The article uses the historical background of Chernobyl to establish government policies, the analysis of policies pertaining to the healthcare system available to affected population, and narratives of those directly affected by Chernobyl related illnesses.
1) “Mismanagement was not the only charge mounted against the Japanese Utility that operated the reactors at Fukushima Diichi, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO). In the aftermath of the disaster, international media charged workers at the plant, alternatingly, with a lack of expertise to handle the situation adequately, and with a lack of courage, when they retreated temporarily under the threat of dangerously high radiation levels.”
2) “But emergency preparedness is hardly ever considered ‘good enough’ in retrospect, especially after a disaster in which so many lives were lost or shattered.”
3) “Within the nuclear industry, an almost exclusive emphasis on accident avoidance has given way to a new strategy of accident preparedness and response.”
The author conducted his research by personal experience and reference to case examples.
The data is mainly visualized in a report form.
This organization seeks to promote the use of nuclear technology which creates an inherent bias in how it looks at nuclear disasters. On one side, it does not want any nuclear accidents and wants to promote safe nuclear use as disasters cause the public to be less favorable towards nuclear. On the other hand, in the event of a nuclear incident, the IAEA is biased against being too critical of the nuclear industry when assigning blame, as it did with the Fukushima incident.
The main argument of the article is that humanitarian efforts are far behind progress when it comes to gender violence due to politics, stereo types, and prioritization.
The main point of the article is to show the ethical and enviromental danger inmates face on Riker Island. This is supported by the description heat emergencies that are risking lives of inmates, air pollution in the facility due to methane gas that is being produced by the landfill it was built on, and the shifting in the ground that is leading to cracking, subjecting facilities to flooding during extreme weather.
This study addresses vulnerable populations by identifying the factors are that make one vulnerable. These factors are: loss of shelter, location of housing, access to clean water and sanitation, disruption to utilities, environmental changes, population displacement, health services, and response systems.
This article is referenced in various other papers concerning cultural factors in patient treatment.
I found the part where the healthcare worker relates to the difficulty of his position most compelling and persuasive. A man on the burial team talks about some of the challenges he faced. He says that they are in denial about the disease. For example, a man’s wife died from the disease. They took the body and marked the room with the health tattoo, do not enter and barricaded the door. A health team was tasked to disinfect the building but the moment they left the husband bust the door down and went inside. He died as well. “You see the challenges? You tell people, don’t do this, they pass behind you go do it, don’t do this, they say we are eating free money, the government is lying”.
I was probably influenced by the fact that I am a healthcare worker and while not the same situation, I can relate to his dilemma.