Just coercion? Detention of nonadherent tuberculosis patients

The need to balance the rights of individuals and to protect the public health will bring with it demands for the restriction of individuals' liberty. Three points should always be considered when these measures are adopted: (1) the lack of evidence that detention benefits the public health; (2) the risk that fundamental human rights may be overridden unnecessarily; and (3) that coercive practices may act as a smokescreen for improved, but more complex or more costly, public health responses to the causes of TB control failures. The policies of New York City and England are presented, and the argument is made that neither is just.