The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The Fund identifies and shares policy ideas and analysis to advance state health leadership, strong primary care, and sustainable health care costs.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest blogs from our thought leaders, including Fund President Christopher F. Koller.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is is a foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
June 1980 (Volume 58)
Quarterly Article
David T. Courtwright
December 2024
Dec 19, 2024
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
Historically the most important rationale for coercive public health measures has been the prevention of disease and harm to others. As noncommunicable diseases, induced by personal habits, account for higher rates of death and disability, governmental restrictions on individuals are being based on a new argument-social costs. Indirect monetary effects are substituted for direct health effects. But since we lack precise measurements of net costs, the risks of coercion should be approached cautiously.
Author(s): David T. Courtwright
Download the Article
Read on JSTOR
Volume 58, Issue 2 (pages 268–282) Published in 1980
