Legal preparedness for health emergencies: Lessons from Canada’s SARS outbreak


Back to Annual Meeting Page		American Public Health Association 133rd Annual Meeting & Exposition December 10-14, 2005 Philadelphia, PA

3370.0: Monday, December 12, 2005 - 4:30 PM

Abstract #112575

Nola M. Ries, MPA, LLM, Health Law Institute, University of Alberta, 4th Floor, Law Centre, Edmonton, AB T6G 2H5, Canada, (780) 492-7577, nries@law.ualberta.ca

In 2003, Canada faced the most significant outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outside Asia. As with many other countries, the emergence of this novel disease instigated serious evaluation of public health preparedness in Canada, including analysis of gaps in legal authority needed to support key public health activities such as surveillance, quarantine and other disease control measures. Four expert commissions have recently examined weaknesses in Canada's public health system and all have highlighted legal ambiguities that impede emergency response. As our close neighbor, the state of Canada's public health preparedness is of major concern to the U.S.

Post-SARS, Canada has finally established a national public health agency (often described as “CDC North”), yet legislation to support the functions of this agency is still under development. The national government is also attempting to modernize quarantine legislation and clarify the relationship of the national public health agency with other levels of government, both internal and external.

This presentation will highlight lessons learned from Canada's experience with SARS to identify and discuss legal barriers that may impede appropriate public health emergency response. These include the impact of privacy rights on surveillance and information sharing, legal challenges to public health measures that limit individual liberty, and tensions that arise in international relationships during outbreak situations. Examples from other contexts – such as pandemic influenza and bioterrorism events – will also be discussed. The presentation will emphasize the international consequences of public health preparedness at the national level.

Learning Objectives:

At the end of this session, participants will be able to

1. Describe legal problems that may impede public health emergency response.
2. Apply lessons from the SARS case example to other health emergency contexts.
3. Identify international ramifications associated with national public health preparedness.

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

I wish to disclose that I have NO financial interests or other relationship with the manufactures of commercial products, suppliers of commercial services or commercial supporters.

Bioterrorism, Emergency Preparedness and the Law, Part B

The 133rd Annual Meeting & Exposition (December 10-14, 2005) of APHA