Lucy Easthope, so the ‘Guardian’ tells us, is ‘a senior lecturer specialising in disaster response’ at Lincoln University’s law school. She is also the emergency recovery lead at the Cabinet Office emergency planning college.
And what she proposes is dangerous nonsense:
With the best of intentions, we have allowed DNA technologies to interfere with the production of a timely final death toll. We have needed to look in control, with the right kit and the right experts in place; and have set about baffling and frightening with tales of sieving and mitochondrial samples. In this new order, there is little room for a family’s recollection (“He was sat next to me as we broke the fast, and then he was gone”); no room for mother’s instinct (“I knew in my gut straightaway that she wasn’t coming back”).
Well…..yes. That’s right. There is no room for those things, nor should there ever be. This is the First World, not the Third!
Pronoucing someone dead with no evidence that they are dead shouldn’t be considered. Ever.
There is still a chance to break the cycle and create a new approach that takes the best of 9/11 and Lac-Mégantic, reinforcing a respect for community narrative, and an understanding of the importance of a list of names generated by the devastated. That is at odds with talk of latest scientific advancements, and it will need considerable bravery from police and politicians in relinquishing some of their need to stay in control.
Utter insanity. And once again, once this was pointed out by the readership, the comments were deep-sixed with frightening speed.