having BABIES during the worst flood EVER

[ensho]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/08/25/pakistan.maternity.hospital/index.html?hpt=T2


Pakistan hospital cut off by floods struggles to help survivors


The baby's heartbeat was failing, the mother needed medicine, and the doctors wanted clean instruments. But three weeks into Pakistan's flooding crisis, staff in one maternity ward in northern Pakistan had nothing but candles and light from a cell phone on hand to perform a high-risk emergency delivery.

-snip-

The maternity nurse turned to the pregnant woman's mother and whispered, "Which is more important -- the mother, or the baby?" She answered adamantly, but also sadly, "The mother."

That was the scene that Dr. Emma Varley found in the delivery room at the Kashrote hospital in Gilgit, more than three weeks after unprecedented flooding hit the town.

-snip-

The doctors and hospital staff are facing their own dangers due to the risk of dysentery from contaminated water and the ever-present threat of new flooding.

-snip-

As for the young mother with the difficult delivery, In the end, her baby lived for only a few more hours and died during the night. And with little left for the hospital and committed medical team to offer, the mother was released back into the surrounding disaster.
------------------------


sigh

[uncommon]

1. :(

Natural disasters are so terrible. That poor woman.

[ensho]

2. don't think we can call any weather 'natural' anymore

now its called climate change weather.

[dipsydoodle]

3. EVER ?

Presumably as you added that word in UPPER CASE to mean in Pakistan as opposed to , for example , the Mediterranean breaching the Bosphorus to create the Black Sea.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. 1931 floods in China.

Some 3 million dead.

[dipsydoodle]

6. Hardly surprising

Thanks for that one.

:hi:

[ensho]

8. yes, of course I meant Pakistan

nt

[aquart]

4. Sixty-seven years ago they gave my dad that choice.

He, too, saved the mother. As a result, my sister and I are alive.

Horrible as it was, he was lucky to have the choice. In previous decades both mother and child died.

These are dark days for that woman and her family. If they survive at all, she may have better luck with her next pregnancy.

[Igel]

7. "Ever" is contingent on the definition.

It's not the worst flood ever in terms of extent of flooding and volume of water.

Undoubtedly not the worst flood in the last 100 years, on those terms.

One problem is the anti-flood technologies used. That made some of the flooding worse, even holding water flow constant.

Another is the population increase in the area. It's been skyrocketing. About half of all the population is under 18. Given childhood mortality rates, I'd expect about a quarter of the population to be under age 9. In other words, 2-year-olds make up a bit less than 1.5% of the population, yet can't handle themselves well at all against flood waters. If we look at the population affected, we can count on floods of the same size becoming worse if we define "bad" in terms of population affected.

Population increase has also led to increased village sizes. If a village was built on the high ground and triples in size, odds are a chunk of it won't be on the high ground. In other words, they build badly. Perhaps they have no choice, often a consequence of previous choices they've made. So if we define "bad" in terms of damage, then the same size flood will be worse and worse.

With increased agricultural demand and yields, a flood the same size as one 100 years ago would be worse today if we define a term in agricultural economic terms: One acre is worth more in terms of bushes of wheat.

By conflating the various kinds of "worse," you effectively reduce a word with referential meaning to a term of emotion. We "feel" that the flood is worse in some sense and are satisfied with our emotions, although thinking what "worse" means is what is required to take concrete, efficient, and effective steps to prevent worsening.