Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think she did. She refused to agree to it - to have the government tell her what she can and can't do based on hysteria, fear, and politics. She may voluntarily avoid crowded places, but not as a condition. Do you see the difference?
That was per CNN that she did reject it. Let me find a print article that details it. I thought it was an overly generous compromise and one that is the same as the guidelines offered by CDC. She would have lost nothing at all except political points if she agreed - that is if she really is truthful that she is fighting this because she only wants to follow CDC guidelines.
I just don't understand why she rejected the compromise offered by the state of Maine.
She could go out but just not ride on crowded public transport or go to crowded public locations. That seems fair and in line with all of the guidelines I've seen for returning Ebola workers. Why do y'all think she rejected that proposal?
Look, let's talk turkey here.
That dame's got a lot of hormones, and the governor had no business whatsoever "negotiating" with her. Quarantines are not open to compromise. If she can't take the heat, she should get out of the kitchen.
Imagine the chaos, not to mention the threat to public health, should her petulance set a precedent for others. Ridiculous.
You would guess wrong. She would have had to come in contact with the virus to be "exposed" and this is highly unprobable. There are literally hundreds of workers who have come back to their countries and just went about their business. The US is acting irrationally out of political motivation and it is a disgrace.
Since we can't know 100% if she was/wasn't "exposed", the court could also come down on the side of caution.
Even if the odds were 99% she wasn't exposed, in the long run, that would mean 1 out of every 100 people were exposed. I'm not sure if the judge/that court would want to go down in the history books as the modern day Typhoid Mary, no matter how slim the odds. Plus throw in politics, we can only guess and your guess is as good as mine how a court would decide if it ever comes to that.
That dame's got a lot of hormones, and the governor had no business whatsoever "negotiating" with her. Quarantines are not open to compromise. If she can't take the heat, she should get out of the kitchen.
Imagine the chaos, not to mention the threat to public health, should her petulance set a precedent for others. Ridiculous.
I find it significant because the offer followed CDC guidelines and yet she STILL rejected it. So, she either never really intended to follow CDC guidelines or she's just trying to make a political point only.
It's within the governor's power and nurse look at me could be forcibly quarantined without having the disease or even being contagious (according to CDC and WHO guidelines) simply because she has been exposed to it under state law. So your analysis of what could happen under the law is completely wrong.
Has Maine issued an Extreme Public Health Emergency?
The CDC is even clearer in giving states rights the power to isolate/quarantine in the case of people working with Ebola patients:
Legal Authorities for Isolation and Quarantine | Quarantine | CDC
"Quarantine separates and restricts the movement of people who were exposed to a contagious disease to see if they become sick.In addition to serving as medical functions, isolation and quarantine also are “police power” functions, derived from the right of the state to take action affecting individuals for the benefit of society."
"States have police power functions to protect the health, safety, and welfare of persons within their borders. To control the spread of disease within their borders, states have laws to enforce the use of isolation and quarantine."
No one is questioning the power of states. The issue is whether there is reason to use that power in this case. Medical experts say no, politicians say yes.
Since we can't know 100% if she was/wasn't "exposed", the court could also come down on the side of caution.
Even if the odds were 99% she wasn't exposed, in the long run, that would mean 1 out of every 100 people were exposed. I'm not sure if the judge/that court would want to go down in the history books as the modern day Typhoid Mary, no matter how slim the odds. Plus throw in politics, we can only guess and your guess is as good as mine how a court would decide if it ever comes to that.
Can't imagine a court saying a healthcare worker directly involved in patient care with ebola victims is not "exposed" to the ebola virus. The folks on this board parse words more than Bill Clinton's famous line it depends on what the definition of "is" is.
Nancy Writebol contracted the disease without being involved in direct patient care and doesn't know how she contracted it.
They can't have it both ways. They want to say you can't prove anyone was even "exposed" to it unless they come down with it. That is ridiculous and wouldn't past muster before any judge. They are really arguing against self-monitoring for 21 days. Why worry?
No one is questioning the power of states. The issue is whether there is reason to use that power in this case. Medical experts say no, politicians say yes.
Yes, DC Ridge among others is saying the Governor of Maine can't possibly quarantine nurse look at me. Maine state law says he can - although he hasn't yet and I don't think he will.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
