DOB: 3 Questions On The Government's Role In Protecting

Dob 3questionswhat Is The Governments Role In Protecting The Publics

Dob 3questionswhat Is The Governments Role In Protecting The Publics

DOB 3 Questions What is the government’s role in protecting the public’s health? Specifically, what is the role of the judicial system in protecting the public’s health? In your responses to peers, consider the positive and negative impact of laws and regulations on public health.

Answers According to former Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “Government has a responsibility to implement effective public health measures that increase the information available to the public and decision makers, protect people from harm, promote health, and create environments that support healthy behaviors” (Frieden, 2013, p. 1859).

The majority of scholarly articles I found regarding the role of the American judicial system in protecting public health generally concern public health emergencies. For example, during a severe infectious disease outbreak, measures such as “involuntary civil confinement such as isolation, quarantine, or other compulsory ‘social distancing’ measures” are implemented, and the judicial system is responsible for ensuring that “those measures do not unduly interfere with the rights of individuals or groups” (Stier, Nicks, & Cowan, 2007, p. S71).

The 1905 United States Supreme Court decision in Jacobson v Massachusetts established that individual rights and civil liberties can be overridden for the common good—i.e., public health—and affirmed that the judiciary has the authority both to enforce public health policies and to resolve conflicts that arise between government actions and individual rights (Mariner, Annas, & Glantz, 2005).

Broadly, the judiciary’s role involves balancing the rights of individuals and groups with the need to protect public health. Policies enacted in the name of public health have, at times, overlooked civil liberties, leading to decisions that were perhaps detrimental or not beneficial to public health. Historical cases such as the Tuskegee syphilis study exemplify violations of civil liberties justified by public health objectives. Both constitutional law and public health practices evolve, and it is the judiciary’s role to ensure that policies consider the fundamental civil liberties that underpin American society.

Side note—although I didn’t find as much insight from the movie as I had hoped, it was an engaging, if somewhat depressing, film to watch.

References

• Frieden, T. (2013). Government’s Role in Protecting Health and Safety. The New England Journal of Medicine, 368(20).
• Mariner, W., Annas, G., & Glantz, L. (2005). Jacobson v Massachusetts: It’s Not Your Great-Great-Grandfather’s Public Health Law. American Journal of Public Health, 95(4).
• Stier, D., Nicks, D., & Cowan, G. (2007). The Courts, Public Health, and Legal Preparedness. American Journal of Public Health, 97(Suppl. 1), S69-S73.