Zika is a mosquito-borne and sexually transmitted disease that is a dangerous threat to pregnant women, causing catastrophic birth defects in a large percentage of fetuses when their mothers become infected while pregnant.  It raises numerous issues related to abortion, birth control, poverty, and women’s control over their procreative choices. While the United States received ample warning from January 2016 onward that it was at risk of local transmission of this virus and public health officials at all levels generally behaved properly, the state and federal legislative responses in the summer of 2016 were entirely inadequate. For example, no state at a high level of risk undertook to provide long lasting and reliable birth control to all women who wanted it. Furthermore, Congress took a seven-week recess at the height of mosquito season without providing any funding for a Zika response.    In light of these failures, it appears that the federalist system that allocates both public health police powers and duties to act contains a flaw. The system creates a vacuum within which there are no enforcement mechanisms that can compel legislators to act appropriately.  Given recent changes in the United States political make up at a federal level, it appears that the problems are only going to get worse.  This talk will analyze the response from January through August 2016 from a legal, health policy, and ethical framework and frame this analysis within current challenges. 

An article by Jacqueline Fox concerning this case study has recently been published in the Connecticut Law Review.

Bookings: If you would like to attend, please email jane.beinart@ethox.ox.ac.uk