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.

According to the history page of American Red Cross, the organization began in 1882. In the 23 years following that, the organization aided in disaster relief efforts with the US Army during the Spanish American War. Not until prior to WW1 was the first water safety, first aid and health program introduced by the organization, where they first expanded their efforts and scope of what they can offer. What truly motivated the way and thinking of disaster relief was the outbreak of war America had. The organization grew tremendously because of war. In the 4 years between 1914 an 1918, chapters of American Red Cross went from 107 to 3,864- which is astonishing. Membership also grew from 17,000 to 20 million in that time. With this large jump of people and chapters came a large growth in funding and material to cover programs, hospitals, nurses, etc to aid refugees and American and Allied forces. Then in 1918, influenza pandemic struck and American Red Cross was able to help combat that and in the process took on more nurses to do so. This trend of growth is seen during times of war, or devastation such as the Great Depression, Mississippi River flood and WW2. Ultimately, what motivated the growth and disaster response was the need for it. As need increased for care during times of war, devastation or disease, American Red Cross grew, due to those in support of troops overseas, volunteering time and money, which allowed for the organization to grow and gain the moment needed to combat epidemics and eventually natural disasters.

This was touched upon a little in a previous question. Many cases of patient dumping were popping up around America. Patients in need  of emergency medical care were being cast aside, ignored and delayed due to their inability to pay. In addition to the stab patient, Eugene Barnes that sparked this law, there were dozens of other cases where patients needed to be transferred to larger hospitals but the hospital refused to take patients without insurance, so the patients died. There were cases of people being asked right before surgery for a deposit, and being unable to pay were discharged with no surgery. There was also a very high rate of dead babies that were arising due to the fact that mothers in labor were being turned away because the patient was uninsured. It was then realized by the government that there were no legal duties for a hospital to treat people who are in emergency situations but cannot pay, only ethical and moral duties, which apparently weren't enough in some cases. This led to the birth of the EMTALA, requiring medical attention to all ED patients as well as transfers if needed to stabilize, including mothers in labor.