Page 108 - Creating Spiritual and Psychological Resilience

Ethical and Legal Considerations in Postdisaster Collaborations 77

available in the county because of hurricane-related closures. They suggest
that someone from the church should come and pick up the person. Instead,
a member of the congregation who was coordinating activities at the shelter
suggests that the person would be better suited at some shelter that is designed
for people with severe mental illness. A week later, a newspaper publishes a
story about how the church violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by not
allowing individuals with mental illness to stay at their shelter.

Whether or not the person with mental illness in this vignette has a
right to sue the church is less relevant. The negative effect of the publicity
can be far worse than any actual monetary consequences of a suit. Several
elements common to many disasters are highlighted in this vignette. First,
the development of informal collaborations between public and private
organizations can blur the distinction of who has responsibility for dif-
ferent services. Because the local government emergency management
agency was arranging transportation to and from the FEMA office, the
evacuees staying at the church may have developed expectations that this
volunteer-run activity was somehow responsible for providing services
that the church itself could not provide. Because the shelter was a new cre-
ation after a disaster, it is unlikely that Rev. Jones took the time to consult
local shelters to find out how to frame rules that were considered non-
discriminatory. It is unlikely that Rev. Jones was aware of what resources
were available for individuals with serious mental illness. After Hurricane
Katrina, in at least one church in Baton Rouge that provided temporary
shelter to evacuees from New Orleans, the local clergy discovered that
there were effectively no inpatient mental health services available for
individuals who were psychotic.
Because many disaster-response initiatives and many faith-based orga-
nizations rely on volunteers initially, there can be a diffusion of responsi-
bility within an organization. The person who advised the ill individual in
this vignette to go to the emergency room may not have been the person
who answered the telephone when the hospital wanted to send the patient
back. If the local community of disaster responders had held a meeting
to discuss how to manage individuals with physical and mental illness, it
is quite possible that Rev. Jones would have gone. But how likely would it
be for that information to have been effectively communicated to all the
individuals managing the church response every day of the week and on
nights and weekends?