Morgan Oliver W, Sribanditmongkol Pongruk, Perera Clifford, Sulasmi Yeddi, Van Alphen Dana, Sondorp Egbert
Health Policy Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
PLoS Med. 2006 Jun;3(6):e195. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0030195.
Following natural disasters, mismanagement of the dead has consequences for the psychological well-being of survivors. However, no technical guidelines currently exist for managing mass fatalities following large natural disasters. Existing methods of mass fatality management are not directly transferable as they are designed for transport accidents and acts of terrorism. Furthermore, no information is currently available about post-disaster management of the dead following previous large natural disasters.
After the tsunami disaster on 26 December 2004, we conducted three descriptive case studies to systematically document how the dead were managed in Thailand, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka. We considered the following parameters: body recovery and storage, identification, disposal of human remains, and health risks from dead bodies. We used participant observations as members of post-tsunami response teams, conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants, and collected information from published and unpublished documents. Refrigeration for preserving human remains was not available soon enough after the disaster, necessitating the use of other methods such as dry ice or temporary burial. No country had sufficient forensic capacity to identify thousands of victims. Rapid decomposition made visual identification almost impossible after 24-48 h. In Thailand, most forensic identification was made using dental and fingerprint data. Few victims were identified from DNA. Lack of national or local mass fatality plans further limited the quality and timeliness of response, a problem which was exacerbated by the absence of practical field guidelines or an international agency providing technical support.
Emergency response should not add to the distress of affected communities by inappropriately disposing of the victims. The rights of survivors to see their dead treated with dignity and respect requires practical guidelines and technical support. Mass fatality management following natural disasters needs to be informed by further field research and supported by a network of regional and international forensic institutes and agencies.
自然灾害发生后,对死者的不当处理会对幸存者的心理健康产生影响。然而,目前尚无针对大型自然灾害后大规模死亡事件管理的技术指南。现有的大规模死亡事件管理方法无法直接套用,因为它们是为交通事故和恐怖主义行为设计的。此外,目前尚无关于以往大型自然灾害后死者灾后管理的信息。
2004年12月26日海啸灾难发生后,我们开展了三项描述性案例研究,以系统记录泰国、印度尼西亚和斯里兰卡是如何处理死者的。我们考虑了以下参数:尸体回收与储存、身份识别、遗体处理以及尸体带来的健康风险。我们以海啸后应急小组成员的身份进行参与观察,对关键信息提供者进行半结构化访谈,并从已发表和未发表的文件中收集信息。灾难发生后,没有足够快地提供用于保存遗体的冷藏设备,因此必须使用干冰或临时掩埋等其他方法。没有一个国家具备足够的法医能力来识别数千名受害者。快速腐烂使得在24至48小时后几乎无法通过目视进行身份识别。在泰国,大多数法医鉴定是利用牙齿和指纹数据进行的。通过DNA鉴定出的受害者很少。缺乏国家或地方大规模死亡事件应对计划进一步限制了应对的质量和及时性,由于缺乏实用的现场指南或提供技术支持的国际机构,这一问题更加严重。
应急响应不应因对受害者的不当处理而增加受灾社区的痛苦。幸存者有权看到他们的死者得到尊严和尊重的对待,这需要实用的指南和技术支持。自然灾害后的大规模死亡事件管理需要进一步的实地研究,并得到区域和国际法医机构及组织网络的支持。