Search

Emergency response is addressed primarily through preventative measures that may minimize the trauma of a disaster. The article suggests that high risk locations need stronger adherence to regulations for buildings, as well as constantly stocked shelters for evacuated individuals to go to during a disaster. Emergency response is also discussed through the statistics given on mental illnesses present in emergency responders after a disaster. The article does not suggest methods of minimizing risk to emergency responders, however the focus on community and government support for victims of a disaster also applies to the strong communities that form among emergency responders.

“Within the nuclear industry, an almost exclusive emphasis on accident avoidance has given way to a new strategy of accident preparedness.” (Schmid 207)

“…creating a group or agency that is both capable of assembling the needed expertise for effective emergency response, and that also is accepted as legitimate by the broader public.” (Schmid, 195)

“...an emergency response requires…expertise, trust, legitimacy, as well as public engagement as part of that response” (Schmid 195)

I was interested in the accident prevention mindset that was in part responsible for poor response in past nuclear disasters, so I read a summary of “Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity” by Ulrich Beck, one of the works referenced in Schmid’s article. The summary better explained the societal mindset that a structured set of rules for accident prevention was more reliable that the educated and adaptive individual.

The point that nuclear fallout does not respect national borders was interesting, so I looked at how far fallout can spread. An understanding of how geological features such as mountains and valleys can affect the immediate fallout zone and how meteorological conditions can spread eradiated rain and wind significant distances from the site of a disaster would be important in the evacuation and clean up portions of a response to a nuclear disaster.

When discussing existing emergency response groups that dealt with nuclear disasters the IAEA was mentioned several times, so I looked into the organization and their responsibilities. Although the IEAE is often criticized for its slow response to Fukushima, I found that the organizations stated missions are to promote peaceful use of nuclear energy and safety, as well as implement safeguards meant to prevent military use of nuclear energy. While an international group that works closely with the nuclear industry it does not claim any responsibility to act as a response group to nuclear disasters.

The article supports the claim with statistics of mental illness and experience related data taken from interviews with both patients and doctors. The style of the article also highlights the authors’ claims in a way that is understandable for readers without experience in that subject by including definitions and working from micro to macro scales as the article progresses.

The main argument is supported primarily with a detailed description of the events surrounding the Fukushima Daiichi plant disaster on March 11th, 2011 as an example of the need for a specilized group to respond to nuclear emergencies. Schmid also supports the effectiveness of such a group by tracing the recent shift in opinion away from an accident prevention mindset to the idea that nuclear disasters are a risk in the nuclear industry and therefore plans for the effective response to future nuclear disasters must be made in order to mitigate the damage caused. Several other works addressing similar problems in risk management, such as Risk Society by Ulrich Beck, as also cited to support the main argument.

The bibliography suggests this article was produced through analysis of historical events and other works without any new experimentation or data collection.

• “interest in how disasters could influence communities and result in large-scale effects, as well as interest in the mental and physical health consequences of different types of disasters, the influence of context on risk to mental health, and the distinct needs of different types of disaster victims.” (170)
• “Consistent with life-course epidemiologic perspectives (37), characteristics or experiences of individuals before, during, and after a disaster may influence mental health outcomes and interact to produce psychopathology.” (174)
• “The key functions of pre-disaster preparation efforts are to prevent or minimize exposure to potentially traumatic disaster-related events and reduce likelihood of additional post-disaster stressors, which are both associated with post-disaster mental disorders. Local governments and communities can reduce the likelihood and severity of disaster exposure” (176)

Schmid argues that previous nuclear disasters, such as Fukushima, Three Mile Island, and Chernobyl demonstrate the need for a nuclear emergency response group with the expertise to handle unexpected disasters as well as public and international support. The article focuses not only on the need for such a group but also on the requirements and challanges such a group would face.

• I was interested in the portion of the article that referred to the initial scientific understanding of post-traumatic stress after the Vietnam War, so I looked into the early reports on PTSD to see how far the science has come since then.
• The article extensively referenced Hurricane Ike which I was unfamiliar with, researching the storm gave me better idea of the type of trauma that many of the survivors experienced due to the massive amount of damage that occurred.
• The article suggested that properly stoked and manned shelters for evacuated residents would be very important in preventing trauma, so I looked into the existing infrastructure in high risk locations. The government maintains stockpiles of supplies around the country and most communities have designated shelters, however there is not a single existing plan for how a community could safely evacuate the entire population.

This article has been referenced in several other works concerning the Fukushima plant disaster, such as “The Fukushima Effect: Traversing a New Geopolitical Terrain” by Hindmarch and Priestley, where it was quoted for its opinion that an international group would be needed to overcome bias that may be present in national regulatory agencies.