Judge Dismisses Written Quarantine Order; Harvey County Health Department to Revise Procedures

A Harvey County District Court judge on Feb. 28 dismissed a written quarantine order that the Harvey County Health Department had issued for a minor identified as a contact to a case of varicella (chickenpox), the health department told the Harvey County Board of Commissioners at its March 4 meeting.

The ruling left the department without legal authority to require the child to remain at home, Lynette Reddington, director of the Harvey County Health Department, told commissioners. “The ruling from the judge was that the judge did not discount the infectious and contagious nature of the disease, varicella. He ruled that Harvey County Health Department overstepped the order of quarantine with a statement to remain in the home through the remaining 21 days of quarantine, and the order was dismissed,” Reddington said.

Why it matters: The dismissal prompted public concern about how the health department investigates exposures and issues orders, and it led county staff to say they will update internal processes to reduce legal risk and improve communication with affected families and local officials.

Public concerns and courtroom outcome

Several residents urged the commission to review the health department’s practices. Anne Roberts, who said her daughter was the subject of the order, told the commissioners, “My minor daughter... we were in court for here on Friday for a illegal quarantine order that was issued by the Harvey County Health Department, which the judge did dismiss and throw out.” Roberts said the family felt the department had not conducted contact tracing “legally or correctly.”

Other commenters said the episode recalled the intense public reaction to COVID-era health orders. Timothy Connor said, “I am very concerned because all the damage and pain and suffering and disruption that was caused by COVID wasn't COVID. It was the reaction to COVID.” Another resident, Scott Seiple, told the commission he believed the health department’s leadership lacked medical qualifications for making such orders and urged personnel changes.

Several speakers defended the department and its director. Susan Lam Heston, who identified herself as having worked with Reddington, said, “She has been capable, competent, honest, serves with integrity,” and highlighted long-running health programs and the department’s drug-court work.

Health department account of events and next steps

Reddington and Assistant Director Tobias “Toby” Harkins described the sequence of events to the commission. Staff were alerted to the exposure through Reno County’s notification and then confirmed the contact involved a Harvey County minor. Because Reddington was out of state at the time, Harkins and other staff proceeded with an order based on the department’s existing template and the medical director’s approval, the department said. The order was delivered Feb. 23 and the hearing was held Feb. 28; the judge dismissed the part of the order that required the child to remain at home.

Reddington said staff will review Kansas statutes and regulations related to quarantine and isolation, with particular emphasis on varicella rules, and will revise the quarantine order template and procedures with input from the county’s legal counsel. She told commissioners the department plans a follow-up call to the household to confirm the child remains asymptomatic and to ensure the family understands the public-health guidance; Reddington said the quarantine as written would have extended through midnight March 5.

Toby Harkins described a technical change the department will make after the hearing: “Exclusion. We should have written an order of exclusion from vulnerable situations keeping her out of schools, child care areas, adult care facilities, and nursing homes. We ask that she stayed in the house. We should have asked that she stayed away from vulnerable people,” he said, noting that exclusion from vulnerable settings — rather than a blanket home quarantine — is the statutory pathway the department intends to emphasize.

Legal and process questions

Commissioners pressed staff on notification and investigation procedures. Reddington said most case reports come via lab or clinician reporting, sometimes through the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, and that the situation in this case was irregular because the contact record arrived without the usual lab confirmation or direct provider notification. She told the commission the department uses KDHE systems including Epitrax and WebIZ (the state immunization registry) and that nurses, not the director, typically access WebIZ.

Participants discussed legal limits and public expectations. The health department acknowledged it had not previously issued a written quarantine order in Harvey County and that the episode exposed gaps in how the department and the local board of health coordinate legal and operational review. Commissioners and staff discussed whether the board should have more advance oversight or an opportunity to review certain orders before they are served in unusual cases; county officials said they will seek counsel on what oversight is legally appropriate.

Practical points raised in discussion

- The department said the standard statutory option allows a contact to be excluded from vulnerable settings, or to receive a vaccine within a 72-hour window that can prevent conversion to a case; otherwise the incubation period cited for varicella was 21 days.

- Reddington said the department will update its quarantine/exclusion templates to make language clearer (for example, to explicitly allow emergency medical care and 911 access) and to reduce potential misinterpretation that led to the court finding the “remain home” language to be an overreach.

- Commissioners asked for an after-action review and a written quality-management plan; Reddington said staff intend to prepare revisions and work with county legal counsel and will report back when that work is complete.

What the commission and public were told

No formal corrective action or personnel decision was taken at the March 4 meeting. Commissioners heard both criticism and defense of the health department’s actions and asked staff to return with clarified procedures, legal review, and an after-action summary. Reddington told the commission staff will revise the order template and the department will seek additional legal guidance so similar issues are less likely to recur.

Ending

The episode underscored a tension commissioners described between protecting public health and protecting individual constitutional rights. Commissioners said they want clear procedures that align with state law and reduce legal exposure for the county while ensuring communicable-disease threats to vulnerable populations are addressed. The health department pledged to revise its quarantine/exclusion language, work with county counsel, and return to the board with a plan and updates on training and legal alignment.

(Reporting based on the Harvey County Board of Commissioners meeting transcript of March 4, 2025.)