MHE507 - Bio-Terrorism Module 4 - Case - Essay Example

Running Head: BIO-TERRORISM Bio-Terrorism Module 4 – Case Assignment Dennis L. Wilken MHO409080 Touro Bio-Terrorism Module 4 Q The fundamental problem with our response to bioterrorism is not inadequate legal authority.  It is that health departments do not have adequate political and economic support.  Do you agree or disagree? Agree. In the aftermath of the country’s horrific experience of terrorism in 2001 including the subsequent release of anthrax spores via the Post Office, the US government quickly passed a series of legislations aimed at curtailing incidences of bioterrorism as well as increased funding to the Health and Human Services.

Albeit public health preparedness has increased comparatively from the pre-9/11 period, the present state of preparedness of the public health system is such that it would not be able to cope with a catastrophe, like a bio-terrorist attack, were it to happen today (Barclay 2009). This gap in bioterrorism preparedness is underpinned by less than adequate political and economic support to the public health system. The 9/11 incident gave birth to frantic legislative activities that mainly broached, unsurprisingly, on terrorism prevention and preparedness.

The Bush administration saw the enactment of the following: updated Title 18 of the US Code; the Department of Defense and Emergency Supplemental Appropriation for Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States Act in January 2002 which allotted $2.9 B to HHS for bioterrorism preparedness; the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (the Bioterrorism Act) which increased the country’s capability to prevent, prepare for and meet bioterrorism (Center for Biosecurity of UPMC 2009), and; the Pandemic and All Hazards Preparedness Act in 2006 which strengthened public health infrastructure.

In 2001, the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MSHEPA), a modern public health emergency preparedness prototype that can serve as template for state bioterrorism and other contingencies laws, was drafted. It authorizes, among others, state and local public health agencies during catastrophic events with emergency powers. Under this model, adopted by more than 35 states, emergency powers may suspend temporarily rules and regulations that interfere with swift and effective interjurisdictional coordination or legal requirements in State business that hamper or delay rapid responses to emergencies (Roberts et al 2007).

As can be gleaned, the 9/11 incident has spawned more than adequate legislative authority to combat and prevent bioterrorism. On the other hand, economic funding for anti-terrorism, including anti-bioterrorism, likewise drastically increased after 9/11. In 2001 to 2005, for example, the HHS spent almost $15 billion for the health system, and the FY 2006 budget allocated $4.3 B more for it with priority on the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) research on next-generation countermeasures ( ).

Yet, according to Dr, Eric Toner of the Center for Biosecurity of UPMC, the preparedness gap of the public health system, could result in the inability to cope with emergencies of the magnitude mentioned by the DHS National Planning Scenarios (Barclay 2009). A scrutiny of the present of the public health system vis-à-vis bioterrorism preparedness would show that its shortcomings are underpinned by political and economic inadequacies, among which are: a lack of coordination among the different levels of government; overlapping and fragmented structures of the health system; poorly equipped laboratories; inadequate surveillance systems; lack of rapid diagnostics techniques; insufficient training of health personnel; lack of sufficient stockpiling of vaccines, and; lastly, despite the increased funding post 9/11 and perhaps because of the magnitude and extent of the requirements, a public health system that remains relatively underfunded (Patel et al 2005).

References:Barclay, L. (2009). US Hospitals May Be Better Prepared for Disasters, But More Work Is Needed. Medscape Today. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/701969Center for Biosecurity of UPMC. (2009). Hospitals Rising to the Challenge: The First Five Years of the U.S. Hospital Preparedness Program and Priorities Going Forward, Evaluation Report. http://216.251.248.90/pages/hpp/2009-04-16-hppreport.pdfKahn, L. (2008). Strong Health Care Equals Strong Emergency Response. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

http://www.thebulletin.org/web-edition/columnists/laura-h-kahn/strong-health-care-equals-strong-emergency-responsePatel, K. & Rushefsky, M. & McFarlane, D. (2005). The Politics of Public Health in the United States, Edition: illustrated. (pp 269-273). M.E. Sharpe. Roberts, M. & Hodge, J. & Gabriel, E. & Hick, J. & Cantrill, S. & Wilkinson, A. & Matzo, M. (2007). Mass Medical Care with Scarce Resources: A Community Planning Guide (p 30). http://www.ahrq.gov/research/mce/mceguide.pdf