Search

It is clear from the bibliography as well as the notes, that Schmid is very educated in this field. She has done immense amounts of research (including citing herself), which shows that this is being written by an expert, and not a random scientist with an opinion. She provides information within her notes that help point someone seeking further information in the right direction. She also cites multiple sources form the same author, showing knowledge of other colleagues or experts within the field who may provide good insight and information.

The main finding or argument of this article is that a patient's culture will significantly impact a patient's narrative and description of their medical history. Each culture has its own stigmas and norms that can affect the way a patient views their own medical history. This is an important thing that doctors should recognize when analyzing and assessing a patient's situation and history. Also, there is discussion about how an illness can impact an individual physically, mentally, socially, and otherwise. Public perception is an important part of this article.

Three ways the document is supported is using the history of France is allowing dieased immigrants into the country- none at all, with some exception and then applying a protocol. The article is also supported through using doctors and their perspective on the immigrants- not caring, wanting to follow the law or being compassionate. The last way is this article is supported is through claims filed by the immigrants themselves-whether they were completely legitimate in their reasons, had medical records falsified or their identity falsified- and the overall effects on the country.

The main public health issue mentioned in this article is the cholera epidemic that was caused by UN Nepalese workers, and the lack of accountability by the UN. The article discusses how the UN is "immune" to a court's decision, despite its obvious injustice for Haiti. In spite of the distrust by world leaders and NGOs on the Haitain government to handle a trust fund meant to help its citizens, the money that has gone directly to them has been used to increase childhood vaccination and save HIV patients. This shows their ability to manage funds and the issues that arise when allowing people overseas to handle the money meant for efforts in Haiti. 

1. MSF
2. Policies about gender based violence 
3. rape rates aroudn the world

The report was published by the Select Bipartisan commitee.

The most compelling part of the film for me was the woman yelling at the side of the road about a pregnant woman that was sick and left behind by emergency responders that did not have the authority or equipment to handle the ebola patient. The fetus was still alive and moving, however, the ebola team came too late and the baby died along with its mother. This was compelling because it showed her dead on the side of the road and the woman screaming watched it happen. The baby could have been saved, but the understaffed ebola team could not get there in time. 

Policy makers, mostly. People who are privileged and can go to private doctors or hospitals don't often see the issues that public hospitals face. Policy makers who don't see this as a problem would benefit from seeing this documentary. But I think that everyone can learn smething from this documentary. For future doctors it can show patient care and bed-side manners. For a regular person it can show the need for insurance so that they can push local policy makers to make a change.

The system relies on partnerships for funding and credibility- IBM, capital factory,telemental health institute, health wildcatters. It relies on a patient provider relationship and a provider-provider relationship.