Fear and a type of madness have taken over the news media, the blogosphere and politicians over the subject of Ebola. Science and medicine are being ignored. The most ridiculous statements about the disease are being made. If the HIV scare of the 1980’s was bad, the scare nowadays is terrifying. Already we have had one teacher placed on leave merely for having flown to the city of Dallas. Entire buildings have been evacuated based merely on a person being near a person who developed Ebola, even though that person did not have any contact with the infected.
Even worse, down in Dallas, people cleared of Ebola are unable to get an apartment out of the sheer fear that the medical community might possibly be totally wrong about the disease, see http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Ebola-Patients-Fiance-Unable-to-Find-New-Home-280127682.html. They are forced to live in a church camp because no one will rent to them.
Fortunately, a heroic nurse with gumption has for a second time become a hero. She defied the illegal and unsubstantiated government orders for her quarantine. How do I know the orders were illegal? Because a judge said so, see the video above. The judge has clearly stated that the rights of a person may not be removed on fear alone, but must be based on verifiable facts. Conspiracy theories, and a refusal to listen to medical experts are not, and cannot be, a basis for taking away human rights. Any legal moves must be based on facts and facts alone.
At the beginning of World War II, we committed one of the grosser violations of human rights in our history. We interned every person of Japanese descent who lived on the west coast. There was no proof and no truly legal basis, but it was done by the Federal government with the support of a fearful populace. We jailed people merely based on their ethnic descent. It took until 2011, under President Obama, that the Department of Justice finally filed a formal writ stating that the internment was wrong.
Three years later, we are again trying to repeat the same mistake. Fear, without basis in fact, is being used to mandate a set of restrictions that violate constitutional rights. Fear is blinding too many people to the reality of what is happening, a reality that in the long run is more dangerous than the disease. Fear may allow a precedent to be set that will cost us in later years.
Fortunately, a truly heroic nurse has spoken up and has refused to roll over. An equally fine judge has ruled based on law and not on fear. We need to applaud her for having the gumption to defy mistaken public opinion, and to insist that the government cannot take her rights away based merely on rumor and innuendo.
The phrase “in an abundance of caution” cannot be used to justify any actions by the government or even by private individuals. It is at our peril that we allow that phrase to become legally usable. It is at our peril that we give a tool for justifying any fear to any arm of the government. If we give that tool to them, we should not be surprised when our worst fears of intrusive government become reality and we find ourselves in an internment camp, or quarantined at home, or even unable to find a job or a place to live.
You’re… honestly, directly (‘the same mistake’?) comparing quarantine for a handful of people who might have Ebola to the internment of an entire population based on perceived racial/political loyalties in wartime? Putting aside whatever other merits there may be in this article, that’s a false equivalence of flabbergasting proportions.
Hickox treated Ebola patients in Sierra Leone. Due to that, it is entirely possible that she is infected- healthcare workers can be infected. We won’t know until the twenty-one day incubation period is up. She may be, or she may not be, but the only way to find out is to wait and monitor. Thus, to say that we can only act on ‘facts and facts alone’ is somewhat irrelevant to this discussion. Unless you’re advocating that quarantine and monitoring for people who have been potentially exposed to Ebola, or any other fatal disease, should only be done when they’re symptomatic? At that point it is, quite probably, too late. Especially considering how ebola spreads- through direct contact and contaminated material- even immediate quarantine may not be enough if she happens to contaminate material that other people use. This is fairly simple medical procedure, and her bucking quarantine to talk to reporters and go bicycling isn’t ‘brave,’ it’s completely irresponsible. As a nurse, she should know better. I’m also not impressed by a judge disagreeing with Dr. Sheila Pinette about what should be done with her. Let’s not pretend that one side is ‘fear’ and the other side is ‘medicine.’ That, too, is a flabbergasting false equivalence, and not at all a true representation of the case.
Is there a lot of fear with Ebola? Yes, as per usual with a disease with about a 60-70% fatality rate. Has there been some over-reaction? Yes, as usual with… anything. But let’s not pretend that this is some secret conspiracy or slippery slope to take away our rights, and let’s not ignore the actual facts of the case in an effort to bolster our pet positions.
You are missing one very important fact. Quarantine is not recommended by the medical community given what we know of the disease. That is why the judge overruled the governor. When an action is taken in direct contradiction of medical recommendations, then it is not to be considered a reasonable action. When someone’s personal rights are removed, there must be more present than “reasonable” arguments. Even people accused of non-capital murder are generally allowed bail unless the prosecutor can show “flight risk.” In various cases, the bail may be set very high, but there are many others in which the judge overrules the prosecutor based on overreach and misuse of the term “flight risk.” The same is true here. The governors are overreaching based on the judgment of the medical community and the judge rightfully said that she must be released from quarantine. As a nurse and medical professional, Hickox did know better, took it to court, and demonstrated that it is her view that is the “reasonable” view, not the governor’s. [Note: a single doctor does not constitute the medical community. Dr. Sheila’s own organization does not agree with quarantining of otherwise health people, only of monitoring them.]
As to overreach on the use of the Japanese, I would point out that both are the same type of case. I would also point out that governors are preparing to do things like quarantine entire planes if they come from the “wrong” country. Hickox is a single example of rules that are being crafted in fear to deal with larger groups.
Finally, quarantine rules are applied when the person is infectious. Since Hickox has not run a temperature and has tested negative on two separate Ebola blood tests, she is not infective. Second, even with the family of the patient who died in Dallas, not one person was infected. Not one person has been infected on Hickox’s flight. Not one person has been infected who has merely been on the same airplane or ground transport as any of the other Ebola-infected people. Ebola patients become infective only after a certain point and only to people who handle their body fluids directly. Hickox has never disagreed with the CDC and Doctors Without Borders recommendations of daily monitoring for a period of time. It was her incarceration in an under-equipped tent, and forced unnecessary quarantine that she fought.
There have been two ebola-related media events here in Maine in October. The current Kaci Hickox drama is made more media-worthy by her defiance (and I agree with her and with Fr. Ernesto), and also by the coming gubernatorial election. Governor LePage is in a tight three-way race and he’s taking a hard line (as he always does, about everything) in order to show strength in the last days before Tuesday’s election. After the judge’s ruling he conceded but, in a last shriek on the retreat, said that he doesn’t “trust” Kaci to comply with the recommended monitoring of her health.
The other case, a teacher in a small town in Maine, was given paid leave of 21 days after she returned from an educational conference in Dallas—not a medical conference, and with no contact with an infected patient there. The school board responded to pressure from parents who “were not notified” that she would be going to Dallas. While I understand the school board’s caution, having served on my town’s school board, this is just plain ridiculous. At least the teacher has been paid for her suspension and is free to go outside.
http://www.pressherald.com/2014/10/17/fearing-ebola-strong-elementary-teacher-on-leave-after-traveling-to-dallas/
This will all get straightened out, as the AIDS scare did back in the 1980s, but in the meantime it’s a foolish distraction.