It”s rare for Taiwan to make BBC headlines, but now it”s appeared on the BBC”s front page for two consecutive days, unfortunately not for anything to be happy about.
Both news reports are related to the hospital fire that occurred in Tainan yesterday. One was breaking news yesterday, titled “Taiwan hospital fire kills 12 elderly residents,” and the other was a follow-up seen this morning, titled “Taiwan “arsonist” cites illness”… Tainan, Xinying Hospital, Beimen Branch, big fire, fire, arson, nursing home,
Caption: Ignition point of the Tainan Xinying Hospital Beimen Branch fire disaster
After the incident, various concerned parties immediately issued statements, including:
Tainan Mayor Lai Ching-te stated: “The hospital is in a remote location, and many patients have mobility impairments, which are the main reasons for the severe casualties.”
Xinying Hospital issued a statement, saying that the nursing home was originally outsourced, but will now be taken back for self-management, with long-term care development remaining the focus.
Li Ming-feng, Director of the Tainan City Fire Bureau, stated that the fire department had conducted a fire inspection in June, and at that time, everything met regulations. A thorough inspection of all medical and nursing facilities” fire safety equipment will be carried out in the next month.
Although everyone”s statements were logical, I did not see anyone step forward to apologize.
Fires, or even arson, can happen anywhere in the world at any time. Nursing homes primarily house patients with “three tubes” (nasogastric tube, urinary catheter, breathing tube) and many critically ill patients who rely on oxygen tanks to sustain life.
Initially, when the hospital planned the building functions and facilities (including subsequent renovations), and even before outsourcing its management, it must have known that its clients had “mobility impairment” issues! It should not, after the incident, dismiss it with “patients had mobility impairments” — because they were already mobility impaired!
I sincerely suggest that the Director of the Department of Health, the Director of the Fire Department, and the Superintendent of Xinying Hospital should all resign to take responsibility. Their inaction led to the nursing home being located on the “second floor” of a building, and a second floor without smoke extraction equipment. Therefore, I cannot agree that the casualties of this fire were solely due to a single arson incident. In fact, it was not the patients who were mobility-impaired, but these people who placed mobility-impaired patients in danger. In this fire, even firefighters had to deploy manpower, with groups of 4 firefighters, to move patients out of the fire zone.
Not only was the second floor housing mobility-impaired patients problematic, but Xinying Hospital also used the fourth floor as a psychiatric nursing facility. I ask, when a fire breaks out, how can hospital nurses or firefighters smoothly move out mentally impaired patients whose emotions are already unstable? I boldly say that at that time, it might take 8 firefighters to “drag” out one patient.
If Xinying Hospital plans to continue using its original space configuration and business items after the dust settles, then even if it takes over self-management, the same tragedy will occur again if another fire breaks out. In fact, many nursing homes in Taiwan have the same problem; the only difference is that these institutions haven”t had a fire yet, and everyone is pretending nothing is wrong.
Similarly, the Fire Department Director saying “fire equipment meets regulations” and “strengthening inspections within one month” is standard “nonsense.” If it meets regulations, why strengthen inspections!? Is it that the “regulations” are not up to standard, or did you not conduct inspections according to regulations before? The former is the fault of the Fire Department Director; the latter is the fault of the Fire Bureau Director. Choose one to chew on.
The real problem is not whether the fire equipment is normal or whether the regulations are appropriate; those are black words written on white paper.
Fire regulations mostly focus on equipment and space, but ignore the differences in “users.”
If hospitals do not make more rigorous arrangements and plans based on their own usage and conditions, then no matter how detailed the fire regulations are, there will ultimately be deficiencies, and that “deficiency” is due to human negligence.
Just like this hospital passing fire safety inspections but lacking smoke extraction equipment, the result was that mobility-impaired patients did not have enough time to evacuate. And currently, I do not see anyone genuinely wanting to change the system. — Major and minor matters concerning personal safety should all be executed meticulously to the highest standards.
I think the BBC made this news a headline not just because a hospital caught fire, but because even they didn”t understand why such a small fire caused so many casualties. (Turns to look at the Director of the Department of Health, the Director of the Fire Department, and the Superintendent of Xinying Hospital.)