Search

Sonja D. Schmid is a professor at Virginia Tech in Northern Virginia. Her studies and research focus on “technology policy, qualitative studies of risk, energy policy, and nuclear nonproliferation” as stated on her directory website for VT. She has been an associate professor since 2011 and her current project, such as the article suggests, is investigating the challenges of globalizing nuclear emergency response. She has many published articles including her most recent publication in Global Forum earlier this year titled “What if there’s a next time? Preparedness after Chernobyl and Fukushima - A European-American response.”

This policy was an expansion of the Social Security Act of 1965 and set clearer guidelines regurding classifications of mentally disabled individuals, and the leaneances set fourth due to their disability. 

A child's perspective would increase the emotional aspect of the film.

The author uses a wide variety of news and journal sources to make their point. Everything from the New York Times to East Asian Science. It also cites many volumes on disaster preparedness. For example, “The Chernobyl Accident: a Case Study in International Law Regulation State Responsibility for Transboundary”. The sources tell me that the article was developed around the news at the time and works that dealt with handling of disasters from the past. For me, this furthers the case that the author is making: that the way we have been doing things in the past is not working.

Doctors without Borders (MSF) is an organization that provides emergnecy medical aid to communities affeted by conflict, epidemics, disasters, and more. It's composed of mostly physicians and other health care workers, but is accepting of individuals which will help it achieve it's goals. MSF takes a neutral stance on issues as they only strictly abide by medical ethics.

1) “…what would happen if race and insurance status no longer determined who had access to the standard of care?

…in addition to removing some of the obvious economic barriers at the point of care, the clinicians and researchers considered paying for transportation costs and other incentives as well as addressing comorbid conditions ranging from drug addiction to mental illness. They also implemented improvements in community-based care, conceived to make AIDS care more convenient and socially acceptable for patients. The goal was to make sure that nothing within the medical system or the surrounding community prevented poor and otherwise marginalized patients from receiving the standard of care.

The results registered just a few years later were dramatic: racial, gender, injection-drug use, and socioeconomic disparities in outcomes largely disappeared within the study population [35].”

2)            “This model [PIH’s model], with conventional clinic-based (distal) services complemented by home-based (more proximal) care, is deemed by some to be the world's most effective way of removing structural barriers to quality care for AIDS and other chronic diseases.”

3)            “While some interventions are straightforward, we also have to recognize that there is an enormous flaw in the dominant model of medical care: as long as medical services are sold as commodities, they will remain available only to those who can purchase them.”

The article uses historical references to provide context to the problems faced and information gained. Through each event it evaluates the individual which they, and the general public considers at fault. 

1) “The current concern with new microbial threats has developed in at least four overlapping but distinct domains: emerging infectious disease; bioterrorism; the cutting-edge life sciences; and food safety”

2) “’Global health’ is a second field in which health threats have been problematized in new ways.”

3) “The regulation of what Ulrich Beck calls “modernization risks” comprises a third field in which biosecurity has been newly problematized.”

4) “Although there is a great sense of urgency to address contemporary biosecurity problems— and while impressive resources have been mobilized to do so — there is no consensus about how to conceptualize these threats, nor about what the most appropriate measures are to deal with them.”