| Course | MPH 503 Health Policy and Ethical Issues in Public Health |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Public health ethics case analysis |
| Length | About 1,049 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Master of Public Health |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for MPH 503 Module 5
To Name or Not to Name: Applying a Public Health Code of Ethics to a Restaurant Exposure
Student Name
Master of Public Health Program, Aspen University
MPH 503: Health Policy and Ethical Issues in Public Health
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
To Name or Not to Name: Applying a Public Health Code of Ethics to a Restaurant Exposure
Public health decisions often involve competing values: protecting the public, respecting privacy, treating people fairly and maintaining trust. Codes of ethics help practitioners reason through these conflicts. This paper applies a public health code of ethics to a composite county's decision about whether to publicly name a restaurant after a food worker there was diagnosed with hepatitis A.
The Case
A cook at a popular family restaurant was diagnosed with hepatitis A. Investigators determined that during the infectious period, the cook worked eight shifts, and as many as 1,200 diners may have eaten food he prepared. Hepatitis A vaccine or immune globulin can prevent illness if given within 14 days of exposure. The restaurant's owner, who cooperated fully and closed for cleaning, asked the county not to name the business, fearing it would never recover.
The Code
The American Public Health Association's code of ethics describes core values for the field, including professionalism and trust, health and safety, health justice and equity, interdependence and solidarity, human rights and civil liberties, and inclusivity and engagement, and it offers considerations for ethical analysis such as permissibility, respect, reciprocity, effectiveness, responsible use of scarce resources, proportionality, accountability and transparency (American Public Health Association, 2019).
Options
The county had three options: name the restaurant publicly and urge diners to seek vaccination; contact diners privately using reservation and credit card records without naming the restaurant; or issue a general alert about a local exposure without naming the business.
Values Applied
The table summarizes how each value applied.
| Value | Name publicly | Private contact only | General alert |
|---|---|---|---|
| Health and safety | Reaches most exposed diners | Misses cash-paying and walk-in diners | Too vague to prompt action |
| Human rights and civil liberties | Burdens owner who did nothing wrong | Protects owner's reputation | Protects owner |
| Justice and equity | Reaches all diners equally | Favors those with records | Unequal response |
| Professionalism and trust | Transparent | Could appear secretive if leaked | Could erode trust |
| Proportionality | Burden justified if necessary | Less burden, less effective | Least burden, least effective |
Health and Safety
The primary goal was to prevent cases by reaching exposed diners within 14 days. Private contact through records would miss many diners who paid cash or came in with others. Only public naming could reach nearly everyone exposed, which weighed heavily toward naming.
Liberty and Harm
Naming would harm an owner who had done nothing wrong and had cooperated. Public health ethics, like the law since the early vaccination case, accepts burdens on individuals when necessary to prevent significant harm to others while asking whether less burdensome means would suffice (Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 1905). Here, less burdensome options would leave many diners unprotected, so they would not achieve the goal.
Justice
Justice favored naming because it gave all exposed diners equal opportunity to seek protection. Relying on records would favor diners who paid by card or made reservations, who were more likely to be higher-income, over those who paid cash.
Transparency and Trust
The code emphasizes transparency. If the county contacted some diners privately and the restaurant's name later leaked, public trust could suffer and people might wonder what else was hidden. Clear public communication maintains trust, especially when paired with fairness to the business.
Legal Considerations
State law authorized the health officer to disclose information necessary to control communicable disease. The worker's identity is confidential health information and was not disclosed; the restaurant's name is not protected in the same way. Public health law scholarship stresses that disclosures should be limited to what is necessary for the public health purpose (Gostin & Wiley, 2016).
The Decision
The county named the restaurant, stating clearly that the owner had cooperated fully, that no customers had yet become ill, that the restaurant had been cleaned and that the risk was limited to specific dates. It held free vaccination clinics for three days. About 1,000 people received vaccine or immune globulin. The county also publicly praised the owner's cooperation and later noted when the restaurant reopened.
Reciprocity
The code's principle of reciprocity suggests that those who bear burdens for the public good deserve support. The county offered the owner a public statement of cooperation, rapid reinspection to reopen and information for other restaurants on preventing foodborne hepatitis A, including encouraging food worker vaccination during the outbreak.
Stakeholder Perspectives
The owner, diners, restaurant staff, the wider restaurant industry and the public each had a stake. Diners wanted to know whether they were at risk and what to do. Staff feared losing income during the closure. Other restaurants worried that the case would make people avoid eating out generally. Listening to each view helped the county shape a message that was accurate without being alarming.
The Role of Timing
Protection after hepatitis A exposure works only within about two weeks, and the earliest exposed diners were already several days into that window when the case was confirmed. Every day spent deliberating would shrink the number of people who could benefit. Time pressure is common in public health ethics, which is why departments benefit from having decision frameworks agreed in advance rather than improvised during a crisis.
Precedent and Consistency
The county reviewed how it had handled two earlier food worker cases. In both, it had named the business when the exposure was broad and contact by records was impossible. Following the same standard protected the county against charges of favoritism and let owners know what to expect. Written criteria for naming, shared with the restaurant association, were adopted after this case.
Communication Choices
Wording mattered. The county's release led with the action diners should take, then gave the restaurant's name and dates, noted the owner's cooperation and explained that the food served since cleaning was safe. Staff answered calls on a dedicated line in English and Spanish. Careful wording let the county protect health while limiting stigma for the business and its workers.
Conclusion
Applying a public health code of ethics clarified a difficult decision. Health and safety, justice and transparency favored naming the restaurant, while respect for the owner's rights called for minimizing and offsetting the burden. The county named the restaurant with careful context, protected the worker's identity and supported the owner, showing how ethical values can be balanced in practice.
References
American Public Health Association. (2019). Public health code of ethics. https://www.apha.org
Gostin, L. O., & Wiley, L. F. (2016). Public health law: Power, duty, restraint (3rd ed.). University of California Press.
Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905).
Reading the MPH 503 Module 5 assignment instructions
Aspen lists ethical issues in public health practice in the MPH 503 catalog description, and with the module text held in the classroom, this sample applies a professional code to a realistic dilemma. Ethics case assignments usually ask you to describe the situation, identify competing values, consider options and justify a decision using a recognized framework. Check which framework your instructor prefers, such as a professional code, principlism or a public health ethics framework. State the options clearly before analyzing them. Show how each value points toward or away from each option. Consider law as well as ethics, since both constrain the decision. Acknowledge what is lost with the option you recommend.
Inside the MPH 503 Module 5 example
The sample totals roughly 1,000 words and includes a values-by-options table. It presents the case, summarizes the code, lists three options and applies the values, then examines health and safety, liberty and harm, justice, transparency and trust, and legal considerations. Stakeholder perspectives, timing, precedent and communication choices are added before the decision and reciprocity sections. The margin annotation by the code section explains why listing the code's values first gives the analysis a structure rather than leaving it to intuition. The conclusion states how the county balanced public protection against the owner's interests and what that balance teaches about ethical practice. Each option is revisited in the decision section so readers can see why two were set aside.
Where the marks sit in the MPH 503 Module 5 rubric
Ethics papers tend to earn marks for clear identification of the dilemma, accurate use of a framework, fair consideration of options, a justified decision and awareness of costs. This sample cites the APHA code, a leading law text and the 1905 vaccination case in APA format. The values table shows systematic application. Options are weighed fairly, including their downsides. The decision is justified and paired with steps to reduce harm. Legal and practical sections, on confidentiality, timing and precedent, show that ethics in public health must work within real constraints. Top papers acknowledge that reasonable people might disagree while explaining why one choice is better supported. Clear writing that separates facts from judgments also earns marks.
Common MPH 503 Module 5 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Common problems include describing a dilemma without choosing a course of action, or choosing without explaining which values won and why. Some students cite a framework but never apply it. Others ignore practical factors such as time limits and law. State your recommendation plainly and defend it against the strongest objection. Keep the case realistic and do not add facts that make the choice too easy. Our tutors can help you lay out a values-by-options grid before you draft, which makes the analysis much easier to write. End with a lesson about ethical decision-making under pressure that you could apply in your own practice. Naming the value you gave up is a sign of honest reasoning, not weakness.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More MPH 503 and Master of Public Health sample papers
- MPH 503 Module 1: Sources of Public Health Law
- MPH 503 Module 2: How a Public Health Bill Becomes Law
- MPH 503 Module 3: Regulation and Rulemaking
- MPH 503 Module 4: The Courts and Public Health Powers
- MPH 503 Module 6: Individual Liberty Versus the Common Good
- MPH 503 Module 7: Health Equity and Tobacco Policy
- MPH 503 Module 8: Public Health Policy Brief
- MPH 530 Module 4: Food Safety and Foodborne Disease
- MPH 520 Module 3: Incident Command and Mass Casualties
- MPH 540 Module 7: Performance Management and QI
- MPH 560 Module 3: Sampling and Confidence Intervals
MPH 503 Module 5 questions, answered
What does MPH 503 Module 5 usually ask for?
Aspen's MPH 503 addresses ethical issues in public health practice, so applying a code of ethics to a case is a typical assignment. Check your Aspen classroom for the prompt.
What values does the APHA public health code of ethics include?
Professionalism and trust, health and safety, health justice and equity, interdependence and solidarity, human rights and civil liberties, and inclusivity and engagement.
What is reciprocity in public health ethics?
The idea that people who bear burdens for the public good deserve support or compensation.
Where can I find a free MPH 503 Module 5 sample paper?
The restaurant hepatitis A ethics paper is published above with its values table. It is the fifth of the eight MPH 503 samples.
How do you apply a public health code of ethics in MPH 503 Module 5?
Identify the dilemma and options, test each option against the code's values and considerations, choose the best-supported option and take steps to reduce its burdens.