The challenge of explaining complex scientific actions in disaster response and humanitarian aid in a parochial environment: The case of the American Red Cross

Joseph O. Prewitt Diaz, PhD

Alexandria, Virginia

As I was driving this morning I heard in NPR that the GAO had completed its review of the American Red Cross[1], and that one of the members of the House of Representatives[2], had proposed the “American Red Cross Sunshine Act”.

The American Red Cross is one of a movement of 189 Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies from around the world with a Headquarters in Geneva. The existence of the American Red Cross is guided by seven fundamental principles: humanity, impartiality, neutrality, independence, voluntarism, unity, and universality.

 I was pleasantly surprised that the query of such a prestigious entity such, as the GAO would conduct a thorough investigation comparing apples with apples. As I reached home I looked up both reports. Then sadness set in.

The GAO detailed their research methodology, they indicate that they compared the American Red Cross several entities, types of disasters, national and international response, and other non-government agencies in the United States. I was taken aback to see that GAO had not compared the American Red Cross and its “modus operandi” at least “three national societies” from resource rich countries comparable to the United States. So in essence lacking that valuable information, the report is rendered useless. It is another report for those that have the miotic vision and the lack of universal vision to see that this organization brings a lot of well being to the image of the American people, especially from countries that are resource poor and who have felt the helping hand of the American people through the American Red Cross in their moment of need.

Secondly, to legislate the work of the American Red Cross, as suggested in the proposed legislation “The proposed American Red Cross Sunshine Act comes in response to a government report, also being released today, that finds oversight of the charity lacking and recommends Congress find a way to fill the gap” (quoted verbatim from the NPR/Pro publica news article).  To provide oversight to a member of an international movement is in effect a direct move to do away with the the mission of the American Red Cross, and the fundamental principles that its work embodies.

My  take is that  (1) monies given by the U.S. government or its representative to  an entity in order that they may perform a specific task should be placed under scrutinty. I also believe the scrutiny should be such that there is respect from the US Government toward the integrity of said organization; (2) establishing a law with the specific purpose to “rein-in” an organization is a an attempt to destroy the principles of independence, neutrality, and impartiality. This may not be very important to politician in Washington or others who unscrupulously seek to say “gotcha” without an unbiased investigative reporting that includes “here say” and also includes desk research, and experiential learning.

In addressing this issue I am fully aware that I will be considered a  “Vox clamantis in deserto”, but morally and with great respect toward those that have died in the past and present with the Red Cross vest providing humanitarian assistance, I couldn’t really be a bystander and keep quiet.

---

[1] GAO. (September 2015).  American Red Cross: Disaster Assistance Would Benefit from Oversight through Regular Federal Evaluation. Washington, DC: United States Government Accountability Office.

[2]  Elliot, J. & Sullivan, L. (Sept 16, 2015). American Red Cross Sunshine Act’ Would Open Charity to Outside Scrutiny. Washington, D.C.. National Public Radio & Pro Publica.

Psychosocial Support in the American Red Cross International Service--An early history

Becoming a volunteer for Disaster Services  of the American National Red Cross, as a Mental Health worker was a dream come through. My mother who had worked with the American Red Cross encouraged my brothers and I to volunteer. We did. But in terms of my growth in the Red Cross, the opportunity to share my skills at a National level was a great honor. Since "Three Mile Island", I have actively responded to over 50 major National Disasters. It wasn't a surprise when I received a call late 1998 from Disaster Services asking my availability for a "short term assignment" in Central America in response to Hurricane Mitch. This assignment would mark the beginning of a  journey that would result in my professional growth as a psychosocial support expert, advocate, and scholar.

There has been great effort  in getting psychosocial support recognized as a viable platform for disaster response, reconstruction and community resilience building in the American Red Cross.

After the embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998, Dr. Gerald Jacobs, the world expert in disaster mental health was commissioned by the IFRC to develop together with the National Societies a response to address the emotional sequelae of the attacks on the affected population. Upon his return he met with personnel from International Services where he provided a briefing and presented a plan for immediate Disaster Mental Health response.

In 1999, Dr. Gordy Dodge, Alice Willard and a staff member from the IFRC Psychosocial Center in Copenhagen presented the results of an evaluation of a "Psychosocial Support Program" in Kosovo. The focus was of the report was on the psychosocial impact of a livelihood project (providing sewing machines in a community center setting, and informal schooling activities).

Late 1999, Dr. Rachel Cohen and others met to discuss the viability of Disaster Mental Heath in International Services responses. Dr. Cohen, a famous psychiatrist and Red Cross volunteer,  shared her vast experience in crisis intervention and in the States, Central and South America. The focus of this report was care for the worker and survivors.

In the aftermath of the El Salvador earthquake in 2001, Sandy Brady, planned a meeting with invited personnel from previous DMH or PSP responses. The goal of the meeting was to identify strategies to insert psychosocial support into International Services. There was a presentation of the American Red Cross sponsored intervention which included emotional support to all the volunteers that responded to the earthquake and their families, and psychological first aid as a tool for first order intervention in psyhcosocial support.

Late 2001, the Technical Assistance Unit of International Services hired Will Matthews, a veteran of the Psychosocial Support response after the Turkey earthquake. He was tasked with developing "Psychosocial support guidelines" for International Services. He held two meetings one with a group of experts in Geneva, and the other with the delegate and the Psychosocial Support Team from El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and NNicaragua. As a result of those meetings he prepared Guidelines and presented them to Senior Management.

The guidelines were shelved shortly thereafter. Senior management concluded that the Psychosocial Support experts couldn't reach an agreement. These conclusion may have been misguided and biased. Each one of the programs reported and developed by International Services in the 1990'2 and early 2000's had elements of psychosocial support--psychological first aid and crisis intervention activities in the early aftermath of a disaster and recovery, Self help activities to increase networking and resilience, informal schooling, training for local staff, and staff care activities--. All were part of what is today known as psychosocial social support for disaster affected people.