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.
No they can't. They did not go to court today as they said they would because they know they would lose. She does not meet the "infected person" requirement of their law. They tried to work a deal with her, instead.
"Quarantine separates and restricts the movement of people who were exposedto a contagious diseaseto 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."
Exposure is the key word. What your describing is when Isolation would happen/someone is showing symptoms. From the CDC:
"Isolation separates sick people with a contagious disease from people who are not sick."
"Quarantine separates and restricts the movement of people who were exposedto a contagious diseaseto 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."
Exposure is the key word. What your describing is when Isolation would happen/someone is showing symptoms. From the CDC:
"Isolation separates sick people with a contagious disease from people who are not sick."
there is no reason to think she was exposed to a contagious disease. Anyway it all comes down to what the law and the medical experts say and both are on her side.
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?
there is no reason to think she was exposed to a contagious disease. Anyway it all comes down to what the law and the medical experts say and both are on her side.
I would guess given she worked in a country/around people where Ebola is rampant, she would be considered "exposed". Plus the history of the 2 nurses in our country, treating patients, who got infected might come into play into a decision.
But I agree....a court would have to play lawyer ball with the word "exposed". No politics will come into play there of course.
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?
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?
I would guess given she worked in a country/around people where Ebola is rampant, she would be considered "exposed". Plus the history of the 2 nurses in our country, treating patients, who got infected might come into play into a decision.
But I agree....a court would have to play lawyer ball with the word "exposed". No politics will come into play there of course.
You would guess wrong. She would have had to come in contact with the virus to be "exposed" and this is highly unprobable. Even if she did, she is not contagious unless and until she is showing symptoms. As long as she monitors those symptoms and isolates herself as Spencer did should they appear, there is no risk. I know that and you should too by now. There are literally hundreds of workers who have come back to their countries and just went about their business (including this one until the politicians decided to exploit it). The US is acting irrationally out of political motivation and it is a disgrace.
That's the crux of the matter. Her lawyer is arguing that it is unconstitutional, though he does not say which part of the constitution he is applying in this case.
I guess we'll find out whether a state really can quarantine someone who isn't sick.
Well the governor said in a statement he would use the full extent of his authority:
That would include declaring an extreme public health emergency and then exercising his power to have her forcibly quarantined under the statute I cited above. He can do this without proving she have ebola or is contagious to others, but under the Maine statute, simply because she was exposed to it.
I don't think he in fact will do this. But some of the medical experts on this board now think they are legal experts as well.
I literally pray this doesn't happen, but you have 2 or 3 people get ebola in this country from being exposed to returning healthcare workers like nurse look at me or Dr. Spencer and you watch how fast state governors start quarantining citizens who aren't sick but have simply been exposed to the virus.
He doesn't want to. He's a 'global citizen' who believes we are equal to people from Liberia and other 3rd world hell holes.
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.
