Gathered at this government-subsidised housing complex are children of all ages, ranging from kindergarten to seventh grade. Most of the children are of African descent, many of whom are refugees from war zones. No, I’m not with Médecins Sans Frontières. No, I’m not in a developing country. I am somewhere in the Greater Vancouver Regional District, at an African children’s summer camp.

This camp is no CEDAR or GEERing UP. Situated within a low-income, disadvantaged area and inside the confines of a two-room apartment, which has been modified to suit the needs of the programme, up to 20 children laugh, cry, and play together with the support of two paid staff members.

A large bookshelf sits near the doorway with a wide collection of reading materials tightly placed together. Sitting at the very top of the shelf is a heavy book, one which catches my eye and brings back the nostalgia of high school. I recall using this a-thousand-some page textbook for Biology 11. Waking it from hibernation, I bring the book to two of my friends, who are beginning and nearly finishing their elementary school careers, respectively.

“Let me show you something cool. Do you want to learn about the brain?” I ask.

We flip to the chapter on the nervous system and I begin to tell them, in very simplified terms, about different parts and functions of the brain. They are intrigued by the drawings of neurons and the nervous system and would point at every single figure, followed by asking what it is. I tell them that the human brain is the most amazing, and my favourite, organ, that the back of the brain (occipital lobe) allows us to see, that the right side of the brain controls the left side of the body.

“There, now that you have learned all this knowledge, you are truly a scientist!” I tell them. Indeed, moments later, I overhear these budding scientists lecturing their friends on the brain.

There she stood.

She was hardly noticeable in her solitary vigil on the bustling intersection of Broadway and Commercial Drive. Her hair first caught my eye. Being middle-aged, overweight, and of African descent, a bundle of curly hair stood proudly on her forehead. Hair was also present on the back of her head. However, something was amiss. The medial portions of her scalp were hair-free. Strange, I thought.

Just then, the traffic light turned red. Seizing this opportunity, I paused, turned around, and looked just enough at her through my peripheral vision to see that she held a sign, onto which words similar to the following were written in bold, red letters: “MOM… NEED HELP.”

I walked towards her, away from the intersection, and asked, “How are you doing today?”

She replied, “Good, but it’s too hot today. I’m getting blisters.”

As I stood facing her, it became apparent to me that her appearance was deviant. There was nothing on the medial portions of her scalp but dark-coloured, circular markings. I was puzzled.

I responded, “Yes, it’s a very hot day today. Are you getting blisters from the sun? Why don’t you stand in the shade? It might be cooler.”

She said, “Yes, but then no one would see me if I stood there,” as she gestured at the shaded spot on the sidewalk, which was a mere footstep away physically but meant the distance of a football field to her.

As she scratched her sun-exposed scalp with her right arm, I realised that she did not have a left arm. What remained of her left arm, or the stump, was covered with extensive burn scars. I was puzzled no more. Reaching into my bag, I was unsuccessful in finding cash for her, which made me feel quite miserable and helpless on the inside.

The traffic light turned green. It was time to go. Defeated, I looked at her, wished her all the best, and asked her to take care.

I hope my words were of comfort.

Forcible feeding is never ethically acceptable. Even if intended to benefit, feeding accompanied by threats, coercion, force, or use of physical restraints is a form of inhuman and degrading treatment. Equally unacceptable is the forced feeding of some detainees in order to intimidate or coerce other hunger strikers to stop fasting.

Then he appeared.

George, let’s call him, caught my attention immediately as he made his way laboriously  across the parking lot towards the store. He was a frail-looking male in his 60s and walked with an awkwardly debilitating limp in his left leg. I watched him directly, out of my peripheral vision, and then finally through my side and rear-view mirrors as he struggled to reach his destination with a cane, onto which he held dearly. Perhaps, I thought to my self, he had suffered a stroke and was possibly weakened further by a cardiopulmonary disease. Were my family not shopping inside Safeway then, I would have offered him a ride home without hesitation.

Some time later, George, as if an apparition, re-emerged from the store carrying two shopping bags, which held a number of items. Slowly, out of my rear-view mirror, he made his way towards my car, with his destination being the main road. The music was still playing inside my car, albeit softly. He spoke to a driver, whose vehicle was stopped next to mine. Because, minutes before, I had closed the windows of my car to block out cigarette smoke on this rather hot evening, I was unable to hear the conversation.

I thought to myself whether George knew the individuals next to me. When George stopped near the front of both mine and my neighbour’s vehicles, although momentarily, and continued speaking, I switched off the radio and listened.

Although George had a visible physical disability, his appearance and behaviour was neither threatening nor dysfunctional. However, because of the manner in which he walked and interacted with my neighbours in the parking lot, had the context been changed from a Safeway in Marpole to a sidewalk in the Downtown Eastside, he would have, sadly, also looked at home.

He kept on walking. By this time, I realised that George did not know the people that he had spoken to and was, possibly, ignored for his request of a ride. He continued his marathon.

And then it happened.

He staggered a few steps forward and stopped. The items which he had just purchased came to a rest on the ground as his upper body began to slouch forward, as if following the shopping bags.

My instincts kicked in. After removing the key while getting out of the car, I reached into my right pocket to ensure the presence of my phone. I was prepared to assess him while envisioning making a 911 call for an ambulance: “There’s a Caucasian male in his 60s who has just collapsed in the parking lot of Safeway on Granville and 70th. He is currently unconscious and may be suffering from a myocardial infarction…”

Fortunately, this was not necessary. He was fine, but was too exhausted to continue walking with two shopping bags and needed a break. I approached him to ask how he was doing and then offered him a ride. The task of sitting into the front passenger seat of my car was already quite challenging for him. Imagine walking home.

Coincidentally, my family arrived as I was assisting George with siting into my car. Together, we helped George temporarily finish his never-end marathon.

Good morning, good morning…

Speaking of Europe, which has a relatively better health care system, here’s another passage or two from Worst Case Bioethics:

As Franklin Roosevelt first noted in 1944, just before D-Day, denying healthcare denies equal opportunity and is an assault on human dignity. Concurrently, the language of social justice should be employed, especially by using stories of real Americans denied needed healthcare, to convince Americans — who probably don’t need much convincing — that it is simply unfair to deny uninsured and underinsured (and even many insured) Americans decent healthcare, as it is unfair to deny decent education to Americans who cannot afford it. Healthcare is a moral issue and denial of healthcare based on inability to pay is immoral.

Since we’re on the topic of morality, let’s talk about torture. Lawyers and physicians working for the United States government and military played essential roles in ensuring the torture of suspected insurgents. Physicians had (and still have) the “licence to torture” from the sanction of lawyers, while lawyers and law-makers made torture legal, despite the result of the Nuremberg trials and Geneva conventions, through the supposed “medical evaluations” of physicians.

Read the following statement from the former White House Counsel, Alberto Gonzales:

…the war against terrorism ushers in a new paradigm… Our Nation recognizes that this new paradigm — ushered in not by us, but by terrorists — requires new thinking in the law of war.

And compare it with Hitler’s policy:

The main theme [of Hitler's instructions] was that this was the decisive battle between two ideologies and that this fact made it impossible to use in this war methods as we soldiers knew them and which were considered to be the only correct ones under International Law. The war could not be carried on by these means. In this case completely different standards had to be applied. This was an entirely new kind of war, based on completely different arguments and principles.

At this conference the Fuhrer stated that… since the Russians were not signatories to The Hague Convention the treatment of their prisoners of war does not have to follow the Articles of the Convention.

What I am inspired by, though, is that such critical remarks and analyses can be freely discussed and even published in America and much of the Western world.

New Orleans emerged from its unique cross-cultural background as a relatively egalitarian society but eventually became a city of income disparity and racial segregation. Founded by France as an access route to Canada, New Orleans was a city in which freed slaves were employed in skilled trades positions. However, after its sale to the United States, as more white Americans migrated to the city, African Americans were gradually subjected to increasing discrimination, such as the segregation laws, which resulted in the concentration of African Americans in poor, low-lying areas.

A number of social factors placed vulnerable citizens of New Orleans at a particular disadvantage. Leading up to Katrina, the city had higher than normal levels of poverty for African Americans than the national average. This was demonstrated through the lack of transportation for large numbers of individuals, the highest homicide rate in the country, as well as an educational system that was deemed “unacceptable” by the US Department of Education. These factors were compounded by the fact that poor African Americans  were concentrated in flood-prone areas of the city which rested below sea level.

Environmental factors also played an important role in the eventual destruction of the city. Natural wetlands, deposited in the coastal areas surrounding New Orleans from silt accumulated over time, were destroyed for commercial development. Wetlands would have acted as a natural barrier to the hurricane, reducing its intensity before hitting land. Furthermore, levees surrounding the city were constructed in the 1920s, which were dangerously inadequate to withstand hurricanes of the strength of Katrina. Finally, climate change had also contributed to the increasing intensity of the storm.

There are numerous political factors that resulted in the death of citizens and destruction of property. George W. Bush, the former president of the United States, cut funding for a water pumping project, a levee improvement project, and a wetland restoration project. Furthermore, the head of FEMA, Michael Brown, had insufficient experience and knowledge to serve in such a capacity, which resulted in insufficient response.

A comparison with Cuba illustrates a startling difference in the collective will of preventing death and damage from storms. Education of the public focused on the interpretation of weather/storm reports, an annual, two-day emergency preparedness conference across the country, and the well-publicised knowledge of evacuation routes. Networks of civil defence volunteers and women go door to door in order to check on emergency rations of food and water, and make lists of the weak, vulnerable, and elderly. Finally, storm evacuation in Cuba is organised, mandatory, and publicised: valuables are to be taken with evacuees; doctors are to accompany evacuating populations; logistical supplies, such as buses and tents, are in adequate supply; water in evacuated locations is to be shut down to prevent disease.

In contrast, the victims of Katrina in New Orleans lacked education, in comparison with cities not filled with poor populations. The city lacked evacuation plans, even for hospitals and nursing homes. There were no planned emergency routes and no mobilisation of buses. Even an AMTRAK offer to assist with the evacuation was declined. Combined with the the gallivanting of public officials, there was a very slow federal response. With the interest of businesses and markets in mind, Mayor Nagin did not immediately declare a mandatory evacuation. The Superdome acted as a temporary shelter in unsanitary conditions without food, water, or medications. A “toxic soup” filled the streets: its ingredients consisted of decaying bodies, sewage, and toxic heavy metals from industrial contamination. Families were separated with one-way tickets to unknown destinations.

New Orleans is now more white and more affluent.

Why don’t rich nations do more to reduce the severe poverty that paralyses much of the world? This section argues that people in rich countries, including the United States, actually benefit from global poverty in several ways.

1. The existence of global poverty helps ensure the wealth of affordable goods for Western consumers

The key here is cheap labour. People in the developing world make our shirts, shoes, and appliances for a fraction of the price at which these goods are sold. For example, the average hourly wage of apparel workers in China is about 23 cents. I’m guessing that the situation in sweatshops in Sri Lanka are probably worse. Without these massive, impoverished, starving populations to whom multinational corporations are supposedly providing financial support (i.e. exploiting), the price of our Nike shoes will likely inflate. Western consumers would be quite unhappy.

2. The existence of global poverty benefits Western companies and shareholders in the form of profit margins

This is self-explanatory: ↑ wages = ↓ profits.

3. The existence of global poverty fosters access to resources in poor states that are needed in or desired by the West

Before India gained independence, Britain encouraged the people of India to farm cotton but prohibited cotton weaving. Farmers laboured in the fields and had their cotton exported to Britain, which weaved the cotton and sold the processed goods back to India. Or, take the current beef situation: many impoverished countries use productive, farming land to raise cattle and export beef to the West even though their own people are starving. Another example would Nigeria: the country has a large supply of oil but is still trapped in poverty because the profits are being exploited by Western corporations.

4. The existence of global poverty helps support Western medical advances

The article was slightly vague on this point. My interpretation is that countries in the developing world do not have ethical guidelines for clinical trials or human experimental subjects. Pharmaceutical companies may conduct drug trials on these populations without following ethical guidelines.

5.  The existence of global poverty contributes to the advancement of Western economies and societies with the human capital of poor states

This is what is known as the “brain-drain”: due to the systematic impoverishment of poor states by the West, intelligent and well-educated individuals are forced to leave their own countries in search of better lives in the West, which further perpetuates the cycle of poverty through their contribution to Western economies and societies.

6. The existence of global poverty may contribute to the pacification of the Western proletariat

The article’s explanation is better than my own interpretation:

To some degree, the broad availability of good, inexpensive merchandise may help obscure class divisions in the West, at least in the arena of consumption. It is clear that those with greater wealth can consume more high-quality goods, but low-end “designer” merchandise is accessible to the less well-off in cathedrals of consumption such as Wal-Mart… Thanks in part to low-wage workers in places like China, these goods are available to the unwashed masses… as well as to better-situated homemakers. Consumption appears to be one of the great equalizers of modern society.

7. Global poverty benefits the West because poor countries make optimal dumping grounds for goods that are dangerous, expired, or illegal

Take the example of radioactive waste being dumped in Russia, or hazardous junk being taken apart in India. Have you thought about where your used phone or printer will end up?

8. The existence of global poverty provides jobs for specialists employed to assist, advise, and study the world’s poor and to protect the “better-off” from them

Now, I must say that this is a somewhat cynical, but at the same time, realistic view of the situation. These specialists could range from governmental development agencies to academics to writers to border patrol agents.

9. Global poverty benefits inhabitants of wealthy countries, who can feel good about helping the global poor through charitable poor and charitable giving

From a functional point of view, this is exactly the case:

Apparently, we need not feel guilt about consuming many times what the unfortunate inhabitants of the world’s poor states do if only we are willing to give up a few of our luxuries to help them. Indeed, not only do the poor not inspire guilt, they may inspire positive feelings.

10. The poverty of less developed states makes possible the massive flow of resources westward.

Americans consume a tremendously disproportionate share of the world’s resources… On both an absolute and per capita basis, most world resources flow westward. The West likely benefits from the fact that few can afford (at least at present) to consume at the rate its people do.

11. The poorer countries, which reproduce at rates higher than Western states, are useful scapegoats for real and potential global environmental threats.

The rapid consumption of resources by the much smaller populations of developed states is a bigger environmental threat to our planet than the rapid growth of populations in developing states. Poor countries are useful scapegoats for making attractive alternative explanations for those who would not wish to fault the “SUV-driving, disposable-diaper using, BBQ-loving American consumer” for threats to the global environment.

Solution?

Phenomena like poverty can be eliminated only  when they become dysfunctional for the affluent or powerful, or when the powerless can obtain enough power to change society.