Cogent and Fallacious Reasoning #2 Protected by Privacy Policies , UNLESS You Have Ebola?

The first words out of my sons mouth as he walked through the door were, "Did you hear the news, someone in Dallas has Ebola!" We consider Dallas our home, so that shocking statement sent my imagination into overdrive, creating horrific images of my dear friends in make shift hospitals, quarantined and doomed to contract this dreaded disease. I quickly got online searching for details, and found out it was true, Dallas, Texas welcomed it's first confirmed case of Ebola this week. 

In an article titled, "With Ebola, the Public’s Right to Know Trumps Patient Privacy",  Arthur Caplan of Wired tells us the story of the man who traveled to Dallas from Liberia to visit his family, unknowingly, bringing Ebola to the the U.S. Caplan insists that the government should break the laws that protect patient privacy because of the potential fear and panic it may cause the public to not know protected details about the infected individuals symptoms and treatment. 

We know Ebola is spread through body fluid. You would have to be in very close contact with this individual to have shared body fluid with him. The CDC is doing it's job and reaching out to people who could have been in contact with the infected patient. 


Caplan's arguments are fallacious, he is basiclly saying, "You need to break the law to tell us information about the infected person because we really, really, really want to know!" Yes, all of us are curious, but it doesn't justify breaking patient privacy laws.