| Isolation and quarantine are two words that have been put in the spotlight especially with the recent Ebola epidemic. Isolation and quarantine are tools often utilized by public health officials around the world to address many types of infectious diseases. Recent experiences with Ebola indicate that isolation and quarantine laws invoke a myriad of ethical challenges. In the United States, legislation that authorizes isolation and quarantine has been enacted in every state and the laws have been upheld by the Supreme Court. Currently, state and local governments have the primary authority to control the spread of diseases within their jurisdicitons, while the federal government's role is limited to interstate and foreign quarantine. However, many states have inadequate procedures in place for isolating individuals who are infected or believed to be infected. In general, the laws currently in effect do not address the spread of disease resulting from a biological attack, and for the most part singly address specific diseases that caused epidemics in the past. In light of the recent Ebola outbreak, many states are reevaluating their public health emergency response plans and are enacting more robust regulations relating to isolation and quarantine. This dissertation provides a brief overview of selected legal questions and legal issues regarding the isolation and quarantine laws in Louisiana and Texas, highlights the impact of those laws on public health and Ebola response, and identifies measures that can be adopted by public health systems, and the world health community in responding to potential health threats. |
