Disaster Myths and Hurricane Katrina 2005: Can Public Officals and the Media Learn to Provide Reponsible Crisis Communication during Disasters?

Maladaptive behaviors in disasters: case study evaluation of Hurricane Hugo, Hurricane Katrina and the Haiti Earthquake

Maladaptive behaviors during a disaster refer to actions that do not benefit the individual or society. Quarantelli highlights several maladaptive behaviors myths associated with disasters: widespread antisocial behavior, passivity, role conflict or abandonment, and sudden widespread mental health breakdowns (1). Despite early work reporting these myths, the common perception is that maladaptive behaviors such as rioting, looting, panic, and criminal conduct are prevalent in the wake of disasters. This is despite research by de Ville de Goyet and Arnold which has called on public officials and the media to stop propagating false disaster myths (2, 3). The classic academic response has been that this is a misconception and that, in fact, such behaviors are a very small part of the overall disaster and are mostly non-existent. Misconceptions about the prevalence of maladaptive behaviors can lead to inappropriate resource allocation, such as allocating extra police officers to prevent looting when the overall crime rate for the most part, decreases during disasters (4). Furthermore, while there are several persistent maladaptive behaviors myths, this is confounded by the presence of actual negative behaviors post disaster: false damage claims, insurance fraud, illegally obtaining relief supplies, failure to provide contracted repair services, hoarding of essential items, psychological trauma (which can lead to intergenerational transmission of the disaster memory) and medications and price gouging (5).When reading lay-press articles about recent disasters, it appears that these behaviors are on the rise. This raises the question: Has there been a change in the basic human reaction to disasters and are maladaptive behaviors on the rise? This review article focuses on case studies from three natural disasters: Hurricanes Hugo and Katrina, and the Haiti Earthquake. The goal of this review article is to evaluate these three natural disasters for evidence of maladaptive behaviors.

Preparedness lessons from modern disasters and wars

Disasters come in all shapes and forms, and in varying magnitudes and intensities. Nevertheless, they offer many of the same lessons for critical care practitioners and responders. Among these, the most important is that well thought out risk assessment and focused planning are vital. Such assessment and planning require proper training for providers to recognize and treat injury from disaster, while maintaining safety for themselves and others. This article discusses risk assessment and planning in the context of disasters. The article also elaborates on the progress toward the creation of portable, credible, sustainable, and sophisticated critical care outside the walls of an intensive care unit. Finally, the article summarizes yields from military-civilian collaboration in disaster planning and response.

Misconception as a barrier to teaching about disasters

INTRODUCTION

This paper is a report on an exercise designed to reveal the extent of belief in the common myths about disasters held by members of four groups of students from the University of Massachusetts and three groups of trainee emergency workers from Italy.

METHODS

A questionnaire was administered in which students and trainees were asked to agree or disagree with 19 statements about disasters. These statements were based on common misconceptions about disasters and are at least statements untenable in statistical terms, if not downright wrong. In each case, a Likert scale was used to assess the strength of the students' and trainees' agreement or disagreement with the statements.

RESULTS

The results suggest that some of the misconceptions (for example, that panic and looting are widespread reactions to disaster) were strongly held, whereas others (for instance, that disasters cannot be managed) were less well-rooted. Despite years of refutation by experts, all groups firmly believed that dead bodies constitute a health hazard if they are not disposed of quickly. Attitudes to the proposition that technology offers a solution to the disaster problem were equivocal.

CONCLUSIONS

Though the results of the study by no means were homogeneous, students and emergency workers, on either side of the Atlantic, bring many of the same misconceptions that the mass media continually propagates. These beliefs represent a serious challenge for the instructor who wants to ensure that disasters and emergencies are not misconstrued.