Search

This gas leak took place in Bhopal, India and I think that the location has an important impact on the aftermath of the situation. After the gas leaked people protested to be compensated for their lost ones but many died before they were able to be justified. I feel that if this happened in America, circumstances would have been different, there would have been more media coverage, and action would be taken more swiftly. The location of this occurrence had an impact with how it was handled after and if it had occurred some place else then it would have been different. 

This film focuses on the environmental and social problem of having large gas (lethal) plants near cities or other populated areas where people can be harmed. Environmentally these gasses are no good because they are emitted into the air and are very soluble in the water which leads to ocean acidification. Ocean acidification makes it so that the ocean has a lower pH level, this can harm marine wildlife. Socially, the gas is toxic to people and as seen in the Bhopal tragedy, it can kill people or severely alter their lives. This could be seen through the immediate deaths of civilians, deformities of children born after the incident, and the families affected even years after hoping for justice.

From watching the video, I feel affected emotionally because it was definitely hard to watch so many people die, especially the innocent children. It is a hard pill to swallow to watch the lives of so many people taken away from them so unexpectedly in their own homes. I feel affected by seeing the photo of the unknown child because it was hauntingly touching as it was for so many people that advocated for justice after this tragedy. It was also really daunting seeing so many people being buried and burned in mass because they were not granted the ability to be respectfully honored for their death which I think is something very valuable. Intellectually I think that this film made me think about how this tragedy could have been possibly prevented if the plant had been maintained and checked up on regularly or if the plant wasn’t so close to a whole city in the first place. And I also feel gratitude to those who are still advocating for justice for the victims and trying to get people with government power to make that change.

Paul Farmer cites this paper in some of his other studies and articles written after this. The article has also been cited in a book entitled "Social Medicine in the 21st Century" by Samuel Barrack. This article has also been cited in: 

https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/10612556/3585352.pdf;sequen…

http://opensample.info/blindness-survey-methods-response-from-sudan-stu…;

Humanitarian aid is not directly a form of emergency response in a sense of EMS, but it does give help and attention to those in areas of need, and often times, forms of aid are medically related. Though emergency response isn't directly addressed in this paper, humanitarian aid is a form of a response to an emergency situation. This paper focuses more on the analysis of humanitarian efforts to those that at one time may have needed emergency response in the moment due to violent act. Yet the paper focuses on the social aspects of humanitarianism and its tie to gender based violence, not EMS or emergency response.

Teach 3.11 was developed to serve students and general public. It allows the public to have more access to different books, teaching material, and research regarding disasters. The website was built in response to the Fukushima disaster of 2011, in order to provide "an educational space for understanding the history, memory, and context of social disasters" (Teach 3.11). The editorial team has members from different countries, reflecting the international collaboration that natural and nuclear disasters require. With it's availability in six different languages, public contribution and comments enabled on articles gives a global platform for discussion and sharing. They are currently accepting papers for their "Terms of Disaster" collection.

There were numerous people invested in this situation and effected by the repercussions of it. The main focus is on the citizens of Liberia. The film shows their account of what happened, in terms of the severe amount of deaths and deplorable conditions in which they lived in. There was a complete lack of health care and public health or awareness, as well as resources such as food and supplies. Citizens were at first not taking the situation as seriously as it should have been, not heeding the warnings from doctors, convinced the government was exaggerating. Yet, once the turmoil and panic of officials was displayed, citizens soon began to worry. There were issues and decisions made involving protecting themselves from the disease as well as their families. Those infected also faced many issues. There was a complete lack of resources for those separated from the population due to infection. There were scarce amounts of food, water, supplies and medical attention. Fear, death and disease spread fast throughout the population. Decisions about not only quarantine and families had to be made, but also decision of whether leaving the country was a good choice, as seen by the main family in the documentary. Other stakeholders include health care officials as well as government employees. There were many decisions made by them in terms of allocating resources, as well as informing citizens about the situation.