Search results

This chapter reviews the empirical evidence for Psychological First Aid (PFA) in the context and experience of the Southeast Asian (SEA) region. First, this chapter provides the definition and background of PFA and its core principles, to explain the basis for doing PFA as part of an integrated approach to disaster mental health. Second, the existing literature on the effectiveness of PFA is reviewed. Third, this chapter examines the application and adaptation of PFA in SEA. Implications and recommendations are provided at the end of the chapter.

Disaster responders play a crucial role in providing aid to individuals and communities following catastrophic events. Being tasked to protect and preserve life and property, these groups of professionals are constantly exposed to various hazards, which puts them at risk of negative mental health consequences. This chapter describes and discusses these mental health effects and interventions for disaster responders in Southeast Asia. The chapter defines who the disaster responders are in Southeast Asian countries. Drawing from the literature, this chapter enumerates the various positive and negative psychological consequences of disaster response, and the risk and protective factors associated with disaster response work. This chapter also describes the different interventions, such as psychological first aid and psychotherapy, following the Inter-agency Standing Committee (IASC) (2007) guidelines on conducting mental health and psychosocial support services (MHPSS), and focusing on the Southeast Asian context. This chapter ends with a discussion of the different challenges of providing MHPSS in Southeast Asia and with some recommendations on how to improve the delivery of these services and the mental health of disaster responders in general.

Advances in disaster prevention and mitigation in Southeast Asia (SEA) have increasingly included plans for mental health and psychosocial support. However, substantial challenges remain, particularly in the areas of (a) disaster communication and preparedness, (b) institutionalized disaster education, (c) culturally adapted and evidence-based tools and interventions, (d) developing capacities and caring for disaster responders, and (e) enabling collective resilience. In addition, the impacts of poverty, lack of access to education, and other forms of marginalization result in less resources to prepare for hazardous event and increased vulnerability to environmental hazards for SEA countries. These issues highlight the need for SEA governments to address deeply rooted human development issues that put communities at risk and heighten vulnerabilities of SEA populations.

The governmental public health workforce provides essential public health services to communities from public health agencies operations at the local, state, and federal levels of government. The roles and duties of public health workers range from infectious disease tracking and control to healthy eating promotion to checking food service establishments for safety. Unfortunately, most of the time, the general public is unaware of, and unconcerned with, public health’s primary mission of disease prevention. This behind-the-scenes, service-oriented workforce has responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by working long hours, extra days, and ever-changing job roles, all while becoming targets of political attacks and enduring substantially elevated psychological distress and burnout. Though this workforce is not well enumerated, existing studies indicate that public health workers face higher anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and burnout than other frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic response. Several strategies have been suggested to address these vulnerabilities, including increasing the amount and stability of available funding, implementing organizational-level policies and programming to boost resilience, and providing individual-level social support, both instrumental and emotional, to protect against burnout and other psychological distresses.

This chapter explores the phenomenon of organizational resilience. A comprehensive model was advanced and tested while utilizing a quantitative study conducted in the education system in Israel with 98 schools, involving 1,132 educators. Statistical analysis based on structural equation modeling revealed significant relationships between three antecedents (social capital, team empowerment, goal interdependence) and organizational resilience. In addition, a positive significant relationship was found between organizational resilience and organizational functioning in crisis. Organizational resilience was found to be a mediator between three of the antecedents (social capital, team empowerment, goal interdependence) and organizational functioning in crisis. Furthermore, organizational functioning in crisis was found to mediate the relationship between organizational resilience and organizational innovation. Implications for policymakers, managers, and change leaders in organizations are discussed.

Although the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 explicitly recognizes the need for psychosocial support and mental health services, the focus of this and many disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM) plans lies in the response, recovery, and rehabilitation phases. Less attention has been given to how mental health aspects affect the predisaster phase. This chapter explores the less understood concept of “resistance” in the perspectives model of disaster mental health, which is related to DRRM themes of “prevention and mitigation” and “preparedness” interventions. Four strategies are identified by which DRRM interventions can contribute to psychosocial support and mental health: increasing stress resistance, fostering cohesion and social support, fostering positive cognition, and building self-efficacy and hardiness. We review the cases of the Philippines, Indonesia, Myanmar, and Thailand and report existing socio-political DRRM initiatives for prevention, mitigation, and preparedness that can potentially enhance resistance as a predisaster intervention. Beyond medical services or clinical mental health interventions for select populations, DRRM interventions can benefit the general public. Despite natural intersections, there remains a need for deliberate and targeted initiatives that explore how vertical pyschosocial care programs can be created to straddle both DRRM and health sectors in practice.