Ebola Quarantine may be flawed but it’s necessary
Oct 28, 2014 | 15979 views | 0 0 comments | 957 957 recommendations | email to a friend | print
If the recent "Ebola-ing" alley scare in Brooklyn teaches us anything, it’s that we can’t always trust good people to do the right thing.

We’re referring of course to Dr. Craig Spencer’s subway gallivant from the Bronx to Brooklyn’s The Gutter bowling alley shortly before his positive diagnosis of Ebola.

While it may be easy to stand with nurse Kaci Hickox and say that she and other healthcare workers should be allowed to their 21-day quarantine at home, that is not what is in the best interest of our nation at large.

We appreciate the efforts of healthcare workers who are risking their lives to treat Ebola patients in West Africa just as much as the next newspaper, but we should also be able to reasonably expect that these healthcare workers would be willing to sacrifice 21 days of their lives to ensure that Americans at home aren't exposed to the deadly virus.

Sure, it seems like in-home quarantine is the best option right now, but what about when hundreds of doctors are returning to all corners of the U.S.? How equipped will state and local governments, located so far removed from the problem of Ebola and with social and economic issues of their own be to deal with a potential health crisis in their communities?

The only sure way to negate an Ebola crisis before it begins in the U.S. is to strictly quarantine all health workers as well as any others who have been in areas where contamination is likely.

We need our elected officials and health leaders to stand strong on this issue, and we need them to provide comfortable, livable conditions for our returning healthcare heroes, so that their efforts to contain the pandemic aren’t in vain.

Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet