Law as a tool in promoting and protecting public health: always in our best interests?
The organized efforts of the state to protect its citizens from threats to the public's health presuppose some commonality of health beliefs and behaviors, and legislation underpinning public health interventions is premised on the beliefs and behaviors of the population majority. To what extent, in a public health emergency, can members of a cultural or religious minority use human rights arguments to justify exemption from public health measures on the basis of offensiveness of those measures to cultural or religious beliefs? Any such challenge cannot rely on arguments based on autonomy of the individual. The person objecting to the public health measure will need to establish that the burden of compliance will be significantly greater because of offensiveness of that measure to belief, so as to impose on the individual a burden disproportionate to the risk to health of the public as a whole.
Martin
Robyn
R
Centre for Research in Primary and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, UK. r.m.martin@herts.ac.uk
D003469:Culture; D033161:Government Regulation; D006291:Health Policy / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006293:Health Promotion / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006806:Human Rights; D006801:Humans; D011159:Population Surveillance; D011634:Public Health / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D012067:Religion