Search

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.

This article has been used as a reference in other STS articles and books. 

While this chapter does not discuss emergency response, its approach to discussing the public health aspects of immigrants and French policies created a discussion about how immigrants and others seeking asylum for various reasons should be treated. The focus of this chapter is more on the public health side of society and the humanitarian side of immigration.

Through extensive data analysis and interviews, the authors were able to produce claims and formulate their argument. They used information from the NIH and other research and data already obtained to explore displacement in relation to race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and age. 

The main point made about emergency response is the need for debriefing and how crucial that is for first responders as well as victims of trauma. They also highlight that emergency responders are some of the sufferers of mental illness and that debriefing could be a way to reduce that statistic. 

The author of this article is Adriana Petryna. She is an Edmund J. and Louise W. Kahn Term Professor in Anthropology at UPenn. She teaches primarily anthropology courses because her main interest lies in anthropological theory and methods, the social studies of science and technology, globalization and health, and medical anthropology. Her research focuses on the effects of cultural and political forces on science and medicine. She has written several books and articles. 

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.