David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 6 (2):197-205 (2009)
One of the ways in which public health officials control outbreaks of epidemic disease is by attempting to control the situations in which the infectious agent can spread. This may include isolation of infected persons, quarantine of persons who may be infected and detention of persons who are present in or have entered premises where infected persons are being treated. Most who have analysed such measures think that the restrictions in liberty they entail and the detriments in welfare they impose can be justified and this paper proceeds from the assumption that detention measures are justifiable in some circumstances. Such measures are often implemented without any compensation being given to the persons who are detained. This raises the question: What do we owe to those whose liberty is justifiably restricted (e.g. through isolation, quarantine or detention) as a public health measure during a public health emergency? More specifically, do we owe them compensation for any losses they experience? The paper falls in four main sections. The first section provides examples of the current regulatory state of affairs from the US, Canada and WHO. The second section lays out the liberal, welfarist and pragmatic arguments for providing compensation. The third section discusses the arguments against compensation and the fourth and final section provides the conclusion. It is argued that the arguments for providing compensation clearly outweigh the counterarguments and that the default public policy therefore should be that compensation is provided.
|Keywords||Compensation Isolation Justice Public health Quarantine|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Lawrence C. Becker (1986). Reciprocity. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Nicola Lacey, John Braithwaite & Philip Pettit (1991). Not Just Deserts: A Republican Theory of Criminal Justice. Philosophical Quarterly 41 (164):374.
Bjørn Hofmann, Jan Helge Solbakk & Søren Holm (2006). Analogical Reasoning in Handling Emerging Technologies: The Case of Umbilical Cord Blood Biobanking. American Journal of Bioethics 6 (6):49 – 57.
Søren Holm (2008). Parental Responsibility and Obesity in Children. Public Health Ethics 1 (1):21-29.
Richard Coker, Marianna Thomas, Karen Lock & Robyn Martin (2007). Detention and the Evolving Threat of Tuberculosis: Evidence, Ethics, and Law. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 35 (4):609-615.
Citations of this work BETA
Diego S. Silva, Angus Dawson & Ross E. G. Upshur (forthcoming). Reciprocity and Ethical Tuberculosis Treatment and Control. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry:1-12.
Michael Selgelid (2009). Promoting Justice, Trust, Compliance, and Health: The Case for Compensation. American Journal of Bioethics 9 (11):22-24.
Joint Centre for Bioethics Pandemic (2009). Public Engagement on Social Distancing in a Pandemic: A Canadian Perspective. American Journal of Bioethics 9 (11):15-17.
Similar books and articles
Stephen Holland (2009). Public Health Paternalism—a Response to Nys. Public Health Ethics 2 (3):285-293.
Stephen John (2009). Why 'Health' is Not a Central Category for Public Health Policy. Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (2):129-143.
Jonny Anomaly (2011). Public Health and Public Goods. Public Health Ethics 4 (3):251-259.
Rita Manning (2011). Punishing the Innocent: Children of Incarcerated and Detained Parents. Criminal Justice Ethics 30 (3):267-287.
Jeffrey Moriarty (2011). Does Distributive Justice Pay? Sternberg's Compensation Ethics. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (1):33-48.
Matthew K. Wynia (2007). Ethics and Public Health Emergencies: Restrictions on Liberty. American Journal of Bioethics 7 (2):1 – 5.
John Dobson (2011). A Moral and Economic Defense of Executive Compensation. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 30 (1-2):59-70.
A. M. Viens (2011). Reciprocity and Neuroscience in Public Health Law. In Michael Freeman (ed.), Law and Neuroscience. Oxford University Press
D. S. Silva (2011). Smoking Bans and Persons with Schizophrenia: A Straightforward Use of the Harm Principle? Public Health Ethics 4 (2):143-148.
Added to index2009-05-30
Total downloads27 ( #140,794 of 1,792,270 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #139,170 of 1,792,270 )
How can I increase my downloads?