an Eldis Resource
Limitations on human rights: are they justifiable to reduce the burden of TB in the era of MDR- and XDR-TB?
Do human rights matter when treating widespread communicable diseases?
Authors:
A. Boggio; M. Zignol; E. Jaramillo
Publisher:
Health and Human Rights, 2008
Tuberculosis (TB) is among the most widespread communicable diseases and the world’s second most important cause of death from an infectious agent. Yet, international law provides for rights-limiting principles, which would justify enforcing compulsory measures against TB patients who refuse to have diagnostic procedures or who refuse to be monitored and treated once disease is confirmed. This article in Health and Human Rights Journal analyses under what circumstances compulsory measures for TB patients may be enforced under international law. The authors argue that compulsory measures for TB patients may, in fact, be justified on legal grounds provided that these measures are foreseen in the law, that they are used as a last resort, and that safeguards are in place to protect affected individuals. The deadly nature of the disease, its epidemiology, the high case fatality rate, and the speed at which the disease leads to death when associated with HIV are proven.
The document outlines how compulsory measures include compulsory medical examination, compulsory quarantine, and compulsory isolation or detention of infected persons. The authors conclude that international human rights law is primarily concerned with balancing the human rights protection with public health concerns. As the respect of human rights is at the basis of modern public health, compulsory measures needed to protect the public from severe health threats should be such that they withstand the scrutiny of the law. They can be justified, under the conditions discussed in this article, to protect the population at large, and prevent the consequences of drug-resistant TB.
