September 18, 2007
TB Patient and Potential Suit against CDC
Over at Concurring Opinions, Professor Daniel Solove looks into whether the infamous TB patient may sue the CDC for release of his name. Professor Solove thinks that he may have a case and provides this overview of Mr. Speaker's life and potential lawsuit,
The WSJ blog points to this interesting update about the TB patient who was quarantined for having a highly-resistant strain of TB. I blogged about the case here and here. According to the news story, times aren't very good from Andrew Speaker, the TB patient:
Speaker was released from National Jewish on July 26, his treatment successfully completed. He takes 11 pills every morning at 8 a.m., supervised by public health officials who drop by on their way to work -- a standard regimen he will follow for the next two years to make sure the TB has been fully eradicated. He's in excellent health and has gone back to his previous routines, unmasked and unquarantined.
But his personal injury law practice is floundering, and his life is far from normal. His existing clients have stuck with him, but there have been no new clients since the ordeal began. The perception that he's a selfish jerk who thought nothing of exposing others to a deadly disease lingers.
"The CDC told everyone that I only care about myself," he said. "They made statements they knew were wrong. They intentionally went after my family and our character." . . . .
Speaker is also being sued in Canada for $1.3 million by eight passengers on his flight from Prague to Montreal for potentially exposing them to TB plus pain and suffering. The brother of one passenger is also suing.
At the end of the article is this interesting tidbit:
Does Speaker have any plans to sue the CDC?
"They're a federal agency. They have immunity," he said in resignation. "It's easier to think this guy is a jerk than that a government agency got together to intentionally misinform the public. That's much harder to believe."
According to the news reports, Speaker's name was disclosed by government medical officials (probably CDC officials trying to cover their behinds for screwing up so badly). Medical officials have legal and ethical duties to maintain confidentiality. There's also a potential Bivens action for a violation of the constitutional right to information privacy. See Whalen v. Roe, 429 U.S. 589 (1977). Most circuits recognize the constitutional right to information privacy, and it is violated by unjustified disclosures of personal information, especially medical data. For example, in Doe v. Borough of Barrington, 729 F. Supp. 376 (D.N.J. 1990), the court held that the police could be liable for disclosing to a person's neighbor that the person was HIV positive. There are many other cases on point.
The short of it is that Speaker does have a case against the CDC if he can prove that CDC officials leaked his name and/or other medical information. It is clearly established that government officials have a duty of confidentiality of medical data under the constitutional right to information privacy in most circuits, so any qualified immunity claims would not bar liability (qualified immunity applies if the constitutional violation is not clearly established). . . .
September 18, 2007 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference TB Patient and Potential Suit against CDC: