| Issue #27/108, Jan 25 - Feb 8, 2000 |
|
Western newspapers have many ways of savoring the victory
of the Cold War. While corporations and politicians are busy colonizing the conquered territory,
journalists function as the rear guard, surveying the burnt out husks of cities
that dared confront American hegemony. Their function is similar to that of
Spanish missionaries of lore: writing home with the dual purpose of justifying
the forced civilization of local barbarians on the one hand, and securing money
on the other to continue the process of bringing God to the heathens.
The
first is simple in Russia. It's a pretty barbaric place. There is no shortage of
whores who, for a couple of bucks, will describe how they sell unprotected anal
sex for 60 rubles. Throw in a few more dollars, and they'll even let you
photograph their forearms scarred by shooting up with doctored BIC pens full of
fourth-rate heroin. These stories require minimal tweaking to convince the
average reader that Russians are savages needing to be contained.
The second
mandate requires many more factual distortions. It can take the form of singing
Putin's praises as a president who gets things done, or of talking about how
Russia seems to be turning the corner eco- nomically. More infrequently, an arti-
cle will write about how a handful of starry-eyed Americans, armed with little
more than good will, managed to effect change in a place as terminally screwed
as Russia.
The reason for the infrequency of the latter is obvious. The colossal
fail- ure of foreign aid packages, from the IMF to USAID, hasn't provided much a
journalist can use to justify sending more money. However, rather than
critiquing these programs and calling for accountability, journalists dig up
obscure examples of regular Americans in contact with Russians, and then blow
them up into stories about how Americans can act as civilizing agents even
here, in the most uncivilized of nations.
Michael Wines of the New York Times
did just that when he wrote about health care in the provincial city of Dubna on
December 31. Through a USAID program, Dubna and its American sister city, La
Crosse, Wisconsin, ran a series of exchanges that Wines decided to advertise.
Part of the reason he chose Dubna, perhaps, is that it is conveniently located
for journalists. If you have a well-organized fixer, it's close enough to
Moscow to avoid a dreaded overnight stay, but it's far enough away to qualify
as Ônot exactly Moscow.'
However, this proximity to Moscow posed an unforeseen
problem. It was- n't hard even for a slacker like me to get on a bus and check
the facts of Wines's story.
Wines thought he was doing everyone a favor when
he wrote this story. By publishing it on the last day of 2000, he figured he had
found a good day for a light human-interest story. Nobody wants to read about
decay on the eve of the millennium. And even the grim micro-printed Times needs
happy fluff stories sometimes. Besides, after running a series of articles
trashing the Russian medical establishment (while, miraculously, avoiding the
fact that poverty is at the roots of the system's problems), he must have felt
that his readers could use a little dose of positivism. Dubna would get a pat on
the back from America's paper of note, the fine folks of La Crosse would gain
more mater- ial for their scrapbooks, the masses would see hope for the world.
Everybody would be happy.
His article, A Fit City Offers Russia a Self-Help
Model, offers an excellent example of what happens when a journalist decides on
the article's substance before he makes his first interview. Out of laziness and
a reliance on his pre-determined assumptions about Dubna's healthcare, he
created a completely distorted view of the city's hospital system. To complete
the illusion, he ordered his photographer James Hill to only take pictures of
that which supported his stance.
The article weaves between two
irreconcilable arguments: that Dubna is helping itself, and that Americans were
the agents of change in Dubna. The former assertion was entirely rhetorical in
character.
"[Dubna is] a textbook example of how Russia, the developed world's
sick man, could heal itself."
"Most of Dubna's luck is home-made."
"The two
sides' early agreement that theirs was not a relationship of American mentor and
Russian protugu, but of equals..."
None of these statements mean anything,
however, because Wines didn't provide any meat to back them up. All the facts
and anecdotes he recorded support the second argument, that a band of doctors
from La Crosse swooped into Dubna on USAID-funded chariots and illuminated the
path of righteousness for a group of backward Russians. According to Wines'
article, the only way Dubna "heals itself" is by relying on Americans' sage
advice and encouragement to transform the city.
Wines's article claimed that
every advance in Dubna's health care in the last ten years was initiated through
ideas generated by the USAID program and the resulting contact with Americans.
The USAID program provided about one million dollars, the bulk of which was
spent on exchange programs which sent about a thousand health care workers from
each city to the other.
Wines emphasized that the money was not spent on buying
new machinery (which Dubna desperately needs), but on bringing to doctors first-
hand knowledge of how a superior system works. This neatly fits into the
American myth that money and equipment are not as important as human resources.
But even a cursory look at all the programs instigated over the last few years
have one thing in common. They all needed money to get started. Amazingly, Wines
completely sidestepped the question of the availability of funding for new
programs in Dubna. The implication here is that these were the only that
requested funding or were necessary.
Virtually every doctor I talked with in
Dubna put monetary woes as among the most severe problems of city health care.
The one notable exception was Dr. Vadim Kalakin, the second gynecologist at the
new maternity ward. Since his ward recently underwent a 9-million Ruble
renovation, he only complained about salaries. Salaries for doctors in Dubna
range from about 1000 to 3000 Rubles a month. Each doctor I talked with had
ambitious plans for expanding hospital services. Some of these plans draw on the
experience with doctors from La Crosse, some don't. What matters is that there
are extremely limited funds to undertake the rebuilding of hospitals. "We make
proposals, but the city budget decides what gets financed," said Sergei Ryabov,
the Director of Dubna's Health Department. "Obviously, we don't get everything
we want."
Instead, Dubna's authoritarian mayor Valery Prokh decides what to finance and
what to put off. One doc- tor, who asked that I not use his name, claimed that
the mayor was more likely to approve projects that reflected the town's relation
with La Crosse, as this program was a pet project of his. Wines played up the
Americans' role in rejuvenating Dubna's health care at every possible juncture.
Phrases like "The exchange has liter- ally transformed medical care here" were
common throughout the piece.
One American, Sandra McCormick was given the label "nursemaid to Dubna's public-
health recovery." This is not the language of a partnership of equals.
Throughout his article, Wines listed all the new programs in Dubna and credited
La Crosse with inspiring them all. However, when I asked, Dubna's doctors did
not agree.
Wines opened the article with a heartwarming image - 93-year-old Nina
Nikolayevna belting out love songs on an upright piano. As an old woman without
relatives to care for her, she receives house calls several times a week from
nurses giving her everything from checkups to groceries. According to Ryabov,
about 400 old people get this service, which is modeled on American home care.
Ryabov claimed it is a successful program. But it is not, as Wines's article
would have you believe, the whole story. While in Dubna, I stumbled into an old
age home, where pensioners were not as satisfied in their old age as Nina
Nikolayevna.
The single story building, which reeked of urine, was literally
crumbling down. The heat didn't work very well. Five people in white coats were
crammed in a little room and chainsmoking. In that room, the cloud of smoke
mitigated the piss-odor. Decrepit old men in ratty bathrobes shuffled
unsupervised along the filthy corridor. One babushka sat in a chair unmoving.
All the pensioners looked slightly confused, as if they didn't quite understand
exactly how low they had sunk. I didn't stay long; the smell was overpowering
and I had an appointment to keep.
That Wines didn't find this place is understandable. I simply chanced upon it
while looking for another clinic. But it is symbolic of his complete lack of a
critical gaze. His piece was generated by a tour of what the doctors wanted to
brag about. He wasn't looking for any problems. The piece was already written;
all Wines needed was to punctuate it with a few quotes of Russians praising the
moral righteousness of Midwesterners. That Wines didn't write about Dubna's
problems is remarkable. Only one statistic in the piece - that
Dubna's death rate remains pinned to Russia's - hints that Dubna has got more
problems than an average American city.
It didn't take any effort at all to hear
about Dubna's problems. The doctors openly discuss them. They complain about
their financial problems even when not asked. It was Wines who didn't want to
listen, in order to create a Utopian system that just isn't there. Dubna doctors
don't consider most of their current reforms exceptional, although Wines clearly
does. "Reform is happening everywhere," Ryabov told me, "not just here."
A good
example is the diabetes education center, which has lead to a five-fold drop in
hospitalizations for diabetes patients. Wines implied that this improvement,
like everything else in Dubna, was due solely to La Crosse's guidance. In fact,
it was a region-wide program that 30 cities in the Moskovsky oblast are
currently taking part in. Dubna was one of three cities that started the pilot
program.
Wines misleads the reader into thinking that La Crosse inspires every
change in Dubna. "After another trip, Dubna found some local funds to convert a
little-used kindergarten into a rehabilitation center for children with bone
deformities and other growth-related problems."
According to Dr. Evgeny
Murovyev, the center's director, the timing was coincidental and that the
center, which caters to kids with either mental or growth defects, had been a
long time in coming. "Two of our specialists visited La Crosse, but most of our
doctors use the tried and true old methods," he claimed, with a touch of pride.
One thing that really did come from the Americans was the technology to create
an orthopedic cast that is superior to the earlier alternatives Dubna
relied on. Earlier, children had to go to Moscow to get fitted with a more
awkward, heavier mold.
Wines made much of this example, but failed to report
that the casts are not made by the city hospital, but by a private firm. This
example would have fit in beautifully with the Times' party line that Russian
health needs to be in private hands. How could he miss it?
Perhaps Wines arrived
on such a tight schedule - God forbid he have to suffer a night at Hotel Dubna -
that he didn't have time to find out any information that he hadn't planned on.
At this center, I also spoke to the head doctor, Maria Shpankova, who had given
Wines and his translator a tour. She seemed very disappointed that Wines had
forgotten to send a copy of the article, even though he had promised. When I
asked her how well he spoke Russian, she said, "Oh, he understood about half. He
got on great with the kids, though," referring to the mentally-retarded
patients. Years of catering to an American audience left Wines on their
wavelength, apparently.
The jewel in the crown of Dubna's medical establishment
is the new maternity ward, which opened at the start of this month. Dubna
doctors claimed that it is probably unique in Russia. Clean, white corridors and
a policy of letting mothers remain with their newborns bear little resemblance
to most Russian maternity wards. But for Wines to call it "a La Crosse-style
birthing center" is equally absurd.
Similarities do exist; families can visit
the mother and child, each room has a telephone, and the mother gives birth and
sleeps in the same private room. "This maternity ward was built independently of
the Americans," said Aleksei Osipov, the assistant director of the hospital
where it was located. "The American system is completely different, because they
have more space and better antiseptic technology. While some fundamentals such
as early breast-feeding are the same, the mechanism is entirely different."
In
this maternity ward, each birthing room has a separate entrance to the street,
thereby lowering the risks of infection. Fear of infection is what keeps mothers
and newborns separated in most Russian maternity wards.
But in reading Wines
piece, you would never know that this ward differs from one in La Crosse,
where an insurance company representatives make sure
mothers don't waste anytime getting dressed after giving birth.
Nor would you
know that Dubna's doctors, without exception, voiced criticism of American
medicine, especially of insurance companies and for-profit medicine. "The system
of profit doesn't impress me," said Kalakin, the gynecologist, who twice
traveled to La Crosse. "Providing free care isn't a minus, it's an obligation of
every doctor."
Wines also wrote that the Americans inspired the city hospital to
a purchase of two dialysis machines, and then trained them how to use it,
"sending operators and technicians to La Crosse for training, while a La Crosse
expert helped set up the Dubna site." According to Osipov, this simply isn't
true.
"Every hospital should have these machines," Osipov said. "But they are
expensive. Earlier, we just didn't have the money. But we got an invitation for
help, and the mayor budgeted money for it." Osipov himself is trained to operate
the machines, but he only had to travel as far as Moscow to gain that expertise.
He laughed at the presumption that Americans were needed to provide training for
them. American influence in Dubna health care is perhaps most apparent in the
two women's health centers in the city. These appear to be a carbon-copy of
their American counterparts. Much of the literature is translated from American
pamphlets. They offer family planning classes, gynecology exams, training for
pregnant women, and breast cancer education. About fifty women a day stop by the
center.
I met with Irina Kosabutskaya, the center's director, to find out what
made the center a success. In her office two framed certificates hung on the
wall, saying she had received training from the American International Health
Organization. One of them had a golden aluminum seal on it, and resembled a
reward for participating in a third grade spelling bee.
Kosabutskaya was blunt
about the center's successes, which include reducing the city's abortion rate
from 2 per birth to about 1.5 and supplying 70 percent of the city's women with
free birth control (donated by an American organization). "When you recommend
birth control, women ask, what will it cost?" she said. "When they find out it's
free, of course they are willing to use it."
The reason Russia's abortion rate
is so high is because it is free to get one, while birth control costs money. In
poor provincial towns, this is a deciding factor. And, while distributing free
birth control is a huge success, it hardly represents, as Wines would have it,
the success of Dubna's medical reforms. Give any Belorussian provincial town
free birth control and you will get the same results.
The photographs that
accompa- nied Wines' article are equally stilted. They show bright images like
the sterile white corridor of the renovated maternity ward, young healthcare
workers in baseball caps taking blood pressure counts on a sunny day, a kid
playing on a colorful course of pads designed to help spinal injuries.
All
these things exist, but where are the pictures of the overcrowded children's
hospital with puke green walls? Or, in the same building as the colorful course,
pictures of the gaping holes in floor that have been covered over by large
planks? Or, in the building next to the maternity ward, images of peeling paint
in the corridor?
The photos selected have little relation to the overall picture
of health care in Dubna. The hospitals look like most Russian hospitals; some
rooms have been renovated, but the overall physical plant is completely run
down.
Wines fails to give a picture of what is going on in Dubna. Doctors there
have made some impressive gains against a system stacked against them and there
are cities in more desperate shape than Dubna.
But that isn't the point. For
every building that gets renovated or sex Ed class added to the high school
curriculum, new endemic problems like alcoholism and drug-resistant tuberculosis
emerge. Every doctor in Russia could visit La Crosse, and the country's health
care would still be in shambles and life expectancy would continue to slip.
Every advance that Wines cites still doesn't add up to a complete health care
system. A maternity ward, better care for diabetics, dialysis machines, rehab
for disabled children, home care for some of the elderly and women's wellness
centers are the sum of the successes of Dubna's medical establishment. These
simply don't add up to a revival of the town's health infra- structure. They
don't even come close.
Wines wrote, "Last year, United States funding for the
health care partnership between Dubna and La Crosse ended, for the best of rea-
sons: Dubna did not need more help." It is absurd. Of course they need help.
Because what the health care system needs, like the rest of Russia, is money.
Every doctor in Dubna knew that. Why couldn't Wines figure it out? Maybe it was
lost in translation.