EBOLA: SHOULD AMERICA CARE?

EBOLA: SHOULD AMERICA CARE?

Introduction

Ebola is a viral disease that occurs in the form of viral hemorrhagic fever. The disease attacks human beings and primates. The causative agent of Ebola disease is the ebolaviruses. The incubation period of Ebola disease usually takes between two days to three weeks of exposure or contracting the virus. Ebola was first discovered in the year 1976 in two African countries by the names Sudan and Zaire (Pavlik et al., 2018). For that reason, the disease was named after a major river in Zaire called Ebola. During this historic outbreak, the disease was regarded as a pandemic because it first infected about two hundred and eighty-four in Sudan with a fatality rate of 53%. The second case of the Ebola outbreak was reported in Zaire, where it had infected three hundred and eighteen people. The second case was much more extreme because it was characterized by a fatality rate of 88% (Pavlik et al., 2018). The third case was reported in Virginia in the year 1989, when some monkeys were imported from the Philippines. However, this third case was not fatal because none of the victims developed the hemorrhagic fever like the first two cases. The last case of Ebola disease to be reported was in Cote d’Ivoire when the virus infected an ethologist who was performing a necropsy on a dead Chimpanzee.

Analysis of Evidence

According to the world infection map of Ebola virus, it is clear that Americans have suffered less as compared to other areas where the virus was reported. The extreme cases were reported in Africa, which contributes to three cases of Ebola Virus outbreak. More so, the case reported in Virginia (United States) in the year 1989 did not get to the levels of causing an alarm because the infected patients did not get to develop the extreme symptoms of hemorrhagic fever (Pavlik et al., 2018). The fact has caused some of the Americans to develop a feeling that the virus is not fatal on Americans people. In other words, some Americans believe that Ebola is a disease for the Africans in Africa (Monson, 2017). However, the concept of democracy and humanitarian responsibility is one issue that bides countries together. Every country has a responsibility to safeguard life where possible. A country is not limited to protect the lives of its citizens only. International obligations require that a country should intervene to provide help to any other country that is encountering some problems. For this reason, the United States has all the obligations and duty to care about the pandemic of Ebola virus when it occurs. The notion of Ebola not being so fatal on the United States soil does not exempt them from having any concern for Ebola casualties or victims. This goes hand in hand with the World Health Organization. W.H.O. is an international organization that focuses on ensuring human health across the globe. However, the organization is managed by aliens. It gets its staff and sponsors from the international community. This includes the United States. Despite showing her involvement in the fight against Ebola by supporting actions of the World Health Organization, the United States continues to provide direct and individual help to all countries that encounter the pandemic of the Ebola virus. It is proof that America should care about the Ebola virus. The reason is not that the virus affects the Americans, but because they have an international and humanitarian role of helping the external community. As the saying goes, the United States is not an island that stands alone.

The Influence of Context and Assumptions

In other words, this is to say that America needs the coexistence of the international community. When America decides not to care about the epidemic of Ebola, it means that its independence and economic growth is compromised (Monson, 2017). America is one of the best and fastest-growing economies. The insinuation in the above statement is that America is involved in intense trading activities with the outer world, including Africa. A significant portion of goods and services developed in America are sold to Africa. Conversely, America also gets some considerable parts of her imports from Africa. That means showing no concern for Ebola victims in African Countries is a poor move by America because her economic equilibrium will be destabilized.

However, America has been at the forefront of the international community in fighting against the Ebola virus. Liberia is a young State that was established during the 19 century, and it comprises of people with origin from the former American slaves (Saxon et al., 2019). When the young country was hit by the Ebola virus epidemic, the United States government, under the leadership of President Obama took so much criticism for not aiding Liberia. However, America responded by establishing the largest intervention in the world health sector. The intervention comprised of three thousand military officers. Most of the military personnel comprised of mostly military medics and engineers. In that context, the American administration questioned the decision by the President. In his justification, the President responded by citing the point of international and ethical obligation to protect humanity. The President continued to argue that the move was important because America takes the front position in leading the global community. The American military force had all the training, discipline and the necessary resources to handle the pandemic.

My Position

The above argument by the President of the United States comes in as a justification that America should be concerned and show care Ebola virus irrespective of the country suffering the disease. As stated earlier in this discussion, Ebola is not reported to have occurred in only one country. For instance, there were cases of the virus reported in countries such as Sierra Leone and Guinea. Sierra Leona was a colony of the United Kingdom, while Guinea was colonized by French (Thompson et al., 2017). However, the corresponding colonizers extended their ethical role of protecting human life by providing military aid to help curb or bring to an end the infections of the Ebola Virus. This is a strong gesture to let the Americans and the government realize their ethical role in fighting Ebola Virus. However, there should be emphasis to change the style of administering the provision of medical aid. The style of service delivery to the needy must not be dictated according to the colonial inclination. The reason for this is that a country like the United States appears to have a little or an insignificant number of colonies. However, the same country is the ablest in terms of resources, manpower and training that is necessary to combat the Ebola virus.

The evidence discussed above has a lot of influence on the local American citizens as well as the international community. One of the key issues presented by the evidence is the aspect of how the American people understand the concern for the United States government in global matters. As stated above, some of the American citizens believe that the virus is fatal to the Africans only. However, this is not the case. The reason for this argument is that the United States is one of the most racial countries worldwide (Fairhead, 2018). The misconception that the Ebola virus is for the black people is wrong because the United States has a considerable population of black people or people with African origin.

Conclusion

More so, the decision made by President Obama was faced with significant opposition from the conservative critics in America. However, the justification issued by the President in response to the criticism from the conservative was quite general. The reason for this is that the justification was not meant to address only the conservative. It also acted as enlightenment to the general public so that they could change their perception of whether the American government should continue to show concern for Ebola across the globe (Fairhead, 2018). The justification did not come from the President as a matter of creating proper public relations. Instead, there was so much local pressure because the conservative has significant population American citizens in their support.  This is to mean that their view was shared across a considerable number of Americans. In that case, all people sharing the concept had a chance to learn from what the President argued in support for his decision. In other words, I believe that every sober and rational human being should consider protecting life before planning to endorse capitalism. If this is practised, then there is an undeniable reason for the United States government and its citizens to start caring about Ebola.

References

Fairhead, J. (2018). Postscript: Epidemic History and the Ebola Present. In Histories of Post-Mortem Contagion (pp. 213-221). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Monson, S. (2017). Ebola as African: American media discourses of panic and otherization. Africa Today, 63(3), 3-27.

Pavlik, I., Lategan, F., & Verter, N. (2018). Ebola: History and some implications for Africa. Agricultura Tropica et Subtropical, 51(2), 41-49.

Saxon, B., Bass, S. B., Wright, T., & Panick, J. (2019). Ebola and the rhetoric of U.S. newspapers: assessing quality risk communication in public health emergencies. Journal of Risk Research, 22(10), 1309-1322.

Thompson, R. R., Garfin, D. R., Holman, E. A., & Silver, R. C. (2017). Distress, worry, and functioning following a global health crisis: A national study of Americans’ responses to Ebola. Clinical Psychological Science, 5(3), 513-521.