Analyze

The author used a combination of field-based research and article examination to produce their arguments and conclusions.

Emergency response is not directly addressed in this article, but humanitarian aid is. Through the analysis of this aid, we can see which areas are in need of help and responders. Because humanitarian aid is a form of responders as well, it is important to understand their function in the context of emergencies and crises. It can also be implied that those receiving aid did at one point need emergency response teams. 

1. I first did further research on Paul Farmer through the PIH website, as he is a cofounder. Through there I also looked at their story and mission to further my understanding of the organization. 
2. I looked into the Baltimore study further and read some anecdotes and stories about AIDS patients living in the Baltimore area and the circumstances under which they contracted HIV. The concept "survival sex" was used to describe situational circumstance that forced men and women into prostitution. These positions are tied to structural violence, as noted by Farmer in the article.
3. I read excerpts from one of Farmers other articles referenced in this one entitled, "The major infectious diseases in the world - to treat or not to treat?" This paper was studied among 6 countries and looked at the cure rates among patients with Tb and highlights the need of equal access to care around the world. 

The study was funded by the WHO Country Office for Sierra leone.

They are shown for a moment in which they bring in trauma patients, but are not a main player in this documentary.

The authors researched previoud research papers, articles, or speeches to gather data that was used to create a discussion.

The article cites the merits and failures of the investigations following three disasters. These are the burning of the Capitol Building in 1814, a boiler explosion in 1850, and the Iroquois Theater Fire of 1903.

While this article does not really address emergency response, the discussion of violent attacks on humanitarian workers does involve emergency responders and can affect how humanitarians provide care. So while not direct, this article does have implications for emergency responders in those regions. 

1. The Burning of the Capitol Building in 1814 is discussed. Knowles talks about how the burning was investigated by one of the key engineers of the building, Latrobe. He was allowed to investigate without any issues and was ultimately allowed to rebuild. Most Americans, however, viewed the burning as a failure of the military, not the engineer. 
2. The Hague Street Explosion of 1850, which was caused by an exploding boiler and resulted in mass casualties. Investigation and determination of responsibility was carried out by the Coroner's office and police. Media and news reporters also assisted in providing information to the public and attributed the explosion to an overheated boiler, as opposed to an engineering flaw. Jurors listened to expert witnesses in order to determine where the blame could be placed, which ultimately led to the disaster being blamed on all involved in the boiler and factory. 
3. The Iroquois Theater Fire in Chicago that happened in 1903 provides information regarding disaster investigation as well. The fire curtains, shields, and other technology meant to protect the theater from the spread of a fire did not work. Building inspectors came into the city after the disaster to investigate along with architects and other commissioners. It was found that the theater (along with many others in the city) had many building code violations, which called into question the integrity of the entire building code system in Chicago. One of the nation's foremost authorities on fireproof construction, Ripley Freeman, conducted an extensive investigation with financial support from an elite man in Chicago. This marked a new era in history of disaster investigation in the US. 

The author cites a number of cases in which the law proved difficult to enforce. One example is seen when looking at the difference in residency application acceptance rates between different locales/prefects. The much larger and metropolitan areas would accept down to 47% of the applications, indicating a possibly fair division of candidates reviewed. Other more rural areas would accept over 90% of the applications, showing almost no distiguishment between ailments. The question becomes whether this is reflective on the doctors' judgements of "serious ailment" given location, the political beliefs of the prefect, or simply the lack of caring whether someone emmigrates or not. Another example of the flaws in this law is highlighted by a personal anecdote from a patient. The patient was given a diagnosis when originially coming to France on a personal visa. They were told their condition was quite serious and would require ongoing care. However, when the doctor who diagnosed him was asked to sign for evaluation for the residency permit, the doctor changed his diagnosis to something much less serious. The political thought behind the poicy came into play and interrupted the normal proceedings, tearing doctors between their obligations to the law (and only allow exceptional cases) and to medicine (and err on the side of caution).  

The author also highlights the development of this law and its effects in three stages. Pre-1990: Serious illness was a factor in residency completely at the discretion of local government. Immigrants were seen as workers and they served that purpose only. If a worker was sick, they were of no use to society. 1990-1998: Illness was more often factored into the decision making process, but those allowed to stay received no paid employment or social wellfare benefits. Post 1998: Written into law, ill immigrants were allowed to stay with the opportunity for pay and legal status in France.