Yes this is the alternative. We trade security, another form of it in this case, for freedom. I didn't think the author made a very good case for "living hell", or for that matter have a very good list of egregious things the govt did. But they made a good point at the end with "one day you may be the price that is paid".
Anyway the US won't have to face the issue as China did because it will arrive everywhere if it gets bad, not one starting point that can be contained. And then all the govt here has to do is scare people enough with warnings of danger to lock things down pretty well. Fears of liability will do most of the rest when it comes to schools and other things shutting down.
When there's clear evidence of the beginnings of an epidemic, a public panic (like we're seeing right now, but on a global scale) is much better than the epidemic spreading.
Apparently doing the best they can involves discrediting doctors warning about an outbreak.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/03/asia/coronavirus-doctor-whist...
This is still a good distance from the best in my view.
But what is the alternative? Letting things run rampant because you didn't want to impose upon peoples human rights? The greater good of the whole population means more than the convenience of the Wuhan people. I just hope America falls in line.
And yes, they didn't act immediately when they had patients in December. That could have been handled better. Hindsight is 20/20. But their mindset, about not wanting to start an unwarranted panic, about wanting to investigate things fully, is understandable.