Earlier today, the Constitution Project and the University of Maryland
Center for Health and Homeland Security brought together a group
of expert panelists at the National Press Club to discuss the civil
liberties implications of the government's response to the H1N1 flu,
more commonly known as swine flu.
Moderator Sharon Bradford Franklin, Senior Policy Counsel at the
Constitution Project, opened the event with a brief overview of
recent news developments in the H1N1 outbreak. The panel
featured Professor Michael Greenberger, Director of the University
of Maryland Center for Health and Homeland Security, Professor
Wendy Mariner of the Boston University School of Public health,
and Dr. Marita Mike, the Health Director at the University of
Maryland Center for Health and Homeland Security.
Dr. Mike began the conversation by offering a medical perspective
on the unique health risks posed by the H1N1 flu, comparing the
most recent outbreak with past public health crises in the United
States. Professor Greenberger built on the doctor's introduction by
outlining the remarkably broad executive powers that may be
leveraged at the state and federal levels to combat the flu. Finally,
Professor Mariner rejected the notion that emergency preparedness
laws can prevent disease, and critiqued the post-9/11 focus on coer-
cive public health tools that threaten individual civil liberties. Instead,
she argued that the focus of the government's response to the H1N1
flu should be on creating a healthy, educated population that has
plentiful access to information, vaccines, and other medical care.
The discussion featured vigorous exchanges on the constitutional
concerns raised by quarantines, mandatory vaccinations, and
interstate travel restrictions. The panelists agreed that the federal
government's response to the H1N1 flu has been timely and
proportionate to the real dangers posed by the disease, but voiced
concerns about how state and federal governments may employ
existing executive powers if more virulent strands of the flu merge.
The panelists encouraged members of the public to take appropriate
health precautions, and urged a rational public dialogue on the tools
state and federal governments need, or think they need, to
effectively combat public health risks like the H1N1 flu.
Today's event drew a diverse and engaged audience to the National
Press Club's Murrow Room, including attendees from various print
and radio news outlets, the Department of Homeland Security,
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, congressional staff,
as well as numerous other advocacy and health organizations.
To see photos from this afternoon's event, please click here. A video
of the discussion will be posted as soon as it's available.
Follow Ginny Sloan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ConPro
You always here about threats of this disease but everything in
life can be threatening I think we need to take everything with
a grain of salt...and eat healthy and learn to deal with life's
stresses before everything is controlled for us.
Yours Truly
mediamerlin
Center for Health and Homeland Security brought together a group
of expert panelists at the National Press Club to discuss the civil
liberties implications of the government's response to the H1N1 flu,
more commonly known as swine flu.
Moderator Sharon Bradford Franklin, Senior Policy Counsel at the
Constitution Project, opened the event with a brief overview of
recent news developments in the H1N1 outbreak. The panel
featured Professor Michael Greenberger, Director of the University
of Maryland Center for Health and Homeland Security, Professor
Wendy Mariner of the Boston University School of Public health,
and Dr. Marita Mike, the Health Director at the University of
Maryland Center for Health and Homeland Security.
Dr. Mike began the conversation by offering a medical perspective
on the unique health risks posed by the H1N1 flu, comparing the
most recent outbreak with past public health crises in the United
States. Professor Greenberger built on the doctor's introduction by
outlining the remarkably broad executive powers that may be
leveraged at the state and federal levels to combat the flu. Finally,
Professor Mariner rejected the notion that emergency preparedness
laws can prevent disease, and critiqued the post-9/11 focus on coer-
cive public health tools that threaten individual civil liberties. Instead,
she argued that the focus of the government's response to the H1N1
flu should be on creating a healthy, educated population that has
plentiful access to information, vaccines, and other medical care.
The discussion featured vigorous exchanges on the constitutional
concerns raised by quarantines, mandatory vaccinations, and
interstate travel restrictions. The panelists agreed that the federal
government's response to the H1N1 flu has been timely and
proportionate to the real dangers posed by the disease, but voiced
concerns about how state and federal governments may employ
existing executive powers if more virulent strands of the flu merge.
The panelists encouraged members of the public to take appropriate
health precautions, and urged a rational public dialogue on the tools
state and federal governments need, or think they need, to
effectively combat public health risks like the H1N1 flu.
Today's event drew a diverse and engaged audience to the National
Press Club's Murrow Room, including attendees from various print
and radio news outlets, the Department of Homeland Security,
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, congressional staff,
as well as numerous other advocacy and health organizations.
To see photos from this afternoon's event, please click here. A video
of the discussion will be posted as soon as it's available.
Follow Ginny Sloan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ConPro
You always here about threats of this disease but everything in
life can be threatening I think we need to take everything with
a grain of salt...and eat healthy and learn to deal with life's
stresses before everything is controlled for us.
Yours Truly
mediamerlin
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment