ABSTRACT
This chapter provides a rough map, from within a framework of rights. Assume that people ordinarily have personal rights, such as rights to bodily integrity, freedom of movement and association, and confidentiality. Compulsion for the sake of controlling contagious disease might be justified on the grounds that while these rights are important, they are not absolute, and when there is enough good, they may be overridden. Or it might be that people do not have rights against compulsion when it is needed to defend other people's rights against being infected an idea of self-defence. This chapter explores each of these ideas of overriding rights, self-defence, and collective action problems. It sets out a framework for assessing the ethics of public health restrictions from the perspective of rights. There are important differences between saying public health compulsion that is justified for the sake of the overall good' and public health compulsion that is justified in self-defence'.
