Franz
Porzsolt, Ulm
In our
previous article "Shots in the Olympia Shopping Centre Munich" we discussed the concept of
‘perceived safety’, the risk cycle and its importance for our decision making. This article discusses the issue of the refugee crisis and is intended to show
that the quality of safety competes with other factors such as freedom and that
there will always be a trade-off between competing factors.
Last year, we in Germany (80 million residents) accepted 1 million refugees.
The discussion about this immigration is referred to as the ‘refugee crisis’.
The example of the ‘refugee crisis’ in Germany confirms that the concept of
‘perceived safety’ is also important for political decision making. These political
decisions affect the safety and freedom of both the citizens of the host
country and the refugees themselves. A lack of safety leads to a considerable
reduction in the quality of life and freedom of action. Because our focus is on health care provision, we are interested to know what
we can take away from the current discussion that is relevant for health care.
We Will Cope
In
September 2015, Angela Merkel expressed clear support for Germany’s refugee
intake with her statement ‘We will cope’. Whether this statement was justified
became the subject of a heated debate. Realists raised the valid question of
whether the statement could be justified if there is no concrete solution for
implementing the intake process. For others, the moral obligation to provide assistance
has greater priority regardless of whether there is an existing solution.
If the consequences of both decisions are considered, at first glance the issue
is off the table for the host country if the response to opening the borders is
NO. The search for a solution to this international problem becomes of
secondary importance to us. If the response to opening the borders is YES,
however, a series of problems that are difficult to foresee emerge for the host
country. For the refugees, at least one initial problem is resolved and a new
outlook on life opens up.
Considering
whether NO or YES is appropriate when all the advantages and disadvantages are
weighed up can be answered if underlying value judgements are taken into
account, and we consider making decisions that we would contemplate in
exceptional circumstances.
Numerous
examples demonstrate that our society feels obliged to help those in need based
on our own value judgements. As one of the most affluent countries in the
world, we should remember that we were only able to take the first steps
towards reconstructing our country after 1945 with external support. Even if
self-serving motives are assumed for those providing the help, the alternative
of not supporting those in need and leaving them to their fate is not an
acceptable alternative from a moral perspective. From a moral point of view
that is applicable to Germany, the statement ‘We will cope’ is therefore the
correct response. Saying NO to opening the borders is hardly justifiable from
this point of view.
Implementing
the Commitment
The second
question relates to implementing our commitment. It requires us to weigh up our
values. Greater safety does not lead necessarily to more freedom. The opposite
can also apply, with too much safety resulting in a considerable restriction of
freedom. A person can secure their home and land with a fence, bars on the
windows, an alarm system and security patrols. Each of these safety-related
measures is associated with a reduction in that person’s freedom of action. The
greater a person’s or society’s need for safety, the more freedom must be
sacrificed.
This correlation and the balance between safety and freedom that is required
can also be applied to the refugee crisis. Some of the rules that have been
defined to ensure our social safety are perceived by the public as bureaucratic
hurdles to resolving the refugee crisis.
Actions to Resolve the Refugee Crisis
Even though
stigma of being an economic refugee is problematic, we have to define criteria
for acceptance as a refugee in our country. Managing the refugee crisis is an
international problem. Every country that can contribute to resolving the
problem is subject to this shared obligation.
Most of the
refugees currently have a low potential for development. Well-educated refugees
will not have any major problems after overcoming the language barrier in terms
of their participation in the job market and their social integration. For most
of the refugees, however, new programs will have to be developed to familiarise
the people, most of whom are young, with their future roles in our society. As
part of this, values and qualities must be taught that are essential for a
successful work life and social integration. It is difficult to explain to
refugees that the months of waiting must go by unused because no solutions have
yet been found to start taking useful steps towards immediate integration.
An
impressive number of volunteers have gathered to take on the tasks that will
fall to our society. Trust has been built up and contact made between
volunteers and refugees, both of which are valuable foundations for the
integration process. Individual solutions such as a system for recording the
personal details and resources of the refugees have been developed. Although
these spontaneous activities appear uncoordinated and pointless from the
authorities’ perspective because they do not appear to be of any use to the
official integration process, this response sets the wrong example.
Positive
signals to volunteers, refugees and citizens prevent increasing levels of
demotivation and dissatisfaction. The interest in the services provided by
volunteers and the progress made by refugees should be apparent and the
benefits of the commitment identifiable. The volunteers must be registered,
instructed, motivated and supported. The establishment of a ‘We will cope’
foundation to support useful projects will help to sustain motivation. Our
existing legal framework is possibly unsuited to resolve problems that are the
result of a ‘social emergency’. These new challenges confronting our society
justify discussing the ‘definition of a legal sphere for refugees’, which can
provide refugees with prompt assistance while at the same time protecting them
from abuse and exploitation.
Reducing
our legally regulated requirements for social safety would enable us to
increase the level of freedom that we urgently need to rapidly integrate
refugees. This facilitation of the integration process is associated with a
consciously accepted increase in risks. An increase in risks does not necessarily
mean that harm occurs more often or that greater harm occurs than previously.
A reduction in the legally regulated requirements during certain phases of the
integration is worth discussing because there was no opportunity when the
refugee crisis first started to weigh up the possibilities and risks associated
with the legal framework of the start of the integration process. Any solution
we find could be of international significance because other countries will
have to resolve similar problems related to integrating refugees to those we
are facing. The citizens of Germany must first feel that we are moving towards
the goal of ‘we will cope’.
Suggestions
for Health Care Provision
Decisions
made with regard to health care provision are just as dependent on value
judgements as those decisions made about managing the refugee crisis. Value
judgements are not reflected in any objective parameters. They represent the
subjective, individually varying perception of qualities such as safety and
freedom. Accordingly, our decisions are not guided by objectively measurable
conditions, e.g. risks and any limitations/restrictions, but are rather
dependent on each individual’s perception of these objective conditions, e.g.
‘perceived safety’ and ‘perceived freedom’.
This
article demonstrates that the two factors of safety and freedom compete with
one another and that a trade-off between the two is necessary. A decision must
be made as to how much of a factor can be sacrificed to enable another factor
to be preserved instead.
This issue of competing factors has not been considered in the social arena or
in the health care sector to date. Discussing the concept of competing factors
could lead to novel suggestions and paths for finding solutions for problems
which have thus far proven difficult to resolve.
