Flint Water Crisis Analysis

Living in Grand Rapids, MI, less than two hours from Flint, I thought that I was quite familiar with the Flint Water Crisis. It was in every paper and on NPR nearly every day. However, reading these articles gave me a whole new view of the crisis. What became obvious was that no one was willing to take blame for the issue. This was a complete failure and no one wants to be the person responsible for it. No one wants to be the person who caused elevated lead levels in children to save a few dollars.

This blame shifting was most obvious in the governmental reports. The letter from the EPA is all about what they need the city of flint to do to ameliorate the problem. For example, in the first paragraph the letter states “it is necessary for

the City of Flint to have the capability to boost the level of chlorine in the water to maintain a residual throughout their distribution system”.1 The letter then goes on to discuss what they need the city to do and how they believe the city is failing to meet those requirements. They discuss that the city must take immediate action and that the city is failing because they currently are unable to do so. 1
Conversely, the letter from the Department of Utilities to the MDEQ and the DEA lists many reasons why they are unable to meet requirements. The DOU seems to attempt to share responsibility by listing which agencies they are counting on for assistance. They Rely on “the MDEQ, EPA and the cities of Cincinnati and Ann Arbor”2 for help. The governmental agencies are filled with reasons as to why they are not responsible.
The newspaper article is much more up front about assigning blame to various government agencies. An article in the New York Times titled “Flint’s water is Linked to High Lead in Children” really focuses on the fact that government agencies continued to state that the water was safe to drink3, even though it was clearly not safe as well as the fact that no one really wanted to take responsibility. Mr. Walling blamed the emergency manager and city council, stating that “he had not been given sufficient information”.3 Everyone thinks that it’s someone else’s problem.
This newspaper article is also the only one, as compared to the government reports, to mention the increase in lead levels in children.

It discusses the health issues of some of the residents of the city, as well as stating that elevated lead levels were being shown as early as 2014.3 Officials during this time were still trying to convince residents that the water was safe to drink but many residents quit drinking the water anyway. As compared to the other articles, the newspaper article does a fairly thorough job of covering the Flint water crisis. It even touches on some of the other issues in Flint, such as its economic issues.

When a situation such as this arises, it is important for public health workers and public officials to work together to find a solution. The reason the Flint water crises got so out of control was because public officials did everything they could to avoid the issue, and when that become impossible, to shift the blame to other agencies. The fact that public health agencies need to work together is addressed in an article entitled “Public Health 2.0” by Dr. David Dyjack. Dr. Dyjack states that “we need to rethink our …business, which will drive us to become more…familiar with our colleagues”.

4
According to a timeline of the Flint water crisis, this definitely didn’t happen in Flint. Flint switched to the Flint River on April 25, 20145 with residents reporting dirty water and health issues soon afterward. A public health emergency wasn’t declared until October 1, 2015. 5 That’s a year and 5 months later. Over a year, that residents had to deal with horrible water, with boiling water and buying bottled water, because no one acted. The EPA, the DEQ, Governor Snyder, the Department of Health and Human Services all avoided acknowledging the problem rather that coming together to create a solution. The ignored physicians and scientists showing proofs of increasing lead. They ignored residents with health problems and dirty water. It was a total failure.
What exactly were residents of Flint dealing with?

Researchers at Virginia Tech sampled the lead in homes in Flint and found that 40% of homes had over 5 ppb of lead, and 16% of homes had over 15ppb6 which is the level at which the EPA recommends children and pregnant women avoid drinking the water. According to our textbooks, children exposed to lead can exhibit decreased intelligence, behavioral problems, and gastrointestinal issues.7Lead poisoning, leading to seizures and comas, can occur as well with very high exposures. Lead exposure can have terrible consequences, and for government agencies to ignore it for as long as they did is

unconscionable.
Overall, after examining all of the resources, I think it is fair to say that the government did a terrible job of working together, of solving the problem, and of taking responsibility for this debacle. In neither of the government articles, does any governmental agency take any kind of responsibility for the issues in Flint. Only the newspaper article seemed to cover the events in a responsible way, by discussing the issues that residents were having with the water. In the New York Times article, a pastor is quoted as saying” anytime you have to weigh money against the health and welfare of people, it always has to be the health and welfare you go with”3 which unfortunately is not what happened in Flint. An attempt to save money is what landed the already economically disadvantaged city of Flint in this situation. Money was then continually chosen over the health of the people. Hopefully, governmental agencies learn from this situation, so that the next time something like this happens they can work together to quickly come up with a viable solution.