Judge Says Anti-Hepatitis Rules May Be Too Broad : Health: He tells county and advocates for developmentally disabled to compromise on restrictions for non-immune workers.

Responding to vehement objections from advocates for the disabled, a federal judge here Monday told county health officials that work restrictions imposed on 300 developmentally disabled people after a hepatitis A outbreak may go too far.

Judge John E. Ryan asked the advocates to work out a compromise with the county Health Care Agency, suggesting the geographic scope of the restrictions be limited or that a committee be formed to consider cases individually.

“I do not find that the county . . . has acted unreasonably in terms of going forward with a broad-based order, but I am concerned that this may be broader than necessary at this point,” Ryan said. “I want the two sides to sit down and look at this. I want a reasonable basis for drawing boundaries.”

The county’s March 24 order bans developmentally disabled people who have had recent contact with others in care facilities from working in certain jobs until they can be proved immune to hepatitis A. These jobs in the community include handling food or caring for children or the elderly.

The order, which requires that most of these job holders be vaccinated, came after 17 developmentally disabled people contracted hepatitis A, a virus that can be spread through contaminated food or physical contact. As of last week, up to 20 cases had been reported.

Some advocates for the disabled contend the scope of the county’s restrictions is dangerously broad.

Protection & Advocacy Inc., a nonprofit group representing developmentally disabled clients, filed a class action suit Friday on behalf of five men who have been temporarily forced from their jobs because of the order. The group requested an order blocking implementation of the restrictions.

The case came into the courtroom of Ryan--the county’s bankruptcy judge-- because the county preferred that Ryan make the judgment rather than a state court judge. A bankruptcy judge may hear certain governmental matters with the county’s permission.

“The assumption is that people in the community care facilities are at greater risk of spreading infectious diseases,” said Eric Gelber, an attorney for Protection & Advocacy Inc. Federal law “does not permit discrimination based on prejudice or unfounded fear.”

Richard Harris, a developmentally disabled man who, because of the order, has stopped working at a restaurant where he filled condiment containers, said, “I feel terrible. I like to have my own freedom and my own space like everyone else. They have to have others fill in and that makes me uncomfortable. I’m worried about losing the job and the income.”

Harris is worried he won’t have a job to return to in a month, which would kill his dream of getting an apartment of his own.

But Dr. Hildy Meyers, a county epidemiologist, argued the order is necessary.

Almost all of the 20 believed to have contracted the virus can be directly linked to each other through their contacts at their special work sites or living facilities, she said.

The community is tight enough, she said, to justify being separated from the greater county population.

Deputy County Counsel Thomas Agin said the county does not want to discriminate but does want to prevent the disease from spreading.

“Our first responsibility has to be for the health and safety of the public at large,” Agin said.

Ryan scheduled another hearing Friday to consider revisions to the current order. He suggested limiting the ban to northern and central areas of the county, where all the cases have been diagnosed. He also proposed setting up a three-person panel to evaluate the individual circumstances of each worker.

In addition, the judge urged the county to provide as many vaccinations as possible to those who may have been exposed. Up to 200 people are to be vaccinated this week, health officials said.