# 2351
My last blog, which highlighted the John's Hopkins Study entitled Ethics and Severe Pandemic Influenza: Maintaining Essential Functions through a Fair and Considered Response, included the following snippet from the summary provided on the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics website.
. . . individuals and families who can afford it should do their best to prepare for any disaster. The paper notes, the more initiative the general public exercises in stockpiling several weeks' worth of food, water, paper goods, batteries medicines, and other needed supplies, the less vulnerable they will be to a break in the supply chain.
It is important for leaders to communicate to the middle class and the wealthy that it is their responsibility to prepare for self-sufficiency in order to free up scarce supplies and allow first responders to direct their attention towards those too poor or vulnerable to prepare themselves.
While this may not have been the main thrust of this paper's message, it is a powerful component. One that bloggers such as myself have been trying to promote for several years.
The GET PANDEMIC READY website is an excellent example of the kind of work being done by volunteers to try to get individual families and communities to prepare for a pandemic.
The various flu forums have been very vocal in recommending that people prepare personally for a pandemic.
Local health departments, like Larimer County in Colorado, have also been very proactive in encouraging families to prepare for a pandemic, or other disaster.
Larimer County's The Plan - How prepared are you to weather a disaster? This 15 minute video gives a good intro into planning to deal with a pandemic. Check out the other videos on this page. Broadband and dialup speeds are supported.
There is, in the opinion of this blogger, a moral imperative that people who can prepare should prepare.
It isn't fair to those who are unable to prepare to have to compete with those who could have prepared for scarce resources during a disaster. Nor should overworked and overburdened relief agencies have to provide for those who very well could have done so for themselves in advance.
For a reasonably affluent family of four, simple preparations can be made for the cost of a couple of family dinners out, or a couple of family outings to a movie theatre.
While a hundred dollars worth of preps might not break the bank for many families, there are some to whom that is a great deal of money. And while some families might elect to spend somewhat more to prepare, it can be done on a shoestring if needed.
Those who can afford to prepare can take a huge burden off the relief agencies during any disaster by simply not being in line to receive aid. They can also, at their discretion, elect to use some of their preps to help those around them who are less prepared during an emergency.
Preparing now, while there are no shortages, and there is no huge competition for resources, is not hoarding.
In June of 2006, I wrote a blog entitled Avian Affluenza, about some people's fears that prepping - when others might be unable to do so - is somehow a less than honorable thing to do.
I disagreed then, and it's nice to see that the authors of this report from John's Hopkins appear to disagree now.
Since it has languished deep in the archives for more than two years, I've resurrected it today.
Avian Affluenza
Monday, June 05, 2006
Of late, in some circles, there has been much debate over the ethics of prepping for a pandemic. There are some who contend that it is unethical to do so when there are others in this world who, due to economic reasons, are unable to do likewise. There are deep moral and religious reasons behind their thinking, and while I do not share them, I do respect them.
The idea of going down with the ship, tho, while noble, is not one that I embrace. We have always lived in a world with limited means, and there have always been people who, due to their location, or poverty, who do not have access to the things that others do. A sad reality.
But before too many people jump onto this bandwagon, I would submit that there is one overriding ethical reason to prepare. For everyone who does prepare, it takes some of the burden off of the governments and relief agencies who will be trying to feed and care for those who can’t.
By prepping, you will reduce the line for food and water during a crisis, and someone else can have those resources in your place. You will also free yourself up so you can help others.
It isn’t hoarding to buy now, while supplies are abundant. It isn’t selfish to take care of your loved ones. And by being prepared, you may be able to lend assistance to your neighbors and friends. It's a win-win situation.
Most Americans, and a great many of other people around the world, could set back a modest supply of food and water. A hundred dollars will buy several hundred pounds of beans and rice. Water can be stored in rinsed recycled 2 liter bottles. It doesn’t take a lot of money to be minimally prepared.
Perhaps it will mean skipping going out to the movies once a month. Or forgoing a dinner at a nice restaurant. But a few hundred dollars spent today, could save your life during a crisis.
Guilt over being affluent enough to prep is, in my opinion, misplaced. But everyone has to seek their own level of comfort, and reach their own moral decision here.
While the virus may get me, despite my preps, I do not intend to assist it in that endeavor. There are people I care about, and intend to help during this crisis. I can't do that if I'm dead or scrambling for my daily cup of rice from the government.
But hey, that's just me. YMMV. (Your mileage may vary)
