Government Failure During COVID-19 Period

Question 1 

The article's central argument is that the government failed to implement the practical system and material protections to curb risks exposed to frontline health workers during the pandemic, especially in Ontario. Many healthcare workers are scared to infect their family members because there are no sufficient protection kits against coronavirus spread. The article also argues that the pandemic's onset exposed many flaws within the healthcare system and public health because the government is doing less when it comes to providing essential services that are mandated to them. For instance, the government does not have the adequate testing capacity of COVID-19 cases due to the cutting of laboratory budgets. Emergency rooms and admission wards are also less showing multiple Canadian government inadequacies regarding the healthcare system (McArthur et al., 2020). COVID-19 has made numerous challenges sink deeper and offers a considerable erosion in the healthcare systems, primarily the fight against the pandemic that require concrete resolutions and recommendations because the emergency rooms and admissions bed have been operating under capacity for the longest time. 

Question 2 

There is considerable primary and secondary evidence that supported the central 

argument within the article. The article utilizes both primary and secondary evidence. One instance of primary evidence from an Ontario nurse who argued in an interview was that she was terrified about the lack of protection kits, which is why she might infect her young child. She complained that the smallest urban hospital within the town is not provided with personal protective equipment, especially while testing the suspected cases. Before starting her shift, she sat in her vehicle, knowing that herself, family members, and residents are not adequately safeguarded from the pandemic. The Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives presents other evidence that supports the central argument. The Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives argued that in 2019, Ontario was among the last positions, including Mexico, which had the least amount of hospital beds than the general population. The International Council of Nurses also provided that many frontline healthcare workers had been infected with the virus in the line of duty. Worst of all, some nurses and doctors have died. Another evidence that aligns with the main argument comes from US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which argues that all frontline workers who come in contact with COVID-19 patients should be offered N95 protection kits (McArthur, Keith, & Brophy, 2020). However, for many hospitals within Ontario, the government has not met the guidelines and mainly provide surgical masks. 

Question 3 

I think that the authors presented all the evidence in an excellent manner that supports the 

main argument effectively. The authors utilized several examples of evidence, and each one of them builds support for a claim. All the evidence is smoothly integrated by providing additional information after the article's argument, and the link between claim and evidence is strong. It also provides evidence that agrees with a stance and including personal ideas to provide original proof of the information. For instance, the authors offered a story of a lamenting nurse because she may infect her child with the virus. The authors then went ahead to state the reason for the case, claiming that because her workplace does not have PPEs needed to handle suspected cases of COVID-19. The authors also presented evidence that counter argues and then claim to strengthen their ideas presented. For instance, the evidence from the US Center for Disease Prevention and Control argues that all frontline workers should be provided with N95 instead of a surgical mask (McArthur et al., 2020). They claimed that the government, especially in Ontario, has not been adhering to the guidelines, such as providing adequate emergency rooms.   

Question 4 

The article has its unique strengths due to well-supported claims and evidence. The authors understand how to write an essay that readers will capture vital information and read till the end. The article's main strength is that topic clearly defined crucial information that will be found within the paper. There is a strong argument elaborated in question one, and it is logical from the start to the end. The text is also written in an orderly way with a clear introduction to capture the reader's attention. The second strength is the utilization of direct quotations from the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The authors utilize direct quotations such as “surgical and other non-respirator face masks that do not protect persons from airborne infectious disease. They cannot be relied upon for novel pathogens" (McArthur et al., 2020). This quote makes the evidence and claim factual that the government provides only surgical masks which are not recommended as argued by CDC. 

Question 5 

The main weakness of the article is the limited sample population. The report mainly 

depended on the secondary evidence to support the claim for the report to be practical among readers worldwide; the author could have interviewed more than frontline healthcare workers to provide factual information. The reference section at the end of the article was also not offered; thus, the reader will find it hard to find another article on the same topic. 

Question 6 

I agree with the central argument of the article. COVID-19 is skyrocketing, and the most 

affected people are healthcare workers. Across the world, most frontline workers have died battling the pandemic; for instance, 18 Italian nurses died due to COVID-19. Doctors, nurses, and other paramedics currently work under pressure due to heavy workload within healthcare facilities. They are presently working in stressful working environments because little is still understood about the virus from many studies. In most conditions, they are overworked and under-protected. I agree that the government does not support these frontline healthcare workers in fighting the battle effectively. Apart from the Ontario case, I agree that many healthcare workers are at significant risk, primarily infecting their family and community members. For instance, many healthcare workers have been infected across the world, resulting in constant community transmission. On the other hand, the government is providing the least support. Many healthcare facilities do not have PPEs, N95, and surgical masks. The admission beds and emergency rooms are also unavailable, making the general public lack essential healthcare services to protect and heal from the COVID-19. I agree with the main argument that for sure, there was no preparation since the onset of the pandemic. The government is reluctant to fight the battle showing ignorance and driven by profit motives, which, in a sense, could have assisted healthcare facilities that critically focusing on preventing the spread of the pandemic. 

References 

McArthur, J. E., Keith, M. M., & Brophy, J. T. (2020, June 6).  Novel virus, old story: Government failings put healthcare workers at risk - The bullet . Socialist Project. Retrieved September 11, 2020, from  https://socialistproject.ca/2020/05/novel-virus-old-story-government-failings-healthcare-workers-at-risk/