Is there a difference between disaster-prep planning and disaster -response planning ethics?
x
one way to avoid cpntradiction between response and prep?
make prep plans general. allow room for change
triage
seperating patients:
unlikely to survive
recover w/o treatment
need treatment to survvive (priority)
egalitarien triage model
treating most ill/damaged first because they stand to reap the most benefit
utilitarian/efficemcy triage
maximizing physically able
(in military: maximizing soldiers/restoring fighting)
example: giving medication to soldiers that would be easily healed and returned to the front. the more ill and resource-wanting would have to wait
succor
assistance and support in times of hardship and distress.
"the wounded had little chance of succor"
moribund
(of a person) at the point of death.
"on examination she was moribund and dehydrated"
(of a thing) in terminal decline; lacking vitality or vigor.
"the moribund commercial property market"
how does disaster triage differ from medical triage
in disaster: treating the direct harms of the disaster (ie no higher purpose beyond immediate victims)
affects people in everyday life
less urgency outcome
war: treating both the direct harms and considering the effects on people not treated or githging in the war
expectation low resources no matter what
expectation of death/injury--accepting casualites beforehand
planning in normal life
openness of info
math action
user assumes risk
fraud protection
PNH
principle of no harm
pwb
principle of well being
ethics of disaster planning
we do not know beforehand what will occur or what plan we can apply
preppinf for a marathon
we cant possibly plan 100 pcent correctly. but we have a moral obligation to prep. no choice madatory
consisstent with principles of normal planning, no harm and preservatiuin,
Avian flu prep
x