Analyze

I've found myself returning to thinking about/around/within interstitial spaces of care, particularly within hospital settings, interested in how viral activity unsettles the ideas we have around space and boundaries, both biological and infrastructural. In COVID-19 pathology and response, the inbetween, the interstitial, become sites challenge and possibility. With COVID-19, we see an acknowledgment of once forgotten spaces quite obviously, with hospital atria and hallways being reconfigured into patient care spaces, makeshift morgues established in refrigerated trucks, and hospitals spilling out into neighboring streets and parks. More than ever, we see how hospitals are simultaneously bounded and unbounded--the most stable and unstable sites for care. Along this line of thought, what might thinking through hospitals as heterotopia of crisis and deviation afford?

Foucault outlines six principles for heterotopic spaces

The heterotopia is capable of juxtaposing in a single real place several spaces, several sites that are in themselves incompatible

Heterotopias are most often linked to slices in time—which is to say that they open onto what might be termed, for the sake of symmetry, heterochronies. The heterotopia begins to function at full capacity when men arrive at a sort of absolute break with their traditional time. This situation shows us that the cemetery is indeed a highly heterotopic place since, for the individual, the cemetery begins with this strange heterochrony, the loss of life, and with this quasi-eternity in which her permanent lot is dissolution and disappearance.

Heterotopias always presuppose a system of opening and closing that both isolates them and makes them penetrable. In general, the heterotopic site is not freely accessible like a public place. Either the entry is compulsory, as in the case of entering a barracks or a prison, or else the individual has to submit to rites and purifications.

I'm currently based in Troy, NY where I recently completed a PhD in Science and Technology Studies.  I'll soon be living in NYC to attend medical school. I can be reached at amorgan14[at]gmail[dot]com

I've long been interested in the disaster of routine medical care in the U.S. healthcare system. As far as COVID-19 is concerned, I'm particularly interested in how the long-term health impacts of intensive care are conceptualized and communicated (including Post Intensive Care Syndrome (PICS)) and the tensions between acute and chronic illness, broadly. 

How is the aftermath of COVID-19 crisis being imagined in different settings? How is this shaping beliefs, practices, and policies?

Paul Farmer is the chair of the Department of GLobal Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School. He is an expert in health care services and advocacy for those who are sick and in poverty. He doesn't appear to be situated in emergency response; he seems to be much more on the follow-up months or years later. Dr. Farmer has myriad publications of relevance to the Network, and his research foci are mostly regarding establishing high-quality health care in resource-poor environments. (http://ghsm.hms.harvard.edu/person/faculty/paul-farmer)

Bruce Nizeye works as the Chief of Infrastructure for PIH in Rwanda. It appears that his expertise is in physical constructs. I could not find how he was situated in emergency response, but it appears that he takes a role on the back side of disasters, much like Dr. Farmer. (http://www.pih.org/blog/the-voices-of-our-colleagues/)

Sara Stulac is an Associate Physician in the Division of Global Health Equity at BWH. She is also the Deputy Chief Medical Director for PIH. She seems to be an expert in pediatrics, specifically HIV care and prevention and oncology. Like her other authors mentioned on this page, she does not seem to be directly involved with emergency response. Her research foci are mostly not related to emergency response, but dealing with non-emergent pediatric care. (http://www.brighamandwomens.org/Departments_and_Services/medicine/servi…)

Salmaan Keshavjee is a professor at HMS and a physician at BWH. He has conducted research on post-Soviet Tajikistan's health transition and worked on an MDR-TB treatment program in Tomsk, Russia. Rather than emergency response, Dr. Keshavjee seems to be focused on epidemiology like his co-authors. He has a number of research foci including MDR-TB treatment and policy, health-sector reform in transnational societies, the role of NGOs in the formation of trans-border civil society, and "modernity, social institutions, civil society, and health in the Middle East and Central Asia. (http://ghsm.hms.harvard.edu/person/faculty/salmaan-keshavjee)

Users enter summaries of articles onto the website as well as replies on articles. Users also enter anti-spam information, email addresses, their names, and websites they may be associated with.

It appears that MSF is motivated by data showing that people in countries without adequate local health services do not recieve the care they need. MSF attempts to bridge the gap between needing healthcare and actually getting it by operating in those aforementioned environments.

The CEHC aims to "support high-quality academic programs for ... students," research to produce new knowledge, provide learning opportunities and training for professionals in order to "prepare for, protect against, respond to, and recover from a growing array of natural and human-caused risks and threats in NYS and around the world."

This report was published by Human Rights Watch.

Dr. Schmid used a variety of sources and methods to produce her report. She pulled a lot of information from other essays, whether they be directly relating to the Fukushima incident or nuclear safety and preparedness in general. She also conducted communication with a number of other researchers and experts in the field. Additionally, she pulled a great deal from IAEA documents and US NRC publications.

Emergency response isn't addressed in the report at all. The only area that could be claimed to be touched on is access to emergency prophylaxis for HIV by those in poor areas.

The article discusses how many current organizations use a cost-benefit analysis to determine how much effort needs to be put into a response. This goes from vaccination to quarantine. The article also discusses how tuberculosis was fought in post-Soviet Georgia. Finally, it discusses how "biosecurity" will be looked at under a different and more holistic lens. The article didn't make an argument, so it was difficult to find support.