[daeken]

The astronaut in question may choose to disclose that they had the medical emergency and possibly its nature, but it seems wholly reasonable to not single them out (when it affects the whole mission) or disclose their medical status.

[mapmeld]

Especially since every movement up and down from space is expensive and risks the life of the crew, it'd be a bad idea for NASA to name the astronaut ahead of time.

[okdood64]

Disagree; this is completely taxpayer funded and we deserve to know every detail relevant to mission status. In this scenario knowing what illness and why it's grounds for a return is very relevant. That said, I can see NASA delaying information release to figure out a good strategy for it while still respecting any wishes of the sick astronaut with regards to disclosure.

[hermannj314]

The school is tax-payer funded, but I don't get to know why every teacher called out sick.

Government employees, contractors, etc. don't owe your curiousity satiety. We are buying their service, not their soul.

[awestroke]

The CIA is also taxpayer funded. Do you have similar expectations of transparency into their missions?

[poulpy123]

When you drive on a taxpayer funded road, should you disclose publicly your medical history? When the taxpayer funded US military kidnap a foreign president on your name, should you disclose publicly your medical history ? When you use the taxpayer funded GPS etc...

[patmorgan23]

Does your employer get to know every little detail of your medical conditions when you call in sick? After all they're funding it.

[pockybum522]

What a strange take. Does this also apply to every soldier in the armed forces? Seems your criteria is equally applicable there.

The relevant people that can do the research and write future policies based on the data obviously will have the information. Not sure what good you think that you personally having it can do.