The legal landscape surrounding the bill is quite positive since it only aims to expand the already existing act. Thus, “supporters argue that this support which the government has already agreed to provide should be available to all who reasonably qualify, not just some” (GovTrack, 2021, para. 7). There are fifteen sponsors of the bill and a 45% chance of it being enacted (GovTrack, 2021). At first, the H.R. 5703 may cause extra spending because the aforementioned departments will have to support more people. Then, the level of provided help will improve, and eventually, the U.S. will be able to notice the increasing mental health and shorter periods of experiencing post-traumatic stress among Americans.
The policy addresses the issue by increasing the community’s access to the resources and support provided after all types of emergencies. Americans’ quality of life after disasters will grow, and their mortality and morbidity levels will reduce because people will receive professional mental help even after experiencing a less major crisis. All populations, especially minorities, will benefit from the bill, and these advantages will be noticed every time the president declares a less severe emergency. Since the program’s funding will become greater, no populations will be negatively influenced. Individuals will become more equal in accessing medical support, which will reduce medical disparities.
Currently, the policy has no opponents – many politicians and organizations approve of this initiative. The interests of the stakeholders, including democrats and republicans, are to raise the quality of life in the U.S. and make the rights of citizens more equal. No negative consequences of the bill can be identified since it only expands the already existing program. If the resources are allocated properly, there will be no additional economic burden. To enact the policy, the aforementioned program should begin to cover less severe emergencies. When one occurs and is declared by the president, the action plan is the same as during major disasters, but fewer resources and less preparation will be needed. The policy is flexible and scalable, and its implementation is not time-consuming. Finally, it is expected that the bill will “only increase the cost of the existing program slightly since the overwhelming majority of declared disasters fall under the already-covered category of major disasters rather than emergency declarations” (GovTrack, 2021, para. 11). As a result, the benefits outweigh the costs, and there will be no extreme pressure on budgets of the FEMA and the CMHS.
Finally, there are some ways that the DNP-prepared nurse can meaningfully participate in implementing the policy. First, the nurse can persuade their healthcare organization to register its position on the bill and support its enactment. Second, they can conduct research that would prove the need for the policy. For example, showing the number of non-major emergencies in the last five years and the number of people who survived them can demonstrate the health inequality that they faced.
GovTrack. (2021). H.R. 5703: Post-disaster mental health response act. Web.
SAMHSA. (2022). Crisis counseling assistance and training program (CCP). Web.
Order this paper