Death of a Child or Spouse: How Can I Help a Friend Whose Child or Spouse Has Died?
jeffromero1955 14th Dicembre 2009
Russia was coming to terms last night with its most deadly fire since Soviet times after 109 people died and more than 130 were injured in a blaze at a packed provincial nightclub.
Investigators ruled out terrorism as the cause of Friday's fire, but president Dmitry Medvedev said the club owners would face severe punishment and ordered a national day of mourning tomorrow with flags at half-mast. He condemned the managers, who had ignored repeated demands from authorities to change the club's interior to comply with fire safety standards, saying “they have neither brains, nor conscience”. Emergency situations minister Sergei Shoigu told Medvedev the owners had been fined twice in the past for breaking fire safety regulations.
Vladimir Putin ordered a government commission to investigate the causes of the tragedy, saying: “It is necessary to launch a minute investigation, punish the culprits and discover the causes of this monstrous disaster.”
The fire broke out at 11.15pm at the Lame Horse nightclub in Perm, in the Urals region some 720 miles east of Moscow. Survivors said an indoor fireworks display went terribly wrong – setting light to the club's rustic wooden ceiling and igniting an inferno.
“The pyrotechnic show caused it,” Andrei, a survivor, told the radio station Echo of Moscow. “There was a cascade of sparks from the floor, one-and-a-half metres high. It looks as if a spark reached the ceiling. The whole ceiling is decorated with twigs.
“The ceiling burst into flames. The wiring was up there. The electricity went off instantly, smoke poured out, the lights went out and that was it. Then the crush [to escape] began.”
Almost 250 mostly young people had crowded into the club for its eighth anniversary party. Video on TV news channels showed guests watching a floor show seated around small wooden tables. As the fire broke out, many stayed put. A host then shouted in a casual tone: “Ladies and gentlemen, guests of the club, we are on fire. Please leave.” Party-goers stood up – at first nonchalantly – then fled in panic.
“The fire took seconds to spread,” witness Svetlana Kuvshinova told Associated Press. “It was like a dry haystack. There was only one way out. They nearly stampeded me.”
Another woman, who identified herself only as Olga, said: “There was only one exit, and people starting breaking down the doors to get out. Everything was in smoke. I couldn't see anything.” Many died in the crush or were quickly suffocated by thick black smoke as they tried to reach the single exit.
Relatives rushed to the scene as news of the disaster spread. “People were still trapped inside. Locals were running around without coats, calling out names and ringing and ringing,” one witness reported in her blog.
Investigators are trying to establish how a party could have turned into Russia's worst fire tragedy in its post-communist history. Local prosecutors arrested the club's co-owner, Anatoly Zak, and its executive director, Svetlana Yefremova, on suspicion that they had violated fire safety precautions. Officials were seeking four other suspects.
Tatyana Golikova, Russia's health minister, said 90 of the 130 injured were in a severe condition, with 59 on artificial lungs. Aircraft took 19 of the seriously injured to Moscow, with others flown to St Petersburg.
A Reuters photographer in Perm reported seeing groups of distraught relatives and loved ones of those feared dead as they trickled into a local morgue for recognition. Others – some weeping or smoking nervously – stared blankly at the lists of the dead.
The tragedy is merely the latest to befall Russia, which has been plagued by accidents due to ageing Soviet-style infrastructure and rampant corruption. Russian fire officials are often accused of being readier to demand bribes than enforce safety rules.
The incident is the second serious one to strike Russia on consecutive Fridays. Nine days ago 26 people were killed and 100 injured when their express train from Moscow to St Petersburg was derailed. Investigators claim the train was blown up and Chechen insurgents claimed responsibility.
Russia's internet, however, has been awash with speculation that it was an accident rather than terrorism, caused by faulty rails or a mechanical malfunction. One report yesterday suggested that investigators are accepting that a technical error could be the cause.
Despite that, the train derailment has stoked fears that Russia could face a nationwide bombing campaign. Yesterday, however, Russian officials played down any links between the train and nightclub disasters. “There are no factors or signs pointing to a possible detonation of an explosive device,” interior minister Rashid Nurgaliyev said.
Russia records up to 18,000 fire deaths a year, several times the per-capita rate in the United States and other western countries; worldwide, nightclub fires have killed thousands of people.
Officials at the emergencies ministry called the fire the worst in the nation's post-Soviet history. The previous most deadly blaze killed 63 people at a nursing home in southern Russia in March 2007.
The title of Jerome Corsi's latest book, Why Israel Can't Wait: The Coming War Between Israel and Iran, does not leave much to the imagination.
Dr. Corsi, together with former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, belongs to a cadre of American Republicans who have taken it upon themselves to champion an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear installation as the only viable solution to the Iranian nuclear conundrum.
Both Corsi and Bolton have visited Israel on numerous occasions, and both have repeatedly declared themselves its friend. Both consider their recommended solutions as the best way to secure the future of Israel.
However, the Israeli government would be well advised to ask itself whether such advice is to its benefit or not. Behind their declared selfless admiration for Israel, such U.S. figures may also have ulterior, more self serving interests at heart.
Since President Barack Obama's election, many supporters of the American right have begun to feel marginalized. Much to their frustration, Obama scrapped the missile defensive shield program in central Europe and made a broad outreach to the world's Muslims in Cairo. Last but not least, Obama reversed Bush's Axis of Evil view of the Iranian government by negotiating directly with Iran in Switzerland this year.
What some Republicans want to desperately see is a failure of Obama's policies, both at home and abroad. Their hope is that they can then use the president's shortcomings as a vindication for their own policies and world view.
To them, a unilateral Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear installations would do just that.
And even if that does not happen, emboldening the current Likud administration to believe that such an option is the best option for Israel would still serve their interests. It would help deepen the rift between Netanyahu and the Obama administration, which currently does not see it in its interests to resort to the military option. Such a rift could then be used by their allies in the Republican Party to attract larger support from the American Jewish community in the 2010 midterm elections in the Senate and House of Representatives.
The Iranian nuclear program is without doubt a danger — one the state of Israel cannot ignore. Ayatollah Khamenei's refusal to accept President Obama's offer, together with his government's refusal to heed the IAEA's calls for further detail of its nuclear program, have added to the sense of danger felt in Jerusalem.
And if the results of a recent Harvard University simulation are anything to go by, Israel may find itself alone as the likelihood of a nuclear Iran gains more commonplace acceptance in Washington. Instead of wanting to launch a military attack, the United States may instead focus on containing a nuclear Iran.
Obama's plans to start the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan in 2011, as well as his plan to withdraw from Iraq in the same year, provide Israel's military planners with a window of opportunity. Once America's forces are away from Iran's borders, it will be more difficult for Tehran to exact revenge for an Israeli attack from American forces. This could severely reduce Iran's deterrence capability.
Despite this, Israel's leaders should weigh their options very carefully. It is unlikely that America's unwillingness to attack is solely due to political considerations. Defense planners may also have doubts over the effectiveness of an assault on Iran's nuclear installations.
Should Israel's planners reach the same conclusion, they would be well advised to follow Washington's lead. Any attack which would set back Iran's nuclear program by less than five years could be counterproductive, both politically and militarily.
Judging by its relationship with Iran during the rule of the Shah, the state of Israel is not against the Iranian nuclear program. It is against Iranian leaders and administrations who want its destruction. A nuclear bomb did not prevent the fall of the Soviet Union, nor did it halt regime change in Pakistan during the reign of Nawaz Sharif. The same may be said for Iran's current leaders.
Israel must weigh all its options, and thus beware the advice of trigger-happy “friends.”
This article originally appeared in Real Clear World.
Meir Javedanfar is an Iranian-Israeli Middle East analyst and a regular contributor to RealClearWorld. He is co-author of The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the State of Iran.
This is a tough situation we all encounter at some point in our lives, perhaps even more than once. I have been the friend or acquaintance of a person that lost a close family member and I am the person that lost both a child and a spouse. Even though I fully understand the pain a “survivor” feels, it is still not easy to help someone unless they allow you to do so.
I know who assisted me in dealing with the trauma I felt at two different times in my life and I will forever be grateful to them. But individual personalities react differently to almost all circumstances. Therefore, the person you are trying to help may, or may not, open up to you.
First of all, how close of a friend are you? Have you frequently spent time together and shared personal information or problems? Or are you a co-worker that discusses work with a minimum amount of personal and / or generic conversation about the outside world?
If you were not a close friend before the death of the family member, it is not likely the survivor will allow you to see beneath the surface of their pain. If you want to help, wait two to four weeks after the death of their family member and then:
Search for, and purchase, a well-written book that deals with death.
Or purchase a journal and pen for the survivor to write down what she, or he, is feeling.
Both the reading and writing helps the survivor to understand their emotions.
Locate a grief recovery group in your area. Churches and funeral homes either support a grief recovery group or can point you in the right direction. Give your friend the information about the grief recovery group without making a big deal of it.
Simply say that you thought the group might be something they would be interested in.
Include the date and time of meetings, the meeting location, a contact (person's) name if available, and a contact phone number.
Follow up with questions after a couple of weeks to see if your friend has been to any of the meetings. If not, offer encouragement for them to go.
If they have gone to a meeting, ask if they felt good about the group. If they didn't think the meeting helped them, suggest they don't give up going for at least two or three meeting. Then if it doesn't work out, they should find another grief recovery group. It is important for them to find the right group.
If you are a close friend, you need to know that helping a friend deal with death may take a large block of your time and may dredge up beliefs, actions, or ideas you disagree with. Your role is to listen, not judge, and give limited advice when you feel your friend needs advice, not when you want to tell them what to do. At this time in their life, it's all about them.
Recovery time varies from person to person depending on their prior life circumstances and their personality. Recovery time will take years, not months.
Invite them to go to a movie or for lunch. Just the two of you, if possible. Getting away from memories for a short while is a welcome relief.
Emails, instead of telephone calls, are easier to work into a busy life for the both of you. Emails will also allow both of you to put more thought into what you want to say or share with each other.
Emails are therapeutic for the survivor because, as I said in the previous paragraph, writing helps the survivor to understand their emotions.
If you are a close family member (like a sister, brother, mother, or dad) don't be surprised if the grieving person doesn't want to discuss how little he (she) has slept and how exhausted they are or how much pain they are in. They probably can't stand making you worry and hurt for them. And the survivor is aware that their family is feeling the loss of the loved one also.
If you are a grief recovery group, you are more knowledgeable than I am. The group I tentatively attended when my spouse died pleasantly surprised me. We wrote answers to questions and could choose to share what we wrote or to pass. In this manner, we learned that it was okay to share how we felt. Everyone there understood and sharing helped us deal with our emotions.
My Suggestions for a Grief Recovery Group:
If you are a church or religious organization, meet in a building that is not part of your church. Candidates for your group may not feel comfortable in a church building and avoid attending your group sessions.
Dealing with the loss of a loved one is not all about Bible scriptures. It is about learning to live without a loved one and learning how to redirect your life. Pain and emotions have to be felt, recognized, and expressed before healing solutions can be explored. Vigorously directing every aspect of recovery toward the Bible and Christ will alienate people that might first be reachable with understanding, concern, and love. Even if the survivor is a Christian, they can feel anger at God, so don't be shocked or negatively judgmental. If they are a Christian, they will probably search and find their own scripture to deal with their anguish.