NZ risking the living to recover the dead?

wiggle16 · 13-12-2019 1:54am #1

NZ troops launch risky recovery operation on volcano: https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2019/1212/1098641-nz-volcano-bodoes/

First time starting a thread here :eek: and at the risk of sounding completely and utterly heartless... actually no, I don't care if I do. Does anyone else think that this is horrifically selfish?

"Authorities say eight bodies remain on the volcano and - after coming under pressure from distraught families - they approved a recovery mission despite a 50-60% chance it will explode again in the next day or so.
.....
After days of caution and focusing on the risk to rescuers, police have indicated they now see the recovery as a race against time, and the longer the operation was delayed, the less chance there was of returning identifiable remains to grieving families"

I have every sympathy for their families, but it's wrong to risk the living to recover the dead. Being bereaved does not give you the right to demand that others risk their lives.
NZ authorities are sending soldiers to that island in the hope that it won't decide to erupt while there are soldiers on it. It doesn't matter how much they monitor it, it's too unpredictable - if that thing erupts again then anyone on that island is toast, no matter how quickly they try to evacuate.

It has bad idea written all over it. Should the NZ government have simply told the families "No.", or what do you think?

Tell me how · 13-12-2019 2:03am

I think everything people in this line of work do has some element of risk associated with it.
An ambulance or helicopter could crash or a boat sink or whatever.

There may be a 50-60% chance of another eruption but that does not necessarily equate to a 50-60% chance of more fatalities.
I suspect they have risk assessed this and determined it is acceptable. They will likely have monitoring and evacuation procedures in place so if they think that risk increases significantly, they'll abort and re-assess.

Your Face · 13-12-2019 2:05am

"Volcanologists will monitor live feeds of seismic activity from the still-smouldering volcano as the eight-strong military team attempt to extract the bodies, ready to call off the operation if signs point to another eruption."

I'm fine with that.

wiggle16 · 13-12-2019 2:10am

Tell me how wrote: »

I think everything people in this line of work do has some element of risk associated with it.
An ambulance or helicopter could crash or a boat sink or whatever.

There may be a 50-60% chance of another eruption but that does not necessarily equate to a 50-60% chance of more fatalities.
I suspect they have risk assessed this and determined it is acceptable. They will likely have monitoring and evacuation procedures in place so if they think that risk increases significantly, they'll abort and re-assess.

I know what you mean and I don't think they're just sending them off to die, but to me it's an unnecessary extra risk no matter what the chances are and something that shouldn't be asked of anyone. I do think the families should have been told "no, it's just too risky and they're already dead".

I know if it were me I would not want anyone to risk their own life to bring back the body of a family member. If I ever die in a remote, dangerous place, f*cking leave me there.

4068ac1elhodqr · 13-12-2019 3:29am

Waiting for Musk to make some of his robots available, then slander anyone who declines his offer.
Actually robotics or big drones would be the perfect choice for this operation, even then a fastboat and quick winchcable would be needed for those.

Graces7 · 13-12-2019 6:18am

This is a highly emotive and emotional time and families are in shock. Not able to think clearly. A death on holiday has an especially horrific quality; trust me on that as we went though it once. .

Needs a huge amount of compassion and patience.

And no; no way should they take risks to recover the dead. But with utter sympathy and not censure.

But ultimately up to the rescuers?

The real issue is WHY there was a trip there when there were warnings?

sugarman wrote: »

+1.

It's a bit selfish imo.. they're dead. What difference does it really make where the body is? All it will do is give the family short term comfort and a grave they might visit every now and again.. but once that immediate family die themselves, you'll be more or less be forgotten about in just another plot.

Ten of Swords · 13-12-2019 8:35am

The six bodies located by drones have been sucessfully recovered by the military, the two missing bodies are being searched for

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2019/dec/12/new-zealand-volcano-eruption-white-island-nz-police-victim-recovery-retrieval-operation-whakaari-live-news-latest-updates

knucklehead6 · 13-12-2019 8:59am

Graces7 wrote: »

This is a highly emotive and emotional time and families are in shock. Not able to think clearly. A death on holiday has an especially horrific quality; trust me on that as we went though it once. .

Needs a huge amount of compassion and patience.

And no; no way should they take risks to recover the dead. But with utter sympathy and not censure.

But ultimately up to the rescuers?

The real issue is WHY there was a trip there when there were warnings?

is there anything you HAVEN'T gone through?>???

That phrase you have used makes me remember something my father said to me years ago. Anytime someone says to him "trust me (insert random waffle here) " he immediately thinks that person is waffling

FluffyTowel · 13-12-2019 9:29am

knucklehead6 wrote: »

is there anything you HAVEN'T gone through?>???

That phrase you have used makes me remember something my father said to me years ago. Anytime someone says to him "trust me (insert random waffle here) " he immediately thinks that person is waffling

Seems a bit unfair. People go through things that you haven’t experienced. Count yourself lucky.

On topic, if they were my family members, I’d be very distraught and hope that trained people with proper information could recover their bodies.

Graces7 · 13-12-2019 3:48pm

FluffyTowel wrote: »

Seems a bit unfair. People go through things that you haven’t experienced. Count yourself lucky.

On topic, if they were my family members, I’d be very distraught and hope that trained people with proper information could recover their bodies.

Seeing my brother coming home from a family holiday in his coffin, and the complications and ramifications at a time of utter grief is not a memory of any peace; I feel for the relatives deeply. At least we had his body. It was many years ago but these things stay with you, and we all need to know compassion and realism at these times.

Graces7 · 13-12-2019 3:51pm

Did you say something? Blank post....

Sheepdish1 · 13-12-2019 3:55pm

knucklehead6 wrote: »

is there anything you HAVEN'T gone through?>???

That phrase you have used makes me remember something my father said to me years ago. Anytime someone says to him "trust me (insert random waffle here) " he immediately thinks that person is waffling

Very unfair a response to someone who has been through something extremely difficult and is simply trying to give other people an understanding of how difficult the situation is for the families involved. People really need to be kinder towards each other.

Sheepdish1 · 13-12-2019 3:59pm

Graces7 wrote: »

Seeing my brother coming home from a family holiday in his coffin, and the complications and ramifications at a time of utter grief is not a memory of any peace; I feel for the relatives deeply. At least we had his body. It was many years ago but these things stay with you, and we all need to know compassion and realism at these times.

I’m very sorry you and your family had to experience that Grace7.

SusieBlue · 13-12-2019 4:07pm

I fully sympathise with the distraught families but putting other people at risk is not the answer. It was the same when that poor guy went missing on mount Everest - a lot of people were happy to send the poor Sherpas on a suicide mission in teacheorous conditions to attempt to recover the corpse.

Its desperately sad but no one should be putting themselves at risk or in danger to recover a body. If there was a chance it was a rescue mission, to recover live people, it would be different.

Graces7 · 13-12-2019 4:09pm

Sheepdish1 wrote: »

I’m very sorry you and your family had to experience that Grace7.

Thank you . There was such utter confusion after the volcano erupted with casualties scattered and families having to search

The rescue workers are sheer heroes and heroines. Utter courage. Even two folk who were on the tour and had paramedic experience.

Just struck such a chord with me. There were so many legalities to face; ID. police, hospital etc, and more with these folk. Praying here for them and hoping they will be fully supported and that they get all the bodies out

Mrcaramelchoc · 13-12-2019 4:10pm

Just curious but will the island be closed for good after this?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 13-12-2019 4:36pm

Tell me how wrote: »

I think everything people in this line of work do has some element of risk associated with it.
An ambulance or helicopter could crash or a boat sink or whatever.

There may be a 50-60% chance of another eruption but that does not necessarily equate to a 50-60% chance of more fatalities.
I suspect they have risk assessed this and determined it is acceptable. They will likely have monitoring and evacuation procedures in place so if they think that risk increases significantly, they'll abort and re-assess.

Yeah but... this is recovery operation. Ambulances and helicopter are going out hopeful of survivors.

Montage of Feck · 13-12-2019 6:11pm

Is Jacinta still PM? Maybe they're going to appease the volcano by human sacrifice.

major bill · 13-12-2019 6:12pm

Hollywood already lining up the film

Tell me how · 14-12-2019 1:21am

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Yeah but... this is recovery operation. Ambulances and helicopter are going out hopeful of survivors.

Not in all cases. Unfortunately, there are several recovery missions carried out as well. I am aware that Caroline Lucas, an Irish coast guard member, lost her life on a recovery mission after which the investigation report specifically highlighted that extra care must be taken to ensure people are not put at undue risk.

I suspect that in this instance in NZ, the risk was assessed, and deemed acceptable. I think such events are undertaken in a 'taking care of the living kind of way' as friends and family of the unfortunate victims may struggle with the thought that their loved ones are lying out there and that may create trauma for them in moving on from the accident.
I just don't think it was a decision that was taken lightly or is an indication that further emergency members were treated unfairly.

Acedia. · 14-12-2019 1:41am

There could be amazing footage of the eruption on the dead people's phones, unless they're melted.

KWAG2019 · 14-12-2019 1:42am

OP is quite right. It’s the Joe Duffy/ I want to speak to a manager school of doing business: I’ll create emotional turmoil and people must give in to me then. No.

Tell me how · 14-12-2019 1:48am

KWAG2019 wrote: »

OP is quite right. It’s the Joe Duffy/ I want to speak to a manager school of doing business: I’ll create emotional turmoil and people must give in to me then. No.

Have you ever spoken to someone who lost a loved a loved one and the body was never recovered? That fact, the inability to have a complete and formal funeral can be a severe stumbling block to dealing with grief.

I was talking to someone whose father donated his body to science and that meant they could not bury or cremate his remains for several months after he died. She really struggled as a result of this and developed depression.

KWAG2019 · 14-12-2019 2:33am

Tell me how wrote: »

Have you ever spoken to someone who lost a loved a loved one and the body was never recovered? That fact, the inability to have a complete and formal funeral can be a severe stumbling block to dealing with grief.

I was talking to someone whose father donated his body to science and that meant they could not bury or cremate his remains for several months after he died. She really struggled as a result of this and developed depression.

Emotional turmoil does not make it others responsibility to risk their lives for others emotional equilibrium.

14-12-2019 2:48am

But sure isn't that what we have "emergency services" for in the first place? My aul lad was a fireman himself, risked his life every day he went to work, same goes for lifeboat crews, search & rescue, lots of jobs really.

I don't like to believe anyone in authority deliberately instructs them to die in the line of duty or anything, but let's be blunt about it here if it was one of your kids/parents/partner/siblings on that island and you thought there was a 0.00001% of them being alive I think you'd change your tune about the risks emergency response folks take on for the sake of the rest of us.

That, plus the fact that modern training and technology drastically reduces the personal risk they might have faced a few years ago, for example drones located some of the bodies without any personnel setting foot in the area.

KWAG2019 · 14-12-2019 11:17am

Deleted User wrote: »

But sure isn't that what we have "emergency services" for in the first place? My aul lad was a fireman himself, risked his life every day he went to work, same goes for lifeboat crews, search & rescue, lots of jobs really.

I don't like to believe anyone in authority deliberately instructs them to die in the line of duty or anything, but let's be blunt about it here if it was one of your kids/parents/partner/siblings on that island and you thought there was a 0.00001% of them being alive I think you'd change your tune about the risks emergency response folks take on for the sake of the rest of us.

That, plus the fact that modern training and technology drastically reduces the personal risk they might have faced a few years ago, for example drones located some of the bodies without any personnel setting foot in the area.

Utter distortion. Risks are taken for the living. The arrogance of claiming others are there in services, many voluntary, to risk their lives so someone can have a funeral is beyond belief. Others do not exist nor are their lives at the beck and call of others grief, others anger, others self absorption. Past time the wheel turned on this.

whisky_galore · 14-12-2019 11:24am

Graces7 wrote: »

The real issue is WHY there was a trip there when there were warnings?

Tourism industry and money.

SEPT 23 1989 · 14-12-2019 11:28am

As a human race we don’t like leaving anyone behind

champchamp · 14-12-2019 11:29am

knucklehead6 wrote: »

is there anything you HAVEN'T gone through?>???

Username checks out.

Tell me how · 14-12-2019 2:20pm

KWAG2019 wrote: »

Utter distortion. Risks are taken for the living. The arrogance of claiming others are there in services, many voluntary, to risk their lives so someone can have a funeral is beyond belief. Others do not exist nor are their lives at the beck and call of others grief, others anger, others self absorption. Past time the wheel turned on this.

Thankfully, those working in emergency services are compassionate as well as selfless and brave.

You think it is beyond belief and yet these expert and reknowned organisations do put a lot of effort in to recovering bodies. Do you think they would do so for no reason?

They don't do it so much on Everest, they do it elsewhere, such as in this case. The difference? The assessment of risk, cost, chance of success, potential for bodies to be discovered by members of the public, etc.

Terms like 'beck and call', and 'self absorption' as you have used, shows you probably dont understand just what happens in these cases.

KWAG2019 · 14-12-2019 2:55pm

Tell me how wrote: »

Thankfully, those working in emergency services are compassionate as well as selfless and brave.

You think it is beyond belief and yet these expert and reknowned organisations do put a lot of effort in to recovering bodies. Do you think they would do so for no reason?

They don't do it so much on Everest, they do it elsewhere, such as in this case. The difference? The assessment of risk, cost, chance of success, potential for bodies to be discovered by members of the public, etc.

Terms like 'beck and call', and 'self absorption' as you have used, shows you probably dont understand just what happens in these cases.

Again, distortion. Emotion does not trump risk to life. Compassion is not the priority. In the NZ case we are discussing the risk was large. Someone gambled with emergency services lives and got away with it. If they lost the gamble there would rightly be hell to pay.

Bodies are recovered when the risk is small. That’s the only way it should be.

NZ risking the living to recover the dead?

Comments