Search

The film gave a lot of instances where the providers were more or less just having fun. For example, nearly every interview invoved the guys sitting down and drinking a beer while joking. While this proved their humanity, it also showed that the doctors spent much of their free time having fun rather than getting sleep. I would assume that they weren't drinkng while still "on call" or planning on giving care, and thus had the time to get proper rest. The amount of luxury afforded to the doctors after the trip also was a bit less compelling. At the end, the doctors were swimming at a nice pool and just relaxing, which is understandable for destressing. But it also seemed to take away some perspective. These doctors go on about how little resources they have to give and how the wish they could stay on their mission, but immediately turn back to luxury. Its just a bit hypocritical. And I understand that they cannot directly contribute to the people they care for in terms of wealth, but I found it was a bit unnecessary to include in the film.

The data primarily manifests in visual prompts. The web platform begins by engaging the viewer with clips, pictorals, gifs, and interviews discussing the hurricanes from start to finish.

The article addresses the lack of unity in the decision making proceess during emergencies. Lots of life-or-death decisions are left up to a doctor's judgemnet, which causes ambiguity as a result. One can argue that doctors are given this right to judgment as a sign of their training and the trust we put in them. However, when the trust is perceived as betrayed by affected individuals, the judgement is called into question. 

Another point is the lack of evacuation preparadness in hospitals.

The article includes multiple in-person interviews, including with Canadian officials (such as the Nunavut Premier), a professor of psychiatry at the University of Saskatchewan, and several prominent figures in the Native community.

The author addresses emergency response in the context of the workers who responded to and continue to work at the site of the chernobyl nuclear disaster. These workers were monetarily compensated in high ammounts, but left physically injured and disabled by the exposure to radioactivity at the site.

The article centers on how social and political factors effected access to care for citizens in the wake of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. Additionally, the author discusses how "at-risk" populations emerge; far too often, these populations are only noted after a disaster occurs, and are often ignored until that point. This creates a dependence on healthcare and illness for these populations, something that can be highly effected based on economic and social status. The author also discusses how technologies and government involvement dictated the situation post-disaster, and includes extensive information from resettled families and workers exposed to radiation

This system definitely shouldnt be used as a means of diagnosis when a doctor is completely stumped for answers. Its a tool but not a reliable resource.

As the data is from 1998, I would sincerely hope that the data has already encouraged responses. Nonetheless, at the very least, the data should be able to serve as a marker for progression in traumatic event services. While sexual assault is markedly different from other traumatic events, the data could also be extrapolated to other events with community ties. More pointedly, data from this study demonstrated where some of the gaps came between victims with the "best" service outcomes and those with the "worst". The primary difference between the "best" group and those in latter tears was in the legal system. These shortcomings appeared to emerge early on, with a discrepancy in whether their reports even made it to the desk of the prosecution from the police department. This indicates a shortcoming in the system, and a point which should be investigated to better victim outcomes moving forward. Sexual assault cases are rarely black and white, thus some detectives may be inclined to create personal judgments about the merit of a case before passing it along, thus leading to its exclusion. This is one of several differences in victim encounters leading to less desired outcomes.

The purpose of this program is to educate students to become global leaders (dubbed Phoenix Leaders) in radiation disaster response. The program aims to use experience from the aftermath for Hiroshima to create an overarching program of “Radiation Disaster Recovery Studies”, with multiple disciplines of Medicine, Environmental Studies, Engineering, Sciences, Sociology, Education and Psychology. The eventual aim is to create a new and evolving system of response, safety, and security. 

This report provides a detailed analysis of international response to nuclear emergencies. In addition to reviewing historic nuclear emergencies and their responses, it examines current nuclear policies. Initial reactions to previous nuclear emergencies (Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, ect.) focused on preventing future incidents. Yet,  Dr. Schmid argues increased safety measures and rigorous regulation cannot possibly safeguard against all emergency scenarios. She emphasizes the need to create an international organization to serve as an emergent response team, and explores several candidates such as the International Atomic Energy Agency and World Association of Nuclear Operators. However, Dr. Schmid concludes none of these suggested organizations currently have the fiscal capability or internation authority to act in this role.