Search

The narrative in this film is an emotional one, rather than a scientific one. For the most part, scientific knowledge is common, as the outbreak occurred recently. The only scientific information given was at the end where the statistics of how many deaths occurred in Liberia are given as well as the amount of people who contracted the disease. The primary appeal of this film is that it plays into people's emotions. The narrator is a student at the University of Wisconsin, who discusses his struggle with getting his family to the United States and out of the infected areas. Through graphic footage, as well as this story and narratives from people within the community, we are given an emotional framework with which to empathize. 

They are shown for a moment in which they bring in trauma patients, but are not a main player in this documentary.

According to ResearchGate, this article has been cited 28 times. 

While this article does not really address emergency response, the discussion of violent attacks on humanitarian workers does involve emergency responders and can affect how humanitarians provide care. So while not direct, this article does have implications for emergency responders in those regions. 

1. "Yet, the demands placed on an investigation have as much, or more, to do with defining the dominant investigator and quickly addressing the fears and anger of the press, government, and an outraged public than they do with discovering the definitive technical truths of a catastrophic event."
2. "Blame, memorial, and reconstruction tend to outpace technical consensus."
3. "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."
4. "Apparently, despite the technical acumen of the nation's investigators, a lack of funding and authority had rendered the investigators unbelievably 'unable to provide a comprehensive analysis of how well the buildings and their structural elements performed, and as a result, they cannot say if the buildings had specific weaknesses'"

The author supports his argument by first giving the reader a history about immigrant healthcare in France. By using stories of immigrants and showcasing the ways in which physicians dealt with the medical and humanitarian issues, the author provides a social framework for us to see how immigrants were treated. By also providing philosophical insight and statistics, the author is further able to support his argument.