Martin Robyn
Centre for Research in Primary and Community Care, University of Hertfordshire, UK.
Public Health. 2007 Nov;121(11):846-53. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2007.07.016. Epub 2007 Sep 7.
The organized efforts of the state to protect its citizens from threats to the public's health presuppose some commonality of health beliefs and behaviors, and legislation underpinning public health interventions is premised on the beliefs and behaviors of the population majority. To what extent, in a public health emergency, can members of a cultural or religious minority use human rights arguments to justify exemption from public health measures on the basis of offensiveness of those measures to cultural or religious beliefs? Any such challenge cannot rely on arguments based on autonomy of the individual. The person objecting to the public health measure will need to establish that the burden of compliance will be significantly greater because of offensiveness of that measure to belief, so as to impose on the individual a burden disproportionate to the risk to health of the public as a whole.
国家为保护公民免受对公众健康的威胁而做出的有组织努力,预先假定了健康信念和行为存在一定的共性,并且支撑公共卫生干预措施的立法是以大多数民众的信念和行为为前提的。在公共卫生紧急情况下,文化或宗教少数群体的成员在何种程度上可以利用人权论据,以公共卫生措施冒犯其文化或宗教信仰为由,为免除这些措施进行辩护?任何此类质疑都不能依赖基于个人自主性的论据。反对公共卫生措施的人需要证明,由于该措施冒犯其信仰,遵守该措施的负担将显著加重,从而给个人带来与整个公众健康风险不相称的负担。