Quarantine Next Door Case Study

In the wake of globally communicable disease outbreaks, such as SARS, Ebola and Zika virus, quarantine and isolation have been used as public health interventions designated to stop further spread while controversies rise. People’s views vary and some even have deep concerns when it comes to communicable disease managing, responsibilities of the medical personnel and individual rights during quarantine response, etc. From my perspective, these problems should be taken into account with respect to implementing quarantine and isolation.

First of all, the concept of quarantine and isolation need to be clarified. According to “The Quarantine Next Door” written by Adrienne LaFrance (LaFrance) ”The agency makes a distinction between ”isolation,” which it defines as the separation of ill people to stop the

Without a thorough understanding of concepts, the public could easily mix up and begin censuring. In the meantime, medical personnel should apply the two approaches to different groups correspondingly.

Secondly, justifying quarantine requires certain criteria. First rule is transparency. It is imperative that all people subjected to quarantine or isolation should be notified of pro and con associated with the interference. Interchangeably, it allows the public to have chances to fully understand those responses and to take active parts in quarantine. The medical experts should also advocate for transparency and inform the public of health issues. It is a win-win! On top of that, collaborations between medical professionals are significant in that their cooperation ensures those medical measures to achieve comparable goals; the effectuality of an intervention is guaranteed and the wellbeing of the society is warranted. Adhering to the transparency of the response, people will consequently have much more faith in medical personnel and be more supportive and