Advertisement

Journal of Bioethical Inquiry

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 207–217 | Cite as

Your Liberty or Your Life: Reciprocity in the Use of Restrictive Measures in Contexts of Contagion

  • A. M. ViensEmail author
  • Cécile M. Bensimon
  • Ross E. G. Upshur
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the role of reciprocity in the employment of restrictive measures in contexts of contagion. Reciprocity should be understood as a substantive value that governs the use, level and extent of restrictive measures. We also argue that independent of the role reciprocity plays in the legitimisation the use of restrictive measures, reciprocity can also motivate support and compliance with legitimate restrictive measures. The importance of reciprocity has implications for how restrictive measures should be undertaken when preparing and evaluating public health responses to contagion.

Keywords

Reciprocity Restrictive measures Infectious disease Ethics Quarantine Isolation Liberty 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr Upshur is supported by the Canada Research Chair in Primary Care Research.

References

  1. Ackerman, B. 2006. Before the next attack: Preserving civil liberties in an age of terrorism. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Batlan, F.J. 2007. Law in the time of cholera: Disease, state power, and quarantines past and future. Temple Law Review 80: 53–122.Google Scholar
  3. Baylis, F., N.P. Kenny, and S. Sherwin. 2008. A relational account of public health ethics. Public Health Ethics 1: 196–209. doi: 10.1093/phe/phn025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bensimon, C.M. 2008. Communicable disease control in the new millennium: A qualitative inquiry on the legitimate use of restrictive measures. (PhD Dissertation, University of Toronto).Google Scholar
  5. Bensimon, C.M., and Ross E.G. Upshur. 2007. Evidence and effectiveness in decision-making for quarantine. American Journal of Public Health 97(Supplement 1): 44–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berg, J., J. Dickhaut, and K. McCabe. 1995. Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior 10: 122–142. doi: 10.1006/game.1995.1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blendon, R.J., J.M. Benson, and K.J.Weldon 2006a. Pandemic influenza and the public: Survey findings. Cambridge, MA: Harvard School of Public Health Project on the Public and Biological Security, available at: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/panflu/IOM_Avian_flu.ppt. Accessed 17 March 2009.
  8. Blendon, R.J., C.M. DesRoches, M.S. Cetron, J.M. Benson, T. Meinhardt, and W. Pollard. 2006a. Attitudes toward the use of quarantine in a public health emergency in four countries. Health Affairs 25: w15–w25. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.25.w15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boggio, A., M. Zignol, E. Jaramillo, P. Nunn, G. Pinet, and M. Raviglione. 2008. Limitations on human rights: are they justifiable to reduce the burden of TB in the era of MDR- and XDR-TB? Health and Human Rights 10: 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cetron, M., and J. Landwirth. 2005. Public health and ethical considerations in planning for quarantine. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine 78: 329–334.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Chapin, C.V. 1894. Pleasures and hopes of the health officer. In Papers of Charles V. Chapin, M.D, ed. F. P. Gorham. New York: The Commonwealth Fund.Google Scholar
  12. Childress, J.F., and R.G. Bernheim. 2003. Beyond the liberal and communitarian impasse: A framework and vision for public health. Florida Law Review 55: 1191–1219.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Childress, J.F., R.R. Faden, R.D. Gaare, L.O. Gostin, J. Kahn, R.J. Bonnie, N.E. Kass, A.C. Mastroianni, J.D. Moreno, and P. Nieburg. 2001. Public health ethics: Mapping the terrain. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 30: 170–178. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2002.tb00384.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coker, R. 2000. From chaos to coercion: Detention and the control of tuberculosis. New York: St. Martin.Google Scholar
  15. Coker, R., M. Thomas, K. Lock, and R. Martin. 2007. Detention and the evolving threat of tuberculosis: Evidence, ethics, and law. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 35: 609–615.Google Scholar
  16. Department of Health, United Kingdom. 2007. Responding to pandemic influenza: The ethical framework for policy and planning. http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_080751. Accessed 17 March 2009.
  17. Dyzenhaus, D. 2006. The constitution of law: Legality in a time of emergency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Edmundson, W.A. 1998. Legitimate authority without political obligation. Law and Philosophy 17: 43–60.Google Scholar
  19. Enhorn v. Sweden (2005), European Court of Human Rights (application no. 56529/00)Google Scholar
  20. Gostin, L.O. 2003. When terrorism threatens health: How far are limitations on human rights justified? The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 31: 524–528. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2003.tb00120.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gouldner, A.W. 1960. The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review 25: 161–178. doi: 10.2307/2092623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Harris, J., and S. Holm. 1993. If only AIDS were different!. The Hastings Center Report 23: 6–13. doi: 10.2307/3562917.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harris, J., and S. Holm. 1995. Is there a moral obligation not to infect others? BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) 311: 1215–1217.Google Scholar
  24. Ignatieff, M. 2005. The lesser evil: Political ethics in an age of terror. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Jacobson v. Massachusetts. 1905, 197 US 11Google Scholar
  26. Jew Ho v. Williamson. (1900), 103 F. 10 (C.C.N.D. Cal.)Google Scholar
  27. Kass, N.E. 2001. An ethics framework for public health. American Journal of Public Health 91: 1776–1782. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.91.11.1776.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Koller, P. 2007. Law, morality and virtue. In In Working virtue: Virtue ethics and contemporary moral problems, ed. R.L. Walker, and P.J. Ivanhoe, 191–206. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Markel, H. 1999. Quarantine! East European Jewish immigrants and the New York City epidemics of 1892. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Meeker, B.F. 1984. Cooperative orientation, trust, and reciprocity. Human Relations 37: 225–243. doi: 10.1177/001872678403700304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Millar, M. 2002. Effects of a guilt induction and guilt reduction on door-in-the-face. Communication Research 29: 666–680. doi: 10.1177/009365002237831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 2007. Public health: Ethical issues. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.Google Scholar
  33. O’Keefe, D.J., and M. Figgé. 1997. A guilt-based explanation of the door-in-the-face influence strategy. Human Communication Research 24: 64–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1997.tb00587.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ostrom, E., and J. Walker (Eds.). 2005. Trust and reciprocity: Interdisciplinary lessons for experimental research. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  35. Parmet, W.E. 2008. J. S. Mill and the American law of quarantine. Public Health Ethics 1: 210–222. doi: 10.1093/phe/phn029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pfaff, D., M. Kavaliers, and E. Choleris. 2008. Mechanisms underlying an ability to behave ethically. American Journal of Bioethics-Neuroscience 8: 10–19. doi: 10.1080/15265160802179994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Powers, M., and R. Faden. 2006. Social justice: The moral foundations of public health and health policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Selgelid, M. 2008. Ethics, tuberculosis and globalization. Public Health Ethics 1: 10–20. doi: 10.1093/phe/phn001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shah, N. 2001. Contagious divides: Epidemics and race in San Francisco’s Chinatown. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  40. Singer, P.A., S. R. Benatar, M. Bernstein, A.S. Daar, B. M. Dickens, S.K. MacRae, R.E.G. Upshur, L. Wright, and R.Z. Shaul. 2003. Ethics and SARS: Lessons from Toronto. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) 327: 1342–1344. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7427.1342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Singh, J.A., R. Upshur, and N. Padayatchi. 2007. XDR-TB in South Africa: No time for denial or complacency. PLoS Medicine 4: e50. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040050.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Simmons, A.J. 1999. Justification and legitimacy. Ethics 109: 739–771. doi: 10.1086/233944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Taylor, C. 1985. Legitimation crisis? In Philosophy and the Human Sciences: Philosophical Papers 2, 248–88. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Taylor, C. 1994. Alternative futures: Legitimacy, identity, and alienation in late twentieth century Canada. In Communitarianism: A new public ethics, ed. Markate Daly. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  45. Trotter, G. 2007. The ethics of coercion in mass casualty medicine. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Tyler, T.R. 2006. Why people obey the law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  47. University of Toronto Joint Centre for Bioethics Pandemic Ethics Working Group. 2005. Stand on guard for thee: Ethical considerations in preparedness planning for pandemic influenza. Toronto: Joint Centre for Bioethics, available at: www.jointcentreforbioethics.ca/people/documents/upshur_stand_guard.pdf. Accessed 17 March 2009.
  48. Upshur, R.E. 2002. Principles for the justification of public health intervention. Canadian Journal of Public Health 93: 101–103.Google Scholar
  49. Verma, G., R.E.G. Upshur, E. Rea, and S.R. Benatar. 2004. Critical reflections on evidence, ethics and effectiveness in the management of tuberculosis: public health and global perspectives. BMC Medical Ethics 5: 2. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-5-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Verweij, M. 2005. Obligatory precautions against infection. Bioethics 19: 323–335. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2005.00446.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Viens, A.M. Public health emergencies, in preparation.Google Scholar
  52. Viens, A.M. 2008. Public health, ethical behaviour and reciprocity. American Journal of Bioethics–Neuroscience 8: 1–3. doi: 10.1080/15265160802180059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Viens, A.M., and R.E.G. Upshur. The concept of reciprocity, in preparation.Google Scholar
  54. Weiner, D.B. 2001. The citizen-patient in revolutionary and imperial Paris. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Wilkinson, T.M. 2007. Contagious disease and self-defence. Res Publica (Liverpool, England) 13: 339–359. doi: 10.1007/s11158-007-9024-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Williamson v. Wong Wai. (1900), 103 F. Rep. 10Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. M. Viens
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Cécile M. Bensimon
    • 2
  • Ross E. G. Upshur
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Law, Queen MaryUniversity of LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Joint Centre for BioethicsUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Department of Family and Community MedicineUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  4. 4.Dalla Lana School of Public HealthUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations