Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T02:25:45.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bioterrorism Law and Policy: Critical Choices in Public Health

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

James G. Hodge Jr.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There is perhaps no duty more fundamental to American government than the protection of the public's health, safety, and welfare. On September 11, 2001, this governmental duty was severely tested through a series of terrorist acts. The destruction of the World Trade Towers in New York City and a portion of the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., presented many Americans with a new, visible reality of the potential harms that terrorists can cause. The staggering loss of lives (estimated from 2,600 to 2,900) damaged the national psyche in ways far exceeding the physical scars to American institutions.

As horrific as the images of destruction and loss of human lives may be, events that unfolded after September 11 revealed another dreaded, and potentially more catastrophic, threat to Americans sense of security and public health: bioterrorism. Unlike terrorists that use bombs, explosives, or other tools for mass destruction, a bioterrorist's weapon is an infectious agent.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , Summer 2002 , pp. 254 - 261
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Gostin, L.O., Public Health Law: Power, Duty, Restraint (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000): at 16.Google Scholar
Lipton, E., “Hard to Figure: A Difference in the Numbers,” New York Times, October 25, 2001, at B1.Google Scholar
Model State Emergency Health Powers Act § 1–104(a) (December 21, 2001), available at <http://www.publichealthlaw.net/MSEHPA/MSEHPA2.pdf>. The Act can also be found on pages 324–348 of this issue.CrossRef.+The+Act+can+also+be+found+on+pages+324–348+of+this+issue.>Google Scholar
Shalala, D.E., “Bioterrorism: How Prepared Are We?,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, 5, no. 4 (1999): 492–93, available at <http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no4/shalala.htm>.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglesby, T. Grossman, R. O'Toole, T., “A Plague on Your City: Observations from TOPOFF,” Biodefense Quarterly, 2 (2000): 1–10.Google Scholar
Freudenheim, M., “Few Hospitals Are Ready for a Surge of Bioterror Victims,” New York Times, October 26, 2001, at B8.Google Scholar
Khan, S. Ashford, D.A., “Ready or Not — Preparedness for Bioterrorism,” N. Engl. J. Med., 345 (2001): 287–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenbaum, D.E. Stolberg, S.G., “New Battlefield: Questions on Adequacy of Health System and Public Protection,” New York Times, October 23, 2001, at A1.Google Scholar
Weiss, R., “Anthrax Testing Shaky,” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, October 16, 2001, at A4.Google Scholar
Fialka, J.et al., “Are We Prepared for the Unthinkable?,” Wall Street Journal, September 18, 2001, at B1.Google Scholar
Public Health Threats and Emergencies Act, Pub. L. No. 106-505, 114 Stat. 2314 (2000).Google Scholar
Miller, J. Stolberg, S.G., “Sept. 11 Attacks Led to Push for More Smallpox Vaccine,” New York Times, October 22, 2001, at A1.Google Scholar
Shalala, , supra note 4.Google Scholar
Fidler, D.P., “Legal Issues Surrounding Public Health Emergencies.” Paper presented at the Second Annual Symposium on Medical and Public Health Response to Bioterrorism, Baltimore, November 28–29, 2000.Google Scholar
Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 24-32-2103 (West 2001).Google Scholar
Bertrand, T.et al., The Emergence of Bioterrorism as a Public Health Concern in the 21st Century: Epidemiology and Surveillance, at <http://www.healthri.org/environment/biot/article.htm> (last updated October 15, 2001).+(last+updated+October+15,+2001).>Google Scholar
Khan, Ashford, , supra note 7.Google Scholar
Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (December 21, 2001).Google Scholar
These thirty-two states are Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Center for Law and the Public's Health, Model State Emergency Health Powers Act State Legislative Activity (April 8, 2002), available at <http://www.publichealthlaw.net/MSEHPA/MSEHPA_Legis_Act.pdf>..' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=These+thirty-two+states+are+Arizona,+California,+Connecticut,+Delaware,+Florida,+Georgia,+Hawaii,+Idaho,+Illinois,+Kansas,+Kentucky,+Maine,+Maryland,+Massachusetts,+Minnesota,+Mississippi,+Missouri,+Nebraska,+New+Hampshire,+New+Jersey,+New+Mexico,+New+York,+Oklahoma,+Pennsylvania,+Rhode+Island,+South+Dakota,+Tennessee,+Utah,+Vermont,+Washington,+Wisconsin,+and+Wyoming.+Center+for+Law+and+the+Public's+Health,+Model+State+Emergency+Health+Powers+Act+State+Legislative+Activity+(April+8,+2002),+available+at+.>Google Scholar
Kellman, B., “Biological Terrorism: Legal Measures for Preventing Catastrophe,” Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 24 (2001): 417–88.Google Scholar
Root-Bernstein, R.S., “Infectious Terrorism,” The Atlantic Monthly, 267 (1991): 44–50.Google Scholar
Alexander, Y., “Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century: Threats and Responses,” DePaul Business Law Journal, 12 (2000): 59–81.Google Scholar
Tucker, J.B., “Historical Trends Related to Bioterrorism: An Empirical Analysis,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, 5, no. 4 (1999): 498–504, at 503, available at <http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/eid/vol5no4/tucker.htm>.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haberman, C., “New Legal Powers, Fresh Anthrax Worries, Resilient Taliban,” New York Times, October 26, 2001, at B1.Google Scholar
Miller, J. Stolberg, S.G., “Wider Anthrax Monitoring; U.S. Officials Acknowledge Underestimating Mail Risks,” New York Times, October 25, 2001, at A1.Google Scholar
Lancaster, J. Schmidt, S., “31 Exposed to Anthrax on Capitol Hill,” Washington Post, October 18, 2001, at A1.Google Scholar
Fialka, et al., supra note 10.Google Scholar
Parker, L. Watson, T. Johnson, K., “Anthrax Incidents Create Growing Sense of Anxiety,” USA Today, October 15, 2001, at A1.Google Scholar
“Snapshot,” USA Today, October 25, 2001, at 1A.Google Scholar
Kortepeter, M.G. Parker, G.W., “Potential Biological Weapons Threats,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, 5 (1999): 523–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Henderson, D.A., “Smallpox: Clinical and Epidemiologic Features,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, 5, no. 4 (1999): 537–39, available at <http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no4/henderson.htm>.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennis, D.T.et al., “Tularemia as a Biological Weapon,” JAMA, 285 (2001): 2763–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inglesby, T.et al., “Plague as a Biological Weapon,” JAMA, 283 (2000): 2281–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fialka, et al., supra note 10.Google Scholar
Altman, L.K., “On Many Fronts, Experts Plan for the Unthinkable: Biowarfare,” New York Times, October 23, 2001, at D4.Google Scholar
Hodge, J.G., “The Role of New Federalism and Public Health Law,” Journal of Law & Health, 12 (1998): 309–57.Google Scholar
“Dark Winter,” available online at <http://www.homelandsecurity.org/darkwinter/index.cfm>..>Google Scholar
Hodge, , supra note 37.Google Scholar
Model State Emergency Health Powers Act § 1–104(m) (December 21, 2001).Google Scholar
Id. § 1–104(a).Google Scholar
Hodge, J.G. Gostin, L.O., “Handling Cases of Willful Exposure Through HIV Partner Counseling and Referral Services,” Rutger's Women's Rights Law Reporter, 22 (forthcoming 2002).Google Scholar
Gostin, , supra note 1, at 34–46.Google Scholar
Letter from Hamre, John J., president and chief executive officer of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, dated July 26, 2001 (referring to findings from “Dark Winter” exercise in June, 2001).Google Scholar
Shalala, , supra note 4.Google Scholar
Connolly, C. Gray, S., “Thompson Seeks $1.2 Billion to Expand Stockpile of Drugs,” Washington Post, October 18, 2001, at A19.Google Scholar
Andrews, E.L., “Bayer Is a Bit Taken Aback by the Frenzy to Get Its Drug,” New York Times, October 26, 2001, at B8.Google Scholar
Sutton, V., “Bioterrorism Preparation and Response Legislation — The Struggle to Protect States' Sovereignty While Preserving National Security,” Georgetown Public Policy Review, 6 (2001): 92–103.Google Scholar
Lancaster, J. Schmidt, S., “31 Exposed to Anthrax on Capitol Hill,” Washington Post, October 18, 2001, at A1.Google Scholar
Willing, R., “Anti-Terror Bill Extends Government's Reach,” USA Today, October 25, 2001, at 7A.Google Scholar
Hodge, Gostin, , supra note 42.Google Scholar
Model State Emergency Health Powers Act § 604 (December 21, 2001).Google Scholar
Id. § 603.Google Scholar
Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gostin, , supra note 1, at 213–16.Google Scholar
Model State Emergency Health Powers Act § 604 (December 21, 2001).Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, Stolberg, , supra note 8.Google Scholar