Andrew Speaker and Tuberculosis Scare: Is the CDC Acting Competently?

His tuberculosis was first discovered in January 2007. Now 5 months later he is told it is a particularly insidiously drug-resistant strain? His father-in-law is a doctor for the CDC. His father tape recorded a session in which his doctors said that as a formality it was recommended that he not travel, but really he posed no threat? He went to Greece to get married but the Greek authorities deny he had the proper authorizations?

With a dangerous case of TB, he plans and executes an elaborate European wedding and honeymoon? The CDC tracked him down on his honeymoon with the results of tests only now run by his father-in-law? He was told not to fly home but did anyway because he suddenly felt he would die if he waited for the CDC? He felt he had to get to the National Jewish Hospital in Denver, but was picked up in...where?...Atlanta and then flown in a CDC transport to Denver?

This seems just all too inexplicable. Although, if truth be told, it could be one of those all too common human cases in which authorities failed; in which normal everyday actions, attitudes and behaviors look unnervingly sinister when subjected to the floodlight of official government and public scrutiny. Maybe he really didn't understand the serious implications of his situation.

If it took the assigned authorities from sometime in January until when he was abroad in Europe to figure out and tell him that he had a dangerously drug-resistant strain of TB, then maybe he was justified in his error of taking a more casual attitude toward his condition himself. If the communication he received from the Fulton County, Georgia, medical authorities said "it is imperative that you know you are traveling against medical advice," rather than "it is imperative that you NOT TRAVEL", then maybe it is understandable how a young man, who doesn't in any way look at all sick, who is planning his marriage to a beautiful blond might have a hard time translating imperative knowledge into imperative action. Although...the blond's father works for the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The media reports slant the story through tone of voice and by juxtaposition of comments to seem like Speaker intentionally perpetrated a devious plot. The only thing that can as yet be said to have been intentional is that he kept his plans for a wedding and a honeymoon, which may sound silly and frivolous because, after all, all he has to do is show up. Right? But remember, there was a bride at the other end of the wedding possibly driving herself and her family and friends, caterer and florist and wedding planner out of their minds while she labored over this season's best gala destination-wedding event. You don't just casually ring up and say, "Say, uh, you know, they, uh, said it's imperative that I know, so, uh, maybe I just won't go after all. There's, uh, always next spring, you know; Greece is, uh, always beautiful every spring...." Because if you did that, maybe the future father-in-law would come pounding on your door and say something definitely dangerous about "My little girl...!!"

That brings us back to that future, potential, theoretical father-in-law. Did they go ahead and have the wedding ceremony anyway even though it wasn't legal under Greek law? Is Greece just denying the marriage to keep its distance? Surely a lawyer would make certain to ascertain and accommodate for the international laws pertaining to his future happiness. Speaker and his dad, who tape recorded the conversations with health authorities, are both lawyers.

But back to the father-in-law, Dr. Robert Cooksey. So he works for the CDC as a microbiologist tuberculosis expert. And he accompanied young Speaker to the preflight meetings with health officials and then told him, "Take care of my daughter." After the wedding, and I suppose Dr. Cooksey would have been there...there were more tests done on Speaker's TB that determined it wasn't just a drug-resistant strain but a super-drug-resistant strain that is particularly dangerous. Did father-in-law Cooksey see something in Greece--or at those meetings that he accompanied Speaker to--that made him suspect that a misdiagnosis was given? Or worse yet, was there some negligence in applying the proper tests to Speaker's case in the first place? Was perhaps Cooksey somehow responsible?That goes too far afield. Doesn't it? Why was a critically determining test done five months after the initial diagnosis during the wedding and honeymoon period?

So then Speaker is told by the CDC "in no uncertain terms" to remain where he was and "turn himself in" and that the CDC would "show up" to pick him up and give him transport back to National Jewish, apparently. But Speaker asked if his confinement in his then present location of Rome was "voluntary" and he is apparently told, "Yes, it is voluntary." Although his name was entered on an American airlines no-fly list.

It is all so muddled. One side seems to be acting innocently and going along, like all of us, making plans and decisions in life. The other side is saying "imperative that you know" and "voluntary" restriction to present location is profoundly binding. Maybe it will turn out that a young lawyer's plan to wed and celebrate was a dastardly deed. Maybe it will turn out that his dastardly deed only looks dastardly in the shadow of the ineptitude of our governing officials. Where's Agatha Christy??