Legislative reform of Washington's tuberculosis law: The tension between due process and protecting public health

Washington Law Review

Volumn 71, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 989-1034

  Vincler, Lisa A ^a   Gordon, Deborah L ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b McIntyre and Barns   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0345986806     PISSN: 00430617     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (274)

1. George J. Annas, Control of Tuberculosis - The Law and the Public's Health, 328 New Eng. J. Med. 585 (1993).
2. "Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is a blood-borne virus transmitted most frequently by unprotected sexual intercourse or the sharing of HIV-contaminated needles and syringes among intravenous drug users (IVDUs). Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) is the end stage of an infection caused by HIV and is always fatal." Spokane County Health Dist. v. Brockett, 120 Wash. 2d 140, 143 (1992); see also John M. Karon et al., Projections of the number of persons diagnosed with AIDS and the number of immunosuppressed HIV-infected persons: United States, 1992-1994, 41 (RR-18) Morbidity & Mortality Wkly. Rep. 1 (1992) (expanding AIDS surveillance definition to include severe immunosuppression);
3. Revision of the CDC Surveillance Case Definition for Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, 36 Morbidity & Mortality Wkly. Rep. 3S (1987).
4. Lawrence O. Gostin, The Resurgent Tuberculosis Epidemic in the Era of AIDS: Reflections on Public Health, Law, and Society, 54 Md. L. Rev. 1, 13 (1995).
5. Id. at 20.
6. Id. at 14.
7. Id.
8. Id. at 13-14.
9. Id. at 13.
10. Jody A. Eckler, Myths & Facts About Tuberculosis, 25 Nursing 17 (1995).
11. Gostin, supra note 3, at 15.
12. Teri Flowers, Quarantining the Noncompliant TB Patient: Catching the Red Snapper, 28 J. Health & Hosp. L. 95 (1995).
13. Id. at 95.
14. Gostin, supra note 3, at 15.
15. Id. at 17.
16. William R. Jarvis, Nosocomial transmission of multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis, 23 Am. J. Infection Control 146 (1995).
17. Consuelo Beck-Sague, Hospital outbreak of multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis infections: Factors in transmission to staff and HIV-infected patients, 268 JAMA 1280 (1992);
18. Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis outbreak on an HIV ward: Madrid, Spain, 1991-1995, 45 Morbidity & Mortality Wkly. Rep. 330 (1996);
19. see also Dr. Thomas M. Hooton, Address at Harborview Medical Center's Trauma Care for the 1990s Conference (Apr. 15, 1993) (transcript on file with Washington Law Review).
20. Lawrence O. Gostin, Controlling the Resurgent Tuberculosis Epidemic, 269 JAMA 255 (1993).
21. Revision of the CDC Surveillance Case Definition for Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome, supra note 2.
22. Charles M. Nolan, A New Era of TB Resurgence Demands Updated Laws and Regulations, 1994 Wash. Pub. Health 1;
23. see also Hooton, supra note 16.
24. Gostin, supra note 3, at 12.
25. Gostin, supra note 17, at 255.
26. Flowers, supra note 11, at 95.
27. Gostin, supra note 3, at 21.
28. Richard E. Chaisson, HIV Infection and Tuberculosis, 2 HIV 11 (1992).
29. Id.
30. Flowers, supra note 11, at 96;
31. Prevention and control of tuberculosis in U.S. communities with at-risk minority populations: Recommendations of the Advisory Council for the Elimination of Tuberculosis, 41 Morbidity & Mortality Wkly. Rep. 1 (1992).
32. Gostin, supra note 3, at 13.
33. Gostin, supra note 17.
34. See TB's Resurgence Calls for New Drugs, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Mar. 26, 1996, at A6.
35. Chaisson, supra note 24, at 12.
36. Charles M. Nolan, Human immunodeficiency syndrome-associated tuberculosis: A review with an emphasis on infection control issues, 20 Am. J. Infection Control 30 (1992).
37. Id.
38. Seattle Post-Intelligencer, supra note 29.
39. Id.
40. Id.
41. Id.
42. Susan E. Buskin et al., Tuberculosis Risk Factors in Adults in King County, Washington, 1988 through 1990, 84 Am. J. Pub. Health 1750 (1994); Interview with Dr. Charles M. Nolan, Director, TB Control Program, Seattle-King County Pub. Health Dep't, in Seattle, Wash. (Feb. 1996).
43. Buskin et al., supra note 37, at 1753.
44. CDC, Initial therapy for tuberculosis in the era of multidrug resistance: Recommendations of the Advisory Council for the Elimination of Tuberculosis, 270 JAMA 694 (1993);
45. CDC recommends four-drug treatment of tuberculosis in multidrug-resistant era, 48 Am. Fam. Physician 671 (1993).
46. Flowers, supra note 11, at 96.
47. Nolan, supra note 19, at 2.
48. Nolan, supra note 19, at 2.
49. Id.
50. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-002 (Supp. 1996). But see Gostin, supra note 3, at 22 ("Tuberculosis infection is usually transmitted through prolonged contact with a contagious person.").
51. Wash. Rev. Code § 246-170-002.
52. See Buskin et al., supra note 37.
53. Wash. Rev. Code § 43.20.050 (1996).
54. Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 43.20.050 historical note (West 1994).
55. Wash. Rev. Code § 43.20.050 (1996).
56. Wash. Rev. Code § 43.20.050.
57. Wash. Const art. XI, § 11.
58. Spokane County Health Dist. v. Brockett, 120 Wash. 2d 140, 146, 839 P.2d 324, 328 (1992) (quoting Lenci v. Seattle, 63 Wash. 2d 664, 667 (1964), and affirming ability of local health department to conduct needle-exchange program).
59. See. e.g., Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031 (1996).
60. Kollin K. Min, Comment, The White Plague Returns: Law and the New Tuberculosis, 69 Wash. L. Rev. 1121, 1126 (1994).
61. Id.
62. See, e.g., Jarvis, supra note 15.
63. Interviews with Katherine M. Anderson, then Coordinator, Washington State TB Control Program, in Seattle, Wash. (Feb. 1996) (regarding prior history of contribution made by groups whose work on this issue pre-dated TB Group). The TB Group began its work with a review of draft legislation proposed by a group of persons organized by the American Thoracic Society and American Lung Association that met in 1992. The 1992 group was comprised of members of Public Health Departments, the Thoracic Society, and the American Lung Association. Portions of this group's proposed legislation were incorporated in the legislation recommended in 1994 by the TB Group.
64. TB Planning Group Meeting Minutes (Feb. 22, 1993) (on file with Washington Law Review) [hereinafter Feb. 22, 1993 Minutes].
65. TB Planning Group Meeting Minutes (Mar. 5, 1993) (on file with Washington Law Review) [hereinafter Mar. 5, 1993 Minutes].
66. The TB Group began with the presumption that the comprehensive health care reform legislation passed by the Washington State Legislature in 1993 would soon be implemented and have profound and far-reaching effects on all state health care programs. See Feb. 22, 1993 Minutes, supra note 58.
67. Mar. 5, 1993 Minutes, supra note 59.
68. TB Planning Group Meeting Minutes 1 (July 23, 1993) (on file with Washington Law Review).
69. Id. at 2.
70. Id.
71. Id.
72. Id.
73. Memorandum from Roxie Schalliol, Washington State DOH, to the TB Planning Group (Aug. 12, 1993) (on file with Washington Law Review).
74. Id.
75. Department of Health, Immunization, & TB Servs., OFM Briefing: Proposed TB Legislation, Oct. 14, 1993, at 1.
76. Id.
77. 20 Op. Wash. State Att'y Gen. 10 (1993).
78. Id.
79. Interview with Katherine M. Anderson, then Coordinator, Washington State TB Control Program, in Seattle, Wash. (Apr. 1996); Interview with Gary Livingston, Coordinator, Washington State TB Control Program, in Seattle, Wash. (Feb. 1996).
80. S. 6158, 53d Leg., Reg. Sess., 1994 Wash. Laws 145.
81. Letter from Dr. M. Ward Hinds, Vice-Chair, Washington State Board of Health, to Representative Dellwo (Jan. 12, 1994) (on file with Washington Law Review).
82. Senator Phil Talmadge, then Chair of the Washington State Senate Health and Human Services Committee, expressed his opposition to these draft regulations in writing. Letter from Sen. Talmadge to Dr. M. Ward Hinds, Chair of the State Board of Health (Nov. 29, 1994) (on file with Washington Law Review). The letter stated that "the draft rules place unneeded obstacles in the way of public health professionals and so violate our intent when we agreed to pass ESB 6158." Id. The rules were adopted as drafted. S. 6158.
83. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.05.060 (1996).
84. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.05.010 (1996).
85. Linda Topel, Northwest Ctr. for Pub. Health Practice, Welcome to Public Health! A Guidebook for Local Board of Health Members 12 (1st ed. 1996). For information and requirements regarding combined city-county health departments, see Washington Revised Code chapter 70.08 (1996).
86. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-011(23) (1995).
87. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-036(1) (1995).
88. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-036(3) (1995).
89. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-211(1) (1995).
90. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.010 (1996).
91. See Wash. Admin. Code §§ 246-100-236, -231 (1995).
92. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031.
93. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031.
94. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031.
95. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031(e).
96. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031(g).
97. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.033 (1996).
98. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.035 (1996).
99. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.037 (1996).
100. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-051(2)(d) (1995).
101. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031(d).
102. These regulations were later enacted in January 1995; for a discussion of these regulations see infra part V.
103. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031.
104. Interviews with Katherine M. Anderson, supra note 57.
105. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-055 (Supp. 1996).
106. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.032 (1996).
107. See Wash. Admin. Code §§ 246-170-051, -055.
108. Wash. Rev. Code chs. 70.05, 70.28 (1996).
109. See Wash. Const. art. XI, § 11.
110. Interview with Katherine M. Anderson, supra note 57; Interview with Gary Livingston, supra note 73; Interview with Dr. Charles Nolan, supra note 37.
111. Rosemary G. Reilly, Combating the Tuberculosis Epidemic: The Legality of Coercive Treatment Measures, 27 Colum. J.L. & Soc. Probs. 101, 103 (1993).
112. Id.
113. Wash. Rev. Code ch. 70.24 (1996).
114. In addition to the relationship between TB and HIV/AIDS public health laws there is also a relationship between the diseases themselves. As noted earlier, tuberculosis occurs with increased frequency among HIV/AIDS infected persons. Nolan, supra note 31. Thus, patients may have both diseases, although LHO intervention measures may be related to only one of the patient's communicable diseases.
115. Reilly, supra note 105, at 118.
116. See TB Planning Group Meeting Minutes (Mar. 26, 1993) (on file with Washington Law Review). Interview with Katherine M. Anderson, supra note 57; Interview with Gary Livingston, supra note 73. Membership on the committee included persons knowledgeable about mental health commitment and advocates of HIV/AIDS service organizations.
117. TB Planning Group Meeting Minutes (Apr. 21, 1993) (on file with Washington Law Review) [hereinafter Apr. 21, 1993 Minutes]; see also Wash. Rev. Code ch. 70.24.
118. State ex rel. Richey v. Superior Court, 59 Wash. 2d 872, 876-77, 371 P.2d 51, 54 (1962); State ex rel. Martin v. Superior Court, 101 Wash. 81, 94, 172 P. 257, 260-61 (1918).
119. Apr. 21, 1993 Minutes, supra note 111.
120. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.024.
121. Nolan, supra note 19, at 3.
122. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-206 (Supp. 1996).
123. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.024.
124. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.024.
125. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.024.
126. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.024.
127. If such information is received from an infected individual, then the exposure to the STD must have occurred during a period when the disease may have been infectious, the contact must have been sufficient to transmit the disease, and, in the health officer's judgment, the individual is credible and believable. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-206.
128. "Conduct endangering public health" for all STDs is defined as anal, oral, or vaginal intercourse; activities introducing blood, semen, or vaginal fluids into a body orifice, a mucous membrane, the eye, or an open cut, wound, lesion, or other interruption of the epidermis; or a needle puncture or penetrating wound resulting in exposure to blood, semen, or vaginal fluids. For HIV and Hepatitis B, "conduct endangering public health" also includes the sharing of injection equipment and donating or selling blood, blood products, body tissues, or semen. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-206.
129. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-206.
130. "Behaviors presenting imminent danger to public health" means anal or vaginal intercourse without a latex condom, sharing use of blood-contaminated injection equipment, or donating or selling HIV-infected blood, blood products, or semen by an individual with a laboratory-confirmed HIV infection. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-206.
131. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.340. "Substantial exposure" means physical contact resulting in exposure presenting possible risk, limited to a physical assault upon the exposed person involving blood or semen; intentional, unauthorized, nonconsensual use of needles or sharp implements to inject or mutilate the exposed person; an accidental parenteral or mucous membrane or non-intact skin exposure to blood, semen, or vaginal fluids. "Exposure presenting possible risk" means one or more of the following: introduction of blood, semen, or vaginal fluids into a body orifice, mucus membrane, the eye, or an open cut, wound, lesion, or other interruption of the epidermis; or a needle puncture or penetrating wound resulting in exposure to blood, semen, or vaginal fluids. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-206.
132. See Wash. Rev. Code ch. 71.05 (1996); Interviews with Gerald A. Smith, Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, in Seattle, Wash. (Feb. 1996). A person may voluntarily seek treatment for mental illness if he or she is capable of giving informed consent for the recommended treatment. In such instances, the individual's treatment may be privately handled as any other treatment relationship between doctor and patient. The focus of this section is not on such voluntary treatment situations but rather the on involuntary mental health treatment system.
133. E.g., Reilly, supra note 105, at 114-15 (referencing State v. Snow, 324 S.W.2d 532 (Ark. 1959), which is an early case making the analogy between confinement for public health reasons due to communicable disease and involuntary commitment for mental illness).
134. Gerald A. Smith & John H. Hertog, Involuntary Commitment, in Washington Family Law Deskbook § 72.3(6) (1991).
135. Id.
136. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.150.
137. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.210.
138. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.200(1)(a).
139. Wash. Rev. Code §§ 71.05.230, .240.
140. In re J.S., 124 Wash. 2d 689, 699, 880 P.2d 976, 978-79 (1994).
141. Smith & Hertog, supra note 128.
142. Id.
143. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.280.
144. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.290.
145. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.300.
146. Smith & Hertog, supra note 128, § 72.6(4).
147. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.320.
148. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.010.
149. In re LaBelle, 107 Wash. 2d 196, 221, 728 P.2d 138, 153 (1986).
150. State ex rel. Richey v. Superior Court, 59 Wash. 2d 872, 371 P.2d 51 (1962); State ex rel. Martin v. Superior Court, 101 Wash. 81, 172 P. 257 (1918).
151. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.370.
152. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.470.
153. Smith & Hertog, supra note 128.
154. "Likelihood of serious harm" means either (a) a substantial risk that physical harm will be inflicted by an individual upon his or her own person, as evidenced by threats or attempts to commit suicide or inflict physical harm on one's self, (b) a substantial risk that physical harm will be inflicted by an individual upon another, as evidenced by behavior which has caused such harm or which places another person or persons in reasonable fear of sustaining such harm, or (c) a substantial risk that physical harm will be inflicted by an individual upon the property of others, as evidenced by behavior which has caused substantial loss or damage to the property of others. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.020(3).
155. "Gravely disabled" means: [A] condition in which a person, as a result of a mental disorder (a) Is in danger of serious physical harm resulting from a failure to provide for his essential human needs of health or safety, or (b) manifests severe deterioration in routine functioning evidenced by repeated and escalating loss of cognitive or volitional control over his or her actions and is not receiving such care as is essential for his or her health or safety." Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.020(1).
156. "Mental disorder" means "any organic, mental, or emotional impairment which has substantial adverse effects on an individual's cognitive or volitional functions." § 71.05.020(2).
157. In re Harris, 98 Wash. 2d 276, 654 P.2d 109 (1982).
158. Wash. Rev. Code §§ 70.28.005, 031.
159. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-051(4) (Supp. 1996).
160. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-051(4).
161. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.034; Wash. Admin. Code § 246-100-206(6)(d).
162. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.150.
163. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.020(1), (2), (3).
164. In re Harris, 98 Wash. 2d 276, 284-85, 654 P.2d 109, 113 (1982).
165. See id. at 279, 654 P.2d at 110-11 (citing Humphrey v. Cady, 405 U.S. 504, 509 (1972)).
166. Id. at 284, 654 P.2d at 113.
167. Because the statute does not contain a judicial review mechanism, it does not mention the burden of proof. Under the Administrative Procedures Act, however, the standard for judicial review of a final administrative action by an agency is, in its application, like an abuse of discretion standard. Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.570(3) (1996).
168. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-055.
169. In re Sego, 82 Wash. 2d 736, 739 n.2, 513 P.2d 831, 833 n.2 (1973); see also Washington Pattern Jury Instructions § 21.01 (3d ed. 1989) (stating that to meet burden of proof by preponderance of evidence, fact-finder must be persuaded in considering all evidence that proposition on which party has burden of proof is more probably true than not).
170. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.034(4).
171. Washington Pattern Jury Instructions, supra note 163, § 160.02.
172. See id. (citing Davis v. Department of Labor & Indus., 94 Wash. 2d 119, 127, 615 P.2d 1279, 1284 (1980)).
173. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965); State v. Koome, 84 Wash. 2d 901, 530 P.2d 260 (1975).
174. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.150.
175. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.150(2).
176. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.240.
177. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.310.
178. See Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.005.
179. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-055.
180. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.024(4)(a).
181. Wash. Rev. Code §§ 71.05.460, .300; see also In re Quesnell, 83 Wash. 2d 224, 243 517 P.2d 568, 580 (1973).
182. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.460.
183. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.300.
184. See Roy G. Spece, Jr., The Most Effective or Least Restrictive Alternative as Only Intermediate and Only Means-Focused Review in Due Process and Equal Protection, 33 Vill. L. Rev. 111, 113 n.2 (1988).
185. Id.
186. In re J.S., 124 Wash. 2d 689, 700, 880 P.2d 976, 981 (1994).
187. Id.
188. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031(e).
189. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-055.
190. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-051(1) (Supp. 1996).
191. Some TB Group members proposed a regulation containing this phrase: "A person . . . who cannot be relied upon to voluntarily submit to appropriate testing, treatment . . . ." TB Planning Group Meeting Minutes (Aug. 30, 1994) (on file with Washington Law Review). Other members objected to that phrase. The TB Group examined whether the individual's reliability was at issue and whether the regulation should focus on whether or not a person had voluntarily submitted. The members did agree ultimately that reliability is an issue because the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior and because the LHO should have some discretion to prevent likely noncompliance from occurring. Id.
192. See Wash. Rev. Code ch. 70.24.
193. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.024(2).
194. Telephone interview with Frank Chaffee, Program Coordinator, HIV Counseling AIDS Prevention Project, Seattle-King County Dep't of Pub. Health (Feb. 1996).
195. Wash. Rev. Code §§ 71.05.230, .240; see also Wash. Rev. Code §§ 71.05.290, .320.
196. Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418, 425 (1979); In re McLaughlin, 100 Wash. 2d 832, 676 P.2d 444 (1984).
197. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.340.
198. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.300.
199. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031.
200. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-055(2).
201. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-055(4).
202. Telephone interview with William L. Williams, Senior Assistant Attorney Gen. & former legal counsel, Washington State Dep't of Pub. Health (June 1996).
203. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.032(1)(b).
204. Telephone interview with Frank Chaffee, supra note 188.
205. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.24.034.
206. See Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.180. Some commentators have noted the possibility that allowing for weekends and holidays, the initial commitment for seventy-two hours could actually stretch to as much as six days. Smith & Hertog, supra note 128, § 72.3(2).
207. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.230.
208. Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.320.
209. Wash. Rev. Code §§ 71.05.260, .340.
210. Letter from Senator Phil Talmadge to Christine Gregoire, Attorney Gen. (Oct. 28, 1993) [hereinafter Sen. Talmadge's Letter] (on file with Washington Law Review).
211. Wash. Rev. Code ch. 70.28.
212. Wash. Rev. Code ch. 70.05.
213. 20 Op. Wash. Att'y Gen. 5(1993).
214. Id.
215. Special Report: Tuberculosis, AIDS Pol'y & L., Supp. Apr. 1993, at 5-6.
216. 20 Op. Wash. Att'y Gen. 5, 7 (1993).
217. Id. at 6-7.
218. Id. at 2.
219. Id. at 7-8.
220. See infra part VII.
221. 20 Op. Wash. Att'y Gen. 8 (1993) (citing In re Schuoler, 106 Wash. 2d 500, 723 P.2d 1103 (1986) (regarding involuntary electro-convulsive therapy (shock treatment)); see also in re Young, 122 Wash. 2d 1, 857 P.2d 989 (1993); Harper v. State, 110 Wash. 2d 873, 759 P.2d 358 (1988) (regarding involuntary administration of anti-psychotic medications), rev'd, 494 U.S. 210 (1990); In re Ingram, 102 Wash. 2d 827, 689 P.2d 1363 (1984) (regarding involuntary invasive surgery); Recovery Northwest v. Thorslund, 70 Wash. App. 146, 851 P.2d 1259 (1993) (regarding constitutionality of involuntary alcohol commitment statute).
222. 20 Op. Wash. Att'y Gen. 6-7 (1993) (citing 120 Wash. 2d 140, 839 P.2d 324 (1992)).
223. Spokane County Health Dist. v. Brockett, 120 Wash. 2d 140, 149, 839 P.2d 324, 329 (1992) (quoting Kahl v. Chehalis, 45 Wash. 2d 616, 621, 277 P.2d 352, 355 (1954), and affirming ability of local health department to conduct needle-exchange program).
224. Gostin, supra note 3, at 97.
225. 20 Op. Wash. Att'y Gen. 10 (1993).
226. Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.032(1)(b). The Washington State Constitution established the State Board of Health in 1889, making public health a government responsibility in Washington. State law has continued to refine the role, responsibilities, and structure of the public health authorities. In 1921, a State Department of Health was created. The State Board of Health is primarily responsible for addressing issues and making regulations that are principally of local concern and over which the DOH has limited authority. For more information on Washington's public health system and structure, and the relationship between DOH and the State Board of Health, see Thomas L. Milne, A Separate Department of Health in Washington State: Four Years Before the Mast, 11 J. Pub. Health Pol'y 305 (1990).
227. See Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.032 (1) (b).
228. Reilly, supra note 105, at 129.
229. Annas, supra note 1, at 585.
230. 480 U.S. 273 (1987).
231. Id. at 287.
232. Id. at 287-88.
233. Id.
234. Annas, supra note 1, at 586.
235. See Sen. Talmadge's Letter, supra note 204.
236. Annas, supra note 1, at 586.
237. John A. Gleason, Comment, Quarantine: An Unreasonable Solution to the AIDS Dilemma, 55 U. Cin. L. Rev. 217, 221 (1986).
238. Id.
239. Deborah Jones Merritt, The Constitutional Balance Between Health and Liberty, in AIDS: Public Health and Civil Liberties, Hastings Center Rep., Supp. Dec. 1986, at 2, 3.
240. Id. at 4.
241. Humphrey v. Cady, 405 U.S. 504, 509 (1972).
242. 197 U.S. 11 (1905).
243. Reilly, supra note 105, at 109.
244. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 25 (1905).
245. Id. at 26.
246. Spokane County Health Dist. v. Brockett, 120 Wash. 2d 140, 839 P.2d 324 (1992); State ex rel. McBride v. Superior Court, 103 Wash. 409, 174 P. 973 (1918); Brown v. Pierce County, 28 Wash. 345, 68 P. 872 (1902); Snohomish County Builders Ass'n v. Snohomish Health Dist, 8 Wash. App. 589, 508 P.2d 617 (1973).
247. Brockett, 120 Wash. 2d at 149, 839 P.2d at 329..
248. Id. (citing Kaul v. Chehalis, 45 Wash. 2d 616, 621, 277 P.2d 352, 355 (1954)).
249. 120 Wash. 2d 140, 839 P.2d 324 (1992).
250. Id. at 143, 839 P.2d at 325-26.
251. Id.
252. Id. at 155, 839 P.2d at 332 (citing Wash. Rev. Code chs. 70.05, .24 (1996)).
253. Id. at 149 (citing Wash. Rev. Code § 70.05.070(2)).
254. Id. (quoting Kaul v. Chehalis, 45 Wash. 2d 616, 621, 277 P.2d 352, 355 (1954)).
255. Id.
256. See Sen. Talmadge's Letter, supra note 204.
257. In re Young, 122 Wash. 2d 1, 26, 857 P.2d 989, 1000 (1993).
258. Id. at 43-44, 857 P.2d at 1010 (citing Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 (1976)).
259. In re Harris, 98 Wash. 2d 276, 287-88, 654 P.2d 109, 114-15 (1982).
260. Interview with Katherine M. Anderson, supra note 57; Telephone interview with Dr. M. Ward Hinds, Snohomish County Health Dist. (Apr. 1996); Interview with Gary Livingston, supra note 73; Interview with Dr. Charles Nolan, supra note 37; Interview with Gerald A. Smith, supra note 126.
261. Supra note 254.
262. Interview with Katherine M. Anderson, supra note 57; Telephone interview with Dr. M. Ward Hinds, Snohomish County Health Dist. (Apr. 1996); Interview with Gary Livingston, supra note 73; Interview with Gerald A. Smith, supra note 126.
263. Nolan, supra note 19, at 2. This Article notes that a case, State v. McQuakey, was argued in Seattle District Court in 1986 that greatly influenced the approach taken by the Seattle-King County Dep't of Public Health. This (non-appellate) case is cited by Dr. Charles Nolan as substantially deterring the Department from using the health officer's quarantine statute, Wash. Rev. Code § 70.28.031, to act against noncompliant infectious patients. Id. Dr. Nolan reports that the court held "the state statute authorizing involuntary commitment. . . unconstitutional because it denie[d] the accused patient due process of law." Id. at 1. The Article also notes that such a predicament is not encountered uniformly throughout Washington State and that some local and county health officers have not had difficulty using the quarantine statute. Id. at 2.
264. In researching this paper, an attempt was made to locate the State v. McQuakey court file through both the King County Superior Court and the Municipal Court systems to no avail. The clerk's office reported that this file was destroyed following completion of its records retention schedule.
265. Albert R. Jonsen, et al., Clinical Ethics § 1.0.1 (3d ed. 1992).
266. Nolan, supra note 19, at 3.
267. Carol W. Runyan, Progress and Potential in Injury Control, 83 Am. J. Pub. Health, 637, 638 (1993).
268. Wash. Admin. Code § 246-170-051 (4)(b) (Supp. 1996).
269. Sometimes these arrangements are made at local motels with proper ventilation systems, but one health department in Yakima, Washington actually purchased a travel trailer for such housing needs. Interview with Dr. Charles Nolan, supra note 37; Telephone interview with Dr. Diana Yu, Thurston County Health Officer (Apr. 1996).
270. 20 Op. Wash. Att'y Gen. 10 (1993).
271. See Annas, supra note 1.
272. Nolan, supra note 19, at 3.
273. Lee B. Reichman, Fear, Embarrassment, and Relief: The Tuberculosis Epidemic and Public Health, 83 Am. J. Pub. Health 639 (1993) (commenting that in 1962 Dr. F.L. Soper of Office of Surgeon General noted that eradication of tuberculosis would require solving many other problems (such as psychological, administrative, educational, and financial)).
274. See Annas, supra note 1, at 587.