Health Problems in Areas Contaminated by the Chernobyl Disaster
On April 26, 1986, one of the four blocks of the Ukrainian nuclear power plant at Chernobyl exploded as a result of human error. The fatal accident sequence was initiated by the decision of the plant’s management to shut down all safety mechanisms in the reactor in an overnight experiment to test the generator under extreme conditions. That night, at 01.24 hours, eyewitnesses outside Chernobyl Unit 4 observed two explosions, one after the other. Burning debris and sparks shot into the air above the reactor, some of which fell on the roof of the machine room and started a fire. The explosions left a gaping hole in the roof, exposing the reactor core to the outside air (Medvedev, 1990; Mould, 1988). Firefighters from the nearby town of Pripyat made heroic efforts to control the fires. Even after rescue workers had entered the Unit 4 building, the operating crew reacted with disbelief to the reported devastation of the reactor’s core. Disbelief and outright denial also characterized the first official response. The authorities had only recently proclaimed that the Chernobyl reactor was so safe that one could have built it on Red Square in Moscow. Only when alarming background readings of radioactivity in the Scandinavian countries made it apparent that a large-scale nuclear accident was occurring somewhere in the Soviet Union did the first public announcements appear in the Soviet press. The state press agency, TASS, issued a four-line statement that an accident had occurred at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant and that every measure had been taken to limit the damage.
KeywordsThyroid Cancer Traumatic Stress Chernobyl Accident Radioactive Contamination Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- American Psychiatric Association. (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed., rev.). Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
- Baum, A. (1987). Toxins, technology and natural disasters. In G. R. Vandenbos and K. B. Bryant (Eds.), Cataclysms, crises and catastrophes: Psychology in action (pp. 5–53 ). Washington: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
- Bromet, J. E., and Schulberg, C. H. (1986). The Three Mile Island disaster: A search for high risk groups. In J. H. Shore (Ed.), Disaster stress studies: New Methods and findings (pp. 119 ). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.Google Scholar
- Davidson, L. M., Fleming, I., and Baum, A. (1986). Post traumatic stress as a function of chronic stress and toxic exposure. In C. Figley (Ed.), Trauma and its wake (Vol. 2, pp. 57 - T7 ). New York: Brunner/Mazel.Google Scholar
- Gittus, J. H., et al. (1989). The Chernobyl accident and its consequences. London: UKAEA. Ivanov, E., and Tsyb, A. (1993). Cited in Nucleonics Week, 34(16),p. 1.Google Scholar
- Kleber, R. J., and Brom, D. (1992). Coping with trauma: Theory, prevention and treatment. Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
- Lifton, R. J. (1971). Death in life: Survivors of Hiroshima. New York: Random House. McCally, M. (1990). What the fight is all about. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 46, 10–14.Google Scholar
- Medvedev, Zh. (1990). The legacy of Chernobyl. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
- Mould, R. F. (1988). Chernobyl: The real story. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
- Park, C. C. (1989). Chernobyl: The long shadow. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Pennebaker, J. W. (1982). The psychology of physical symptoms. New York: Springer-Verlag. Shigematsu, I. (Ed.). (1991). The International Chernobyl Project-Technical report. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.Google Scholar
- Stiehm, E. R. (1992). The psychological fallout from Chernobyl. American Journal of Disease in Childhood, 146, 761–762.Google Scholar