Many city and states public health laws include a provision for detention of people with infectious disease, such as tuberculosis, if necessary to ensure treatment or halt further spread of a condition. Much of the literature around this issue is on the ethics of detention. You are hoping to find evidence that detention is an effective public health practice or case law supporting detention that you can use to justify your agency’s use of this strategy.P (Population or Patient or Problem): spread of infectious disease by people dangerous to others or not treatment-compliantI (Intervention):detentionC (Comparison, if one)O (Outcome(s))balance between individual rights and safety of populationBackground questions: What is the current legal standing of detention in your area?Foreground question (searchable): In what cases has detention been found an effective and legally supportable way to prevent disease transmission? This assignment must be written in a paragraph format. All resources MUST be cited in the paragraph(s). You are expected to cited at least two-three sources in your paragraph (s). Database(s) or resources that you would search: PubMed, LexisNexis or Westlaw or HEIN online, Bioethics resources (LocatorPlus)Terms that you would use in the searching: Quarantine/legislation & jurisprudence Communicable Disease Control/legislation & jurisprudence or Communicable Diseases Transmission (subheading)Look at your relevant results. Lacey C. Abuse of quarantine authority. The case for a federal approach to infectious disease containment. J Leg Med. 2003 Jun;24(2):199-214.Lerner BH. Catching patients: tuberculosis and detention in the 1990s. Chest. 1999 Jan;115(1):236-41.Mindes P. Tuberculosis quarantine: a review of legal issues in Ohio and other states. J Law Health. 1995-1996;10(2):403-28.

Help me study for my English class. I’m stuck and don’t understand.In the lecture “Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do,” Harvard professor Michael Sandel discusses two types of moral reasoning: categorical and consequentialist. Categorical moral reasoning is a type of deontological moral reasoning based on rights and duties regardless of the consequences. Consequentialist moral reasoning bases morality on the consequences of an act rather than the act itself. Sandel describes what is often called the “trolley dilemma.”With the advent of self-driving vehicles, we have an updated version of the trolley dilemma. The Moral Machine is a project by MIT that is using crowdsourcing to help make autonomous vehicles “moral.” Visit the Moral Machine website provided in the Study Materials for this module and view the short video. Click “Start Judging” at the bottom of the page and go through a few scenarios.Consider the trolley dilemma that is described in Sandel’s lecture. In an essay of 500 words, discuss the following:Do you find yourself siding with a consequentialist or categorical (deontological) approach to moral reasoning in this case? Why?After reviewing the Moral Machine, describe the observations you can make about yourself in how you are judging moral actions. What ethical questions are being raised for you?Which scenario do you think is most ethical of the two scenarios described below? Which type of moral reasoning (categorical or consequentialist) would support your view? Explain. Consider the legal issues like vehicular manslaughter and liability. Who is accountable? How might laws need to be reexamined to accommodate self-driving vehicles?Scenario 1The self-driving car with sudden brake failure will continue ahead and crash into a barrier. This will result in the following deaths of the passengers in the car:1 man1 woman1 boyScenario 2The self-driving car with sudden brake failure will swerve and drive through a pedestrian crossing in the other lane. This will result in the following deaths of pedestrians:1 man1 woman1 dog(Note that the affected pedestrians are abiding by the law by crossing on the green signal.)