Conscious Choice: The Right to Say No

February 2002 | Health Conscious

The Right to Say No

by Rebecca Ephraim, RD, CCN

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11 and the ensuing anthrax mail assaults, our government has dedicated much time and effort toward creating a plan that would protect us if, God forbid, a mass chemical warfare attack by bioterrorists were to occur. As a result, the Centers for Disease Control has introduced a model law that would give state public health officials new police powers to control the spread of infectious diseases. But this model law is seen by some as "very scary" in its potential ability to suspend the health rights of citizens.

The creation of this model law, entitled The Model State Emergency Powers Act, is well intentioned but alarmingly overreaching, according to Sue Blevins, M.P.H., R.N., and president of the Institute for Health Freedom, a national watchdog organization (www.forhealthfreedom.org) that monitors individuals’ freedom to choose their healthcare. Blevins says the law would grant governors and public health authorities broad powers to impose medical treatment on citizens.

This could be quite distressing to many — particularly those who take a natural approach to maintaining their health — as the model law would force individuals to conform to a plan that involves vaccinations, quarantines, and medical exams. Hence, it’s evident that under this law treatment choices could be yanked. The law could potentially be adopted by states and used in public health situations that might not even be considered emergencies.

The proposed legislation would grant public health authorities the right to:

* force individuals suspected of harboring an "infectious disease" to undergo medical examinations

* force individuals to be vaccinated, treated, or quarantined for infectious diseases

* track and share individuals’ personal health information, including blood and body tissue samples (genetic information) as well as the names and addresses of those who may have been carriers of a disease

* force pharmacists to report any "unusual or increased prescription rates" that may be caused by epidemic diseases

* force healthcare providers to report individuals who harbor any health conditions that may be caused by an epidemic or infectious agent and might pose a "substantial risk" to a "significant number" of people.

* declare a "state of public health emergency" and consequently preempt existing state laws, rules, and regulations (including privacy, medical licensing, and property-rights laws, rules, and regulations).

In addition, fines and penalties could be leveled against those who fail to obey this law.

Note that such terms as "infectious diseases," "substantial risk," and "significant number" are undefined language in this model law. Hence, as Blevins points out, a disease would be whatever a state says it is.

"We really need a strong public debate on this because what happens if you have a cold? Should I be able to come along and say,‘I don’t want to catch your cold. You need to be vaccinated against the flu?’"

Moreover, the model law has no criteria for deciding who should be quarantined or treated. That’s totally left up to a health official’s belief that a person may have a disease. The idea of such sweeping powers makes Blevins cringe. "People say,‘Well, you don’t think anybody [such as a public health official] has this intent to harm us and do some mean, awful things with this law?’ I don’t know and I don’t think so but why even have the laws that permit that power? ...We don’t have a "one-size-fits-all" immune system. We don’t have a one-size-fits-all mindset or reaction to disease in this country. So to have a one-size-fits-all police plan is really not a good direction to be moving in."

Blevins is in full agreement that our government needs laws in place for emergency situations that threaten the public health and welfare of Americans. But it needs to be done, she says, without having our freedoms infringed upon or our rights taken away. Rather, she suggests that our state public health officials should focus on educating the public about safe and effective measures that will protect against highly communicable and fatal diseases spread or caused by biological and chemical weapons. And then let each of us personally decide how we want to approach the situation.

For instance, some people are very much against vaccinations and would prefer to reject such a measure. A Time/CNN public opinion poll of Americans taken last October found that 50 percent of the respondents said they would not take a vaccine for anthrax if it were available, 41 percent would, and 9 percent were unsure. Blevins contends that allowing people to decide against vaccination would not pose a threat to the vaccinated people who are safely and effectively vaccinated.

Also, for those opposed to vaccines, many might conceivably look for other approaches to health protection in a bioterrorist attack. For instance, one promising approach may be nanoemulsions, which are products of a sophisticated manufacturing process involving a water-in-oil mixture. Nanoemulsions are nontoxic and noncorrosive disinfectants that have been shown to destroy anthrax spores on surfaces and in laboratory mice exposed to the bacteria through a skin incision. However, under the model law, this wouldn’t be an option.

States are currently considering whether to adopt the model law. Blevins urges concerned citizens to take a stand against it before any legislation can be enacted. "The bottom line is that [citizens] need to make sure that their state representatives, senators, and governors are informed of their opinions." In addition, she recommends making our concerns heard at the local and county level also, as those government bodies can enact such laws as well.

The Model State Emergency Health Powers Act is available for reading at www.publichealthlaw.net. I would encourage all who have an interest in opposing this model law to move quickly in making their voices heard. Health choices should always be a fundamental right.

Disclaimer: This column is for information only and no part of its contents should be construed as medical advice, diagnosis, recommendation or endorsement by Ms. Ephraim.

Recommend this page to a friend

Top Ten pages recommended to friends: