Search

pece_annotation_1481648031

jaostrander
Annotation of
In response to

This policy was part of the Consolitated Omnibus Reconciliation Act. Prior to this legislation, specifically Medicare and uninsured patients were being refused lifesaving procedures because of their inabiliy to pay for the services. Patient dumpin became an issue, in which a patient is transferred from a private to a public hospital, and essentially over working public hospitals for minimum wages. 

pece_annotation_1474778113

ciera.williams
Annotation of
In response to

This act provides ongoing support to the first responders and other professionals involved in the rescue efforts of 9/11/2001. The adverse health affects are still being discovered 15 years after the attacks, and the EMS community is still in need of the support provided. This policy also outlines a precedent for future attacks. In the event of another large-scale act of terrorism, the responders would likely receive similar support and "compensation" for the affects that might have them. 

pece_annotation_1474847662

jaostrander
Annotation of
In response to

"Clashes over authority among powerful institutions both public and private, competition among rival experts for influence, inquiry into a disaster elevated to the status of a memorial for the dead: these are the base elements of the World Trade Center investigation. And yet, even a brief historical review shows us that these elements are not unique.""Notions of public responsibility for private safety were highly evolved by this time, hence the fact that a coroner's inquest indicted Mayor Harrison and a full slate of city officials for complicity in the deaths of the Iroquois victims."

"The most bizarre, and perhaps most telling, moment in the hearing occurred when Rep Anthony D. Weiner of New York, addressing the panel of experts, asked for the person in charge of the investigation to raise his hand. When three hands went up..."

pece_annotation_1475447106

ciera.williams
Annotation of
In response to

The main theme of this article is the conditions leading up to, during, and following a policy passed in France in 1998. The policy allowed residency to "any foreigner habitually resident in France and suffering from a serious medical condition requiring medical treatment, and for whom deportation would result in exceptionally serious consequences, provided that he or she would be unable to receive appropriate treatment in the country to which he or she is returned" The author likens the poicy to "compassion protocol" or palliative care. The law should only apply in extreme circumstances and is based on an emotional response to pain/suffering. 

This policy had good intentions, but led to a number of resulting issues, such as disparity in care due to ambiguity in the law. For the enforcers of the law, there was much interpretation which allowed for individuals to exercise "humanitarian reason" and decide what conditions were a "serious medical condition" and what was not. This politicized medical care for foreigners/immigrants, as medical proffessionals no longer diagnosed based on symptoms, but socioeconomic status as well.