The New York Times recently published an article about the 2013 death in China of Peace Corps Volunteer Nick Castle. It's an interesting read that gave me a lot to reflect on and I encourage other people to read it.
Trail of Medical Missteps in a Peace Corps Death
I've been happy with my medical care in Vanuatu. We have a Filipino doctor and an Australian nurse, both of whom are really responsive and attentive to volunteers' needs. Recently I got some sort of bacterial infection that caused my foot to swell up to gargantuan proportions -- like, I couldn't even find a slip on shoe large enough to fit it anywhere -- and the doctor has been doing nightly house calls to give me antibiotic shots. (Now the swelling's gone down a bit, but the foot still has enough water that when I press into it, the indentation stays for a good minute or two. Very disgusting seeing your feet look like an egg crate!)
One thing I didn't realize until I came to Vanuatu was how doctors everywhere are not always as professional or attentive as we expect in the States. I can imagine this affecting other posts (although I don't know exactly what went on in China, and, like I said, this is not the case in Vanuatu.) One instance: our doctor doesn't do gynecological exams, so we have to go to private doctors. This happened to me with an Israeli doctor and to another girl with a French doctor. Neither of us were offered gowns, and the French doctor apparently had the bedside manner of a slug. It was still medical care, but not exactly what you hope for.
I liked what Nick Castle's father said, about how he didn't expect his son to die in the Peace Corps because it's not like Afghanistan. It's so true. Peace Corps does do a good job (I think) of teaching volunteers to minimize risk, even withdrawing volunteers from country if the country is no longer safe. (Honduras, Ukraine, Mali, Kenya ...) It's a government organization, and definitely no one goes overseas with the idea that they might not come back.
I do feel like there are risks that can't be eliminated without eliminating Peace Corps' inherent mission. Peace Corps is supposed to promote world peace and friendship through 1) providing countries with trained men and women, 2) teaching those host country nationals about America and the American way of life, and 3) teaching Americans about HCNs, who they are, and how they live. We do this by working in mostly rural, under-served areas, at the ground level, and not in big, capital cities with excellent, American-standard hospitals. One thing I think is different about Peace Corps, and--I'm biased--I'll argue is better, is this particular focus on rural and ground-level work. Other volunteer organizations in Vanuatu are predominately located in or around town centers. Some volunteers work at high-level positions doing policy work without knowing much about culture, conditions in the villages, or even the language. They do a lot of good work, but I like that Peace Corps is known for going out in the bush and doing our work there. It's bottom-up rather than top-down development.
There are risks involved in doing this type of work--namely, that when volunteers have health emergencies, they don't have access to the same type of American-standard medical care. As volunteers, we do take a lot of risks, and I think for the most part, most of us find that we can accept some dangers because of the reward we get from volunteering. These risks are still there, and I think it's important for volunteers and for anyone thinking of doing Peace Corps to think about what if. I'm 24 and to an extent still think of myself as invincible--but, obviously, I'm not. This was a sobering read and a very interesting thing to look at.
No comments:
Post a Comment