Ethics in Disaster Relief - Essay Example

? Ethics in Disaster Relief Ethics in Disaster Relief Ethical Conflict in Relief Planning While analyzing the contemporary disaster management and relief planning practices, certain elements of ethical conflicts are usually found. The most important ethical conflict identified in relief planning is that underdeveloped communities around the globe are excluded from relief management practices on the ground of caste discrimination. According to National Dalit Watch-National Campaign (n. d.), on Dalit Human Rights (NCDHR), nearly 260 million caste-affected people are living in the world. The organisation also points that caste-affected population are most likely to be discriminated even during disaster relief practices. The case of Dalit, a mixed and untouchable population living in South Asia, will provide a clear view of the caste discrimination practices in relief planning. Dalits are underdeveloped socio-economically and most of them are low educated people. The events of disasters like 2004 tsunami and flooding in India, Nepal, and Pakistan demonstrated the degree to which the issue of caste discrimination can enhance inequity and affect underdeveloped populations including Dalits (NCDHR). Studies identified that Dalits are highly vulnerable to natural and human made disasters because they do not have improved habitation settlements. In many areas, Dalits are segregated from other communities or Dalits do not have access to mainstream settlements. Hence, vast majority of the Dalit people are living in places that are highly prone to all kinds of disasters. Even though disasters dreadfully affect the lives of Dalits, legal authorities or other interest groups do not still prioritize needs of Dalits. The fairness or justice approach can be applied in this case. This approach was evolved from the teachings of the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, who argued that “equals should be treated equally and unequal unequally”. Evidently, the justice approach is against favoritism or discrimination. The above identified ethical conflict is clearly a case of discrimination because Dalits’ lives are equally important as of others. Referring to the fairness approach, Dalits have the right to obtain quick and improved disaster relief services like in the case of other people. In addition, they have to be evacuated from disaster prone areas to other safe regions. Furthermore, governments at local and national levels should make necessary legal amendments to make Dalits less vulnerable to disasters and provide Dalits with immediate response actions in times of disaster situations. International interest groups have also a crucial role to play in reducing Dalits’ vulnerability to different kinds of disasters. In short, Dalits and other populations have to be served on an equal footing in terms of disaster relief planning. Ethics of Disaster Compensation The US Federal Government created the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund shortly after the 9/11 event. At the end of this fund collection process, a total of $7 billion was awarded to over 97% of the victims’ families. Reports indicate that the average payout was around $1.8 million (Department of Justice). This huge compensation raised expectations of a similar compensation package to the victims of other disasters. Evidently, it is ethical to provide compensation to the victims of 9/11 terrorist attack. However, the same ethical approach cannot be applied to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. The 9/11 disaster caused as a result of the failure of the US government’s national security systems and hence it was avoidable. In contrast, the Hurricane Katrina was a natural disaster, which is unavoidable. The right approach can be applied to the first (9/11) case. This approach (as cited in Velasquez, Andre, Shanks, and Meyer, 1996) was developed from the thoughts of the 18th century thinker Emmanuel Kant and his contemporary counterparts. According to these thinkers “what makes human beings different from mere things is that people have dignity based on their ability to choose freely what they will do with their lives, and they have a fundamental moral right to have these choices respected” (Velasquez et al, 1996). The philosophers state that fundamental human rights include right to the truth, right of privacy, right not to be injured, right to what is agreed. The 9/11 event, which occurred as a result of the government’s security failure, breached the people’s right not to be injured. Hence, the federal government has an ethical obligation to offer such a huge compensation to victims’ families. On the other hand, Hurricane Katrina cannot be attributed to a governmental fault as it was a natural disaster. Therefore, the US government is not obliged to compensate Hurricane Katrina victims in a way that was adopted for compensating 9/11 victims. This argument is also supported by the justice approach, which says that unequal should be treated unequally. It is recommendable for governments to compensate future terrorist attack victims hugely because such events show governments’ failure in securing their citizens. The same policy must be applicable to the victims’ of manmade disasters. However, governments should not offer huge compensations to the victims of natural disasters. Compensation for Disaster Relief Workers Disaster relief workers injured during relief operations must be exemplarily compensated. The virtue approach justifies this argument. According to this approach, “there are certain ideals toward which we should strive, which provide for the full development of our humanity” (as cited in Velasquez et al, 1996). Obviously, compassion, courage, and generosity are some of the basic virtues of a disaster relief worker. Disaster relief workers attempt to save others lives by risking their own lives. Undoubtedly, disaster relief workers are an inspiration to all and they motivate others to involve in disaster relief operations. In addition, they contribute to basic human values and fuel integral development of the society. From various perspectives, disaster relief workers are a priceless asset of any society as they promote humane activities. In addition, provision of attractive compensation packages to injured disaster relief workers would motivate more people to enter this field of human service. Evidently, more number of relief workers would effectualize disaster response operations, which in turn may save the lives of many people. It must be noted that majority of the disaster relief workers are not paid for their services or they are voluntary workers. These people add value to the nation’s common good. Therefore, there is an ethical obligation lies with governments to compensate their disaster relief workers attractively who get injured during disaster relief operations. References Department of Justice. September 11th victim compensation fund of 2011. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/archive/victimcompensation/ NCDHR. Addressing caste discrimination in Humanitarian Response. Retrieved from http://www.idsn.org/fileadmin/user_folder/pdf/New_files/India/2012/IDSN-EU_study_on_CBD_in_humanitarian_response_by_NDW.pdf Velasquez, M., , Andre, C., Shanks, T & Meyer, M. (1996). Thinking ethically: A framework for moral decision making. Issues in Ethics V7 N1. Retrieved from http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/thinking.html Read More