It was a sarcastic reply based upon the words of the liberals. On the other hand, foreigners do not deserve the same rights as Americans especially when they are in a foreign land wanting to come here.
Stone, please give this poster a non libtard cigar for posting the most fitting sentence this week.
There are no replies to Comment # 8. End Trace Mode for Comment # 8.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#5. To: jeremiad (#4)
WHY NOT?
#7. To: hondo68 (#5)
#8. To: jeremiad, A K A Stone (#7)
foreigners do not deserve the same rights as Americans
Replies to Comment # 8.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]