Public health powers in relation to infectious tuberculosis in England and France: a comparison of approaches.
This article examines the legal responses to infectious tuberculosis in England and France. Given that tuberculosis has re-emerged as a public health threat in both countries, the differing jurisprudence and legal frameworks of disease control in the two jurisdictions warrant examination. Two questions arise in that respect: firstly, what is the role of the State in the protection of public health in the context of tuberculosis, and secondly, to what extent can the law intervene to coerce individuals to undertake health measures for the protection of society at large. These issues reveal the tensions that exist between the individual and public interest. France and England differ greatly in their responses to such tensions. Paradoxically, France, that has traditionally embraced strong State intervention, has been reluctant to curtail individual freedoms for the benefit of public health. Conversely, England, that has tended to be more closely associated with liberalism, has been ready to accept and even promote restrictions to individual freedoms in the collective interest.
da Lomba
Sylvie
S
Faculty of Law, The University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK. sd19@leicester.ac.uk
Martin
Robyn
R
D003140:Communicable Disease Control / Q000266:history / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D004739:England; D005602:France; D049672:History, 19th Century; D049673:History, 20th Century; D006801:Humans; D015980:Public Health Practice / Q000266:history / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D014397:Tuberculosis, Pulmonary / Q000266:history / Q000517:prevention & control*