The policy deals with Institutions for Mental Diseases (IMD), which are defined as facilities with at least 16 beds, and focuses on diagnosing, treating, and caring for those with mental diseases. There are additional ways to determine whether a facility is an IMD. Once this determination is made, this policy aims to set limits on IMDs, as well as specify which services they should provide.
This program aims to aid the member states in preparing, testing, and improving emergency response for nuclear emergencies and radiological accidents.
I looked up how other countries and areas of the world fund emergency response, like ambulance agencies. I also looked to see in which countries these services are most developed. The last point I researched was the size of the area affected by Chernobyl and the population density of that area.
I research stories about antidepressants and compared those to research on the drugs.
"In the interest of sustainable and socially legitimate solutions, arguably decisions to even the technical responses to disasters should not be left to scientists and engineers alone"
This statement is very thought-provoking and is not exactly expected in a research article - that a scientist's or engineer's decision should be influenced or editied by those without such specific education or expertise.
-balancing point between safety and profitability
-disaster did not happen as a chain of events that made it bound to occur at some point, it happened on a system that was in good shape
-over regulation of the industry and workers results in a lack of flexibility and therefore an inability to be creative in emergency situations
-need emergency response team to be skilled professionally and socially, but on a low budget - and very importantly - cooperation from nuclear corporations
The film goes through the lives of those in the emrgency room of a hospital: the doctors, nurses, patients, families. It looked at how some families don't have any choice other than to go to the ER, which makes the wait times longer. It shows how the field is different than the doctors thought when going into it, but it is still rewarding and they can change lives. It shows holes in the system and how easy it is for people to fall through the cracks, especially if they do not have insurance or a PCP. There is stress on everyone involved to keep people moving but making sure nobody is forgotten. Traumas also bump those waiting farther down the list.
When community factors such as transportation and insurance status were minimized as factors preventing HIV/AIDs care, the playing field was leveled within a few years. No longer were those issues much more often seen in the patients that did not survive, rather, they were seen more evenly in those that did and did not survive.
Combining clinic treatments with home-visits and prescription drug deliveries has been found to be most effective for treating all people, regardless of social factors, in places from rural Africa to Boston, MA.
Mutli-faceted approach in rural areas were most effective and able to dramatically reduce Mother-to-Infant-Transmission of HIV. This requires more resources and organization, but it takes care of the issue most efficiently in areas that are very poor and have very rudimentary infrastructure, even worse than in poor cities.
Lakoff has a PhD in social anthropology and is an associate professor of sociology at the Univeristy of Southern California. Collier in an associate professor of international affairs at the New School in New York. Both authors have extensive backgrounds in studying people, but not disease, so their stance in this paper is not looking at the biological or emergency response aspects, but more how people plan and react to such.
First responders share their experiences, how they responded, how they realized there weren't going to be many survivors. Many of them suffered from health issues afterwards. The air was very toxic and led to cancers. It makes you wonder how other safety information is given to first responders. They weren't even doing a rescue mission at the point that asbestos was being hidden in reports, so their lives should not have been risked like that for simply cleaning up rubble. Was it worth it for them to shovel the debris and pull out parts of bodies at that point, while putting their well being and lives at risk? If they had waited a few months for the dust to settle and be cleaned up, would that have saved many of the first responders? Offices in the area and houses nearby weren't inspected until even later. Schools opened as a sign of American strength led to asthma, bronchitis, etc. Are those lives worth the public image?
The health of the inmates is in serious jeopardy and there was in instance in which an ambulance was unable to get to the island, which resulted in a death. There are also a lot of suicide attempts so that should be a warning to someone.