The investigation of allegations against Dr. Anna Pou of deliberately and lethally injecting patients in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina is one of enormous significance. In her piece, Sheri Fink explores through over a dozen sources and two years, the reasons the events tragically unfolded at Memorial Hospital, with 45 corpses being carried out by workers afterwards. Despite the gravity of such an occurrence, and seemingly undeniable firsthand testimonies against Pou, Sheri Fink remains a decisively neutral journalist. It seems evident that in this incredibly sensitive topic, Fink wished to avoid taking a side in the story at all costs.
In the eighth paragraph, Fink displays the nutgraf of her article, whereby she implores that whether or not Anna Pou was guilty or not takes a back seat to the potential consequences that may arise from the turnout of events. These are the questionable decision to leave the most ill patients as the last to be evacuated, and the notion that “Medical workers should be virtually immune from prosecution for good-faith work during devastating events…” Both questions, according to Fink, “deserve closer attention”, and seem to be the main point of her article.
Throughout the piece, Sheri Fink remains as neutral as possible. It would be easy for Fink to barrage Dr. Pou with allegations and testimonies, yet she adeptly juxtaposed each negative aspect with another positive, explaining Pou’s position and painting her as a sweet, respected, and capable woman placed into an unbearable and inescapable situation.
