Legality of CDC flu screening
Jan 19, 2020, 7:51 pm
#46
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
So because people decide to exercise their legal right, they should be quarantined? Just because i refuse to agree to provide government with information can't be deemed that i pose public health danger. That would mean when i refuse to answer us custom question i should be arrested because i could be terrorist. An Americans we have certain rights, one of them not being harassed/monitored by the government.
Bad idea to keep trying to tell others what they mean.
Jan 20, 2020, 11:21 am
#47
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,160
I think, from a practical and survival perspective, I would want to know if I caught something really bad while overseas. If you read through the CFRs (available on the CDC website), the government at all levels can, in fact detain and quarantine you if they reasonably believe you are carrying a communicable disease. Of course, you can drive a Mack truck through "reasonably believe". Unless something has happened very recently, the last time the USG instituted a quarantine was the 1918-1919 Spanish Fly epidemic.
Here is the 2014 Ebola screening press release from DHS. There are all sorts of involuntary requirements on departing and arriving passengers. Realistically, any U.S. administration desiring to involuntarily detain groups of people it doesn't like can come up with much cheaper ways to do it. Medical quarantine involves expenses for diagnosing and treating diseases, including hospitalization.
Here is the 2014 Ebola screening press release from DHS. There are all sorts of involuntary requirements on departing and arriving passengers. Realistically, any U.S. administration desiring to involuntarily detain groups of people it doesn't like can come up with much cheaper ways to do it. Medical quarantine involves expenses for diagnosing and treating diseases, including hospitalization.
Jan 20, 2020, 11:33 am
#48
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 407
So because people decide to exercise their legal right, they should be quarantined? Just because i refuse to agree to provide government with information can't be deemed that i pose public health danger. That would mean when i refuse to answer us custom question i should be arrested because i could be terrorist. An Americans we have certain rights, one of them not being harassed/monitored by the government.
You may exercise your legal right to have a passport, but you will be required to pay certain amount of USD to get it.
You may exercise your legal right to have a gun license, but you will subject to a criminal records check.
You may exercise your legal right to be a candidate in an election, but your name will be in the ballot box and the paperwork with your data will be made public.
Jan 20, 2020, 8:40 pm
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,401
Jan 20, 2020, 8:42 pm
#51
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,401
If the world worked the way you want we would have seen megadeaths from SARS. (Control measures would have been a total failure if it got to anyplace with a poor medical system.)
Jan 20, 2020, 10:43 pm
#52
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
And in the US, it seems like a lot of adults go to work when sick, even as the reasonable infection control measure may be to not go to work when having some flu symptoms; and this American pattern is probably still more of a public health vulnerability than this mutant coronavirus.
Unless and until the CBP and CDC demand to see that all returning Americans and foreign visitors are vaccinated in at least the way public school-going children are required to be vaccinated to stay in public schools in “tough areas”, there should be questions about how CBP and CDC behave with regard to people at US ports of entry, since this is about more than just Wuhan coronavirus, SARS, MERS, or even Ebola.
Jan 21, 2020, 7:28 am
#53
Join Date: May 2011
Location: San Antonio, TX
Programs: AA EXP, DL Silver, Global Entry
Posts: 1,863
https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/about...isolation.html This is the best I can find. There are probably more detailed explanations elsewhere.
Jan 21, 2020, 12:10 pm
#54
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,594
In The New York Times:
First Wuhan Coronavirus Patient Identified in the United States
A person in Washington State is infected with the Wuhan coronavirus, the first confirmed case in the United States of a mysterious respiratory infection that has killed at least six people and sickened hundreds more in Asia.
The man is a resident of Snohomish County, Wash., who experienced symptoms after returning from a trip to the region around Wuhan, China, where the outbreak began. He was hospitalized with pneumonia last week, and infection with the coronavirus was confirmed on Monday afternoon.
Local officials declined to identify the patient, who was said to be quite ill.
News of the first case in the United States comes amid growing evidence that the virus spreads from person to person, although it is not clear how easily.
***
The man is a resident of Snohomish County, Wash., who experienced symptoms after returning from a trip to the region around Wuhan, China, where the outbreak began. He was hospitalized with pneumonia last week, and infection with the coronavirus was confirmed on Monday afternoon.
Local officials declined to identify the patient, who was said to be quite ill.
News of the first case in the United States comes amid growing evidence that the virus spreads from person to person, although it is not clear how easily.
***
Jan 21, 2020, 1:23 pm
#55
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,079
Jan 21, 2020, 3:52 pm
#56
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,079
Sure, at times. But government forcing a seemingly healthy person into quarantine only because the person stays quiet at a port of entry is not of those times.
The ability of claims about public safety to be used by government to control or otherwise coerce an individual traveler and intrude Into the life of such seemingly healthy individual should not be unlimited even at borders.
The ability of claims about public safety to be used by government to control or otherwise coerce an individual traveler and intrude Into the life of such seemingly healthy individual should not be unlimited even at borders.
The premise of this thread is what happens if a person refuses a quick health screening. If that persons refuses a simple scan for a fever then I believe government has the authority to hold that person until they are either proven to not be infected or give consent for the scan. I certainly don't think it is too much to ask to submit to a quick, no contact, temperature scan. Perhaps even more invasive testing should be considered seeing as how the current virus appears to be spreading.
Jan 21, 2020, 9:50 pm
#57
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC
Programs: UA
Posts: 444
The WA state patient entered the US on January 15th
according to news reports; the screening at US airports started on the 17th.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kir...outputType=amp
It it unknown if the screening techniques would have caught the problem at the airport. What is known is that the virus will jump from human to human.
The sick person took some sort of shared transportation from the airport.
I was in Snohomish County WA recently but left the day the infected person arrived.
Although I am not in a flu risk group (65 or older or immune system compromised) many of the my clients are 65 and older and I am more concerned about the risk to their health than I am about the CDC legality of screening; but that is just me.
according to news reports; the screening at US airports started on the 17th.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.kir...outputType=amp
It it unknown if the screening techniques would have caught the problem at the airport. What is known is that the virus will jump from human to human.
The sick person took some sort of shared transportation from the airport.
I was in Snohomish County WA recently but left the day the infected person arrived.
Although I am not in a flu risk group (65 or older or immune system compromised) many of the my clients are 65 and older and I am more concerned about the risk to their health than I am about the CDC legality of screening; but that is just me.
Jan 21, 2020, 9:57 pm
#58
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 72
The premise of this thread is what happens if a person refuses a quick health screening. If that persons refuses a simple scan for a fever then I believe government has the authority to hold that person until they are either proven to not be infected or give consent for the scan. I certainly don't think it is too much to ask to submit to a quick, no contact, temperature scan. Perhaps even more invasive testing should be considered seeing as how the current virus appears to be spreading.
Jan 21, 2020, 10:04 pm
#59
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC
Programs: UA
Posts: 444
What legal citations do you have that it is false imprisonment?
Jan 21, 2020, 10:07 pm
#60
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 72
What people have posed is CDC reasoning of why they feel it's legal. It really haven't been litigated enough to really know for sure. Few cases where that did happen such as in Ebola, states were forced to retreat in their screening.
