Ethical Debate Brief

Triple Js Jocelyne, Joelle, Justyn

Our topic for the ethical debate is: Should privacy top surveillance when dealing with
infectious disease? Our stance on the issue is the con side that privacy should not top
surveillance. Our three main reasons why surveillance should top privacy are because infectious
diseases affect human security, surveillance is necessary, and surveillance can help countries in
crises.
Human security is an important factor in society, and includes the security of any aspect
of life that affects individuals directly rather than the group as a whole. Some of these factors
include economy, health, environment and famine. Human security risks threaten to burden our
resources and create global risk and instability. Infectious diseases directly affect human security,
and therefore surveillance should be prioritized to protect it.
Surveillance is necessary not only to protect human security, but for a variety of reasons.
Surveillance of infectious diseases is needed in order to identify infected food, where outbreaks
occur, and which strains of the flu virus to create vaccines from. Surveillance is also needed to
determine the safety of the blood supply, childcare facilities, and water. All of these uses are vital
to our society as they are the foundation of how we determine what is safe in our lives. Without
surveillance and keeping this entire information private, no one would have access to enough
information to make viable statements on what is safe or what is infected.
Our last point is that surveillance should top security because obtaining information can
allow us to help countries in conflict. Countries in conflict often do not have the resources or
funding to do their own surveillance or keep track of infectious diseases in their country. By

making surveillance a priority in our country, our health findings could help to inform countries
in conflict that could be easily brought into full-on disaster if an infectious disease broke out
rapidly.