8. Three points I looked up to further my understanding was formaldehyde and trailer homes, the effect of flooding on modern societies, the US preparation for future hurricanes in Louisiana.
Three ways the article is supported is through first hand accounts of diverse residents that have lived in New Orleans- their opinions of how the rebuild process is progressing as well as the lack of a connection between need and aid from the government. The interviews also provide an emotional perspective into the lives of those who experienced the disaster. The article includes direct quotes from federal disaster efforts such as FEMA and HOME, who provided statistics into how many people received trailer homes and money to rebuild their lives. Another way this article was supported was using records of mail, who had lived in New Orleans before the hurricane and after. This evidence provides an insight into how many people were actually homeless because they had no way of getting federal aid.
7. The article’s bibliography is extensive, this points out that there was time and effort put in place to gather the proper evidence in order to prove their argument. There is also a lot of supporting evidence, proving that the argument is valid.
The main findings presented in the article is the lack of recovery in the New Orleans after Katrina and the factors that did not cause a complete rebuild. The article discusses what happened to the poor, how the residents were treated and the lack of government funding to the city- due to the levee needing to be rebuilt. The article also discusses the mental health of those who experienced Katrina and the stress that radiated from it. The article also discusses private businesses that have thrived in lieu of those who need homes, aid and basic necessities.
The article has been referenced and discussed on various platforms such as government websites and other sources that reference what chronic disaster syndrom is.
The authors are Vincanne Adams, Taslim Van Hattem and Diana English. Diana English is an assistant professor of gynecologic oncology of Stanford. She is a dedicated researcher and has a passion for international service and mission trips- she is a voice for the poor. Taslim is a director the Louisiana public health institute, she cares about her state’s well being. Adams is a professor of medical anthropology and does extensive research in disaster recover, social theory and sexuality and gender.
6. Emergency response is addressed in the article because the article begs for those to help when the event happened. While fixing the structural areas of the disaster (such as the levee) the lives and culture of the people were more important. There was little to no focus on rehousing those who were displaced.Despite that there was money specifically allocated to helping those rebuild, rehouse and/or move out of New Orleans, very little money was actually seen by those who needed it most. People also waited for days to be saved from their flooded homes. While it may be dangerous it is unethical to leave people for long periods of time. Money needs to be spent on preventing the levee from breaking again.
The methods, tools and data used to produce the claims in the article include: creating an argument- having separate sections of the paper: a cause, an effect and the resounding outcome. The authors created a story through describing the horrible accounts of what happened during and after Katrina. The cause is the hurricane which caused displacement of most of the population due to the flooding from the broken levee. This caused the government to hire outside resources to house and “collect” citizens. This ultimately caused rent to increase,=, and pushed the poor out of New Orleans. Through developing a solid argument; the paper gains credibility. The claims were also supported through direct quotes and government statistics.
“ for many people, the idea that they had to stay in a state of heightened response to the pending ‘crisis’- a state they had to already been in for over two years- produced huge anxiety and exhaustion”
“ Within two years, 4,600 of the publically subsidized housing units in New Orleans were being torn down and $1 billion was committed by HUD to town developers to create “mixed income residences; however developers were not expected or required to build one to one replacements for units lost”
“ Not surprisingly, residents and those still trying to return to New Orleans are asking the question: Where did all the Federal money go?”