As we hear more about Disease X (a next, new pandemic) being an upcoming threat to humankind, let’s begin more armed with counterpoints than we began in 2020. For example, here’s a peer-reviewed publication regarding the 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts case:
At top, the authors are talking about the Nancy Cruzan case of 1990, where Nancy Cruzan was in an accident and left in a vegetative state, and the parents wanted her pulled off of life support:
In laying out the case, it was assumed by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCUSA) that mentally-competent persons have a constitutional right to refuse medical treatments which their doctors had told them they must take — i.e., that medical doctors do not get to decide what goes into your body.
The case regarded whether others (family members) could speak for you if you were mentally incapacitated and unable to make the personal decision about what goes into your body. At bottom in the quote above, you see a statement about how “emergencies” do not override your personal right to control what goes in your body.
In the near future, this “right to refuse” which we all have may become crucial.
Reference
[people have the right to refuse medical treatments] — Mariner WK, Annas GJ, Glantz LH. Jacobson v Massachusetts: it's not your great-great-grandfather's public health law. Am J Public Health. 2005 Apr;95(4):581-90. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.055160. PMID: 15798113; PMCID: PMC1449224. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1449224/
[case involving Nancy Cruzan where SCUSA acknowledged people’s right to refuse medical treatments] — Oyez. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1989/88-1503