1. In the unfortunate case of a natural disaster occurring, there are various measures which should be taken into account, vital in securing the general population’s safety. These are inclusive of amongst others: - disaster response, evacuation measures, food and water delivery, medical service provision, fire-control and the fixing of electric cable lines amongst others. Regarding Case 43 as aforementioned, there should be guiding principles which are appropriate for the existing measures of disaster coordination. In the field of disaster and emergency management, there are guiding principles, which provide both an enduring and guiding basis for practice. Primary importance should therefore be focused on humanitarian assistance, as the Code of Conduct No. 1. This is rooted in the essence that all citizens are equal and therefore should receive the various forms of aid regardless of their nationality, creed, race, social status or politico-religious affiliations. The above could best be realized by way of entailing a reasonable system of prioritized activities.
This should be pegged on the aspect of saving lives above everything else. Thus, this entails the implementation of various supportive measures such as food, water and shelter provision (relief aid), the set up of situation/ command centers, as well as areas for medical assistance/ aid. Following would be other basics such as power and lighting and the salvaging and management of property, in addition to other auxiliary services. Economics does play a vital role, especially with regard to resource allocation (both manpower and monies). Furtherance is the aspect of salvaging the economic basis of a given affected region as human life still needs to go on after such a disaster as aforementioned (Alexander, 2002). Thus priority should be focused on the most important assets of the prevailing economic base, with the aim of returning life back to normal, as experienced before the occurrence of such a disaster.
2. Regarding the case aforementioned, Craig Moran, as the disaster coordinator, provided leadership that was based on specific guidelines. These guidelines unfortunately, did not entirely regard the ethical standing of a given disaster case scenario as the aforementioned Code of Conduct No. 1 was not fully adhered to. This is especially so regarding his immediate response of dealing with the region’s rich neighborhoods as his first priority and area of focus. His reasoning was educated by the fact that he viewed the economic basis of the two areas: - the Eskridge and Oak Tree neighborhoods, as the economic foundation of the area, hence their importance. While the aspect of economics is vital in cases of disaster management, the core priority would be saving all human lives present within the larger affected area, to be followed by his prioritized measures.
The effects of such a decision, especially with regard to the poor area of town, portended to disastrous results. In the face of such a storm’s immediate aftermath, the poor side of town would be much more affected as a result of amongst others: - the basic lack of proper infrastructure and structural regulation, the lack of essential services and the potential aspect of such an area hosting more people than the town’s suburbs. Furtherance would be the fact that by concentrating on the wealthier part of town, the aggrieved individuals in the poor part would continue suffering more, with disastrous consequences being in the offing (Dunfee & Strudler, 2000). This could potentially result in more deaths and injuries, not to mention the prevailing nature of psychological impacts and effects.
3. Accordingly, I am of the view that Craig, though being the person in charge of disaster coordination, exercised due diligence only partially. The principle guiding factor, with regard to disaster coordination and management is the saving of as many lives as possible. Thus his concentration on one side of the affected area negated this principle to second place. According to his perspective, the area’s economic basis superseded that of the other affected areas, thereby relegating the aspect of saving lives to second place. The prevailing circumstance of limited resources was crucial in informing his decision, thereby commanding the utility of all the main equipment, relief supplies, manpower and materials needed to the two aforementioned wealthier neighborhoods.
He delegated the auxiliary services to be responsible for the other sections of the affected area i.e. the non-profit organizations and the churches, with the FBI to offer other forms of assistance. Given the situational contexts of such an event, it is vital for the prevailing officer in-charge, to optimize the available resources, in terms of man-power, equipment, food, water, medical facilities and medicines and money to the best possible cause-outcome (Dunfee & Strudler, 2000). With the area-scale of an affected region providing the basis for such resource allocation, it is upon the best possible positive outcome that one should channel the available resources.
4. According to my view, I do think it is vital for a disaster coordinator to have due discretion, with regard to response efforts point of focus, in a given disaster. This is due to the delicate nature of such responses, where all areas affected require basic assessment and organization. In such unfortunate cases, various individuals are affected in different ways, thus the need to focus such response efforts on the principle aspect of saving lives. Property and other crucial assets should be second-place to the sanctity of life, therefore informing the lines and phasing of response efforts. As the official in charge, Craig was the holder of such an office, due to various crucial factors i.e. skills and experience, as well as knowledge and expertise. With such a broad aspect of know-how, the coordinator should provide the leadership necessary for such an undertaking.
It is through this leadership command, where various guidelines, activities and procedures may be implemented, thereby providing increased chances of overall success. As his assistance, the officer following in command was right in providing input into the decision making procedure as he pointed out the shortfalls of Craig’s delegation. When he asked of the reason for such prioritization in such a case scenario, he was following due process. This is informed by the fact that it is not always right to accept the given command, but rather also offer input critical in enhancing such a command’s overall effects. The above thus showcased an aspect of the processes crucial in enhancing the likelihood of better decision-making (Alexander, 2002). Through external input, the leader in charge of such a situation is able to better assess the prevailing situational context. In the process, the leadership present is able to find out areas of concern, which require greater attention and hence enhanced focus of response efforts.
References
Alexander, D. (2002). Principles of Emergency Planning and Management. Harpenden: Terra.
Dunfee, T.W. & Strudler, A. (2000). Moral Dimensions of Risk Transfer and Reduction Strategies. In Kreimer A. and Arnold M., Disaster Risk Management Series (No. 2: Managing Disaster Risk in Emerging Economies). Washington D.C: World Bank.
