Replacement for 389.
Repeal of GA389 (in turn continuing from a repeal from Kaschovia):
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=558202
Kasch/Tin's replacement:
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=536607
Legality
Note that this is also bound by GA#53, and the subsequent [2017] GAS 11 ruling that you cannot pass a resolution to encourage something and then have a subsequent resolution that prohibits it. Since GA#53 encourages home/hospital quarantine, I have interpreted this to mean that quarantine facilities cannot be set up except as a last resort and that quarantine cannot last indefinitely (because of the encouragement clause in GA#53).
Personal notes
I have been quarantined before and I find it unpleasant, and I believe the costs of quarantine sometimes outweigh the benefits (mental health issues for those isolated etc., vs potential life savings)
Do people get tired of quarantines?
There's a realistic issue (Tin actually raised this) - do people get tired of quarantines? Also segregating large portions of the population are not necessarily practicable, especially if a significant part of the population of a WA state are infected by the same disease at the same time - Covid-19 being the prime example (plus flus, potentially H5N1). The effects of school closures on education scores is becoming apparent.
Draft 2
The World Assembly (WA),
Affirming relevant GARs, including 53 (epidemic response), 97 (quality healthcare), 320 (disease control), 518 (disease vectors), and 566 (investigations);
Desiring a delicate balance between the rights of the quarantined, those at high risk from potential serious illnesses, the impact of extensive isolation on quality of life, and health outcomes for wider communities;
The WA hereby enacts as follows:
- Definitions. In this resolution:
- "Confinement" means the strict quarantine of individuals at specific locations designated by a WA state (other than at hospitals or their own usual residences), specifically to prevent the spread of quarantinable diseases.
- "EPARC" means the Epidemic and Pandemic Alert and Response Center.
- "State" refers to WA member states as well as competent authorities of that state, and "individual" refer to sapient individuals in a state.
- Quarantinable disease.
- A disease is "quarantinable" only if EPARC deems it to be (i) highly contagious; (ii) communicable through mere tangential or casual contact; and (iii) can result in highly detrimental outcomes for a significant portion of individuals exposed to the said disease.
- EPARC may define whether a disease is "quarantinable" differently in each state or in sub-national divisions in that state based on local factors, such as if a disease is endemic, the vaccination or treatment options available, the prevailing mortality rate, comorbidities or the prevalence of disease vectors.
- Diseases that can only be transmitted through sexual contact, or the transmission of body tissues (such as blood transfusion) cannot be deemed "quarantinable".
- Isolation measures.
- If a WA state detects an outbreak of a disease classified as "quarantinable" in that state, a WA state must be able to show clear and convincing evidence that adopting isolation measures is necessary to contain the spread of the said disease, and that the benefits to the wider community in that state outweigh the burden placed on isolated individuals. Mandatory treatment (including involuntary hospitalization) shall only be imposed if justified by the same standard of proof.
- Isolation measures shall be proportional to the severity of the outbreak. The use of social distancing, home isolation, and other less intrusive measures are to be prioritized. Confinement may only be imposed on an individual if a WA state can show clear and convincing evidence of sufficient severity and urgency, or if an individual cannot be otherwise isolated such as due to special medical needs, a lack of hospital capacity, or homelessness.
- The imposition of any isolation measures is subject to due process of law. Each state is required to impose safeguards to ensure that confinement is only imposed on a strictly necessary basis, and kept to such minimum time as deemed necessary by EPARC, taking into account a balance between public health and the interest and well-being of individuals under isolation.
- Confinement facilities. If a confinement order is imposed on an individual, a facility for confinement shall have in place protocols to:
- Provide reasonable levels of comfort, hygiene, safety, and the supply of basic necessities for anyone held in such a facility;
- Provide reasonable amenities such as Internet access for remote learning or remote work;
- Avoid separation of families, and to provide reasonable levels of care for children, infants, or individuals with physical disabilities or other special needs;
- Prevent cross-infections in a facility;
- Prevent facility staff from exposure to the said disease;
- Provide transit to and from a facility in a hygienic manner;
- Preserve the privacy and dignity of those held in such facilities;
- Provide (if available) ongoing treatment for that disease, and, to the best extent possible, general medical care for individuals confined.
- EPARC assistance.
- EPARC is to render sufficient support to any WA state to comply with this resolution, either at the request of a WA state, or at EPARC’s discretion if it deems such intervention necessary in the interest of the wellbeing of other WA states.
- EPARC is responsible for enforcement and interpretation of this resolution.
- Interpretation. An individual subject to isolation or quarantine is deemed part of a "protected class" and holding an "immutable characteristic". Terms in the singular include the plural and vice versa.
Co-author: Kaschovia
Char count: 4,805