- Email: [email protected]
In the wake of terror: medicine and morality in a time of crisis
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Social Science & Medicine 59 (2004) 1782
Book review In the wake of terror: medicine and morality in a time of crisis Jonathan D. Moreno (Ed.); Bradford Book, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2003, 229 pages, price $24.95 (cloth) This book is a collection of essays on what bioterror means for public health, health care personnel, health care institutions, pharmacy, and medicine. The book was published shortly after the anthrax crisis in America, which killed some and threatened many. Each chapter raises the same issues: every health care worker, provider, and institution must recognize that bioterror is a threat that supercedes individual need and individual rights. In the face of bioterror, public need may demand that pharmaceutical firms suspend their patent rights and profits, individuals suspend their medical privacy, and owners of health care facilities let their facilities be nationalized. The essays in this work go beyond clich!es to raise issues such as the extensive trust that these steps will require between patients, providers, officials, and industrialists. According to the authors of this work, it will be difficult to achieve this trust in the United States so long as people lack access to care. The tone of this volume is thoughtful, it and contains a great deal of new information. The Model State Emergency Powers Act is just one example. I doubt that
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.02.007
most people know about this legislation and its implications for state government and public health, and it is explained in detail in this book. Those explanations include such issues as ‘‘reasonable restrictions,’’ and ‘‘common-sense’’ steps, and most chapters give examples of people and institutions placing common good ahead of personal gain. Clearly, liberals and conservatives differ over what ‘‘reasonable’’ means. Also, the bioterror response exists in a larger political context. As events have shown, some people associate the bioterror threat to the larger ‘‘war on terror’’ which includes legislation that has nothing directly to do with health. Others want to use the need to create trust in the system to justify their claims for universal access to health care. This book is a ‘must read’. Bioterror is not the first health crisis the United States has faced, and the larger political/economic context has tended to obfuscate the true health context.
Steven Andes Health Policy Administration, School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1603 W. Taylor, Chicago, IL 60612, USA E-mail address: [email protected]
Social Science & Medicine 59 (2004) 1782
Book review In the wake of terror: medicine and morality in a time of crisis Jonathan D. Moreno (Ed.); Bradford Book, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2003, 229 pages, price $24.95 (cloth) This book is a collection of essays on what bioterror means for public health, health care personnel, health care institutions, pharmacy, and medicine. The book was published shortly after the anthrax crisis in America, which killed some and threatened many. Each chapter raises the same issues: every health care worker, provider, and institution must recognize that bioterror is a threat that supercedes individual need and individual rights. In the face of bioterror, public need may demand that pharmaceutical firms suspend their patent rights and profits, individuals suspend their medical privacy, and owners of health care facilities let their facilities be nationalized. The essays in this work go beyond clich!es to raise issues such as the extensive trust that these steps will require between patients, providers, officials, and industrialists. According to the authors of this work, it will be difficult to achieve this trust in the United States so long as people lack access to care. The tone of this volume is thoughtful, it and contains a great deal of new information. The Model State Emergency Powers Act is just one example. I doubt that
doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.02.007
most people know about this legislation and its implications for state government and public health, and it is explained in detail in this book. Those explanations include such issues as ‘‘reasonable restrictions,’’ and ‘‘common-sense’’ steps, and most chapters give examples of people and institutions placing common good ahead of personal gain. Clearly, liberals and conservatives differ over what ‘‘reasonable’’ means. Also, the bioterror response exists in a larger political context. As events have shown, some people associate the bioterror threat to the larger ‘‘war on terror’’ which includes legislation that has nothing directly to do with health. Others want to use the need to create trust in the system to justify their claims for universal access to health care. This book is a ‘must read’. Bioterror is not the first health crisis the United States has faced, and the larger political/economic context has tended to obfuscate the true health context.
Steven Andes Health Policy Administration, School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1603 W. Taylor, Chicago, IL 60612, USA E-mail address: [email protected]