Shyra Cabalatungan
Get a one (1) paragraph from an article in a reputable website and another from a book or
published material. Then, paraphrase it and put an appropriate in-text citation. Follow the table
below in encoding your answers.
ORIGINAL TEXT
Petrun Sayers, Elizabeth L. (22 May 2022) ‘We will
Article from a rise no matter what’: community perspectives of
Journal or a
disaster resilience following Hurricanes Irma and
Book Maria in Puerto Rico. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2022.2069473
‘We will rise no matter what’: community
perspectives of disaster resilience following
Hurricanes Irma and Maria in Puerto Rico
On 20 September 2017, category 4 Hurricane Maria
made landfall in the southeastern part of Puerto
Rico as it plowed across the territory with
sustained winds of 155 mph. Maria arrived only
two weeks after the eye of category 5 storm
Hurricane Irma passed north of the island, leaving
about two-thirds of Puerto Rico's population
without power and one-third without clean water
(Scott, 2018). The hurricanes severely damaged
public buildings, commercial businesses, residential
homes, cellular sites, and transportation systems.
The catastrophic damage resulted in a
humanitarian crisis in which 2975 residents lost
their lives (George Washington University
[GWU], 2018). An estimated 130,000 people left
Puerto Rico after the hurricanes (Sutter, 2018).
The resulting government response became the
largest federal response to a domestic disaster in
the history of the United States (U.S. Federal
Emergency Management Agency [FEMA], 2018).
Due to an active hurricane season and a stretched
federal budget, Puerto Rican officials experienced
challenges procuring aid from other states, and
Puerto Rico's geographical distance from the
contiguous United States complicated matters
(Government of Puerto Rico [GPR], 2018). During
the devastation, Puerto Rican residents struggled
to access adequate medical care, many lost their
jobs, schools were closed, and they lived in
damaged homes or shelters while access to
electricity, food, water, and other necessities
BSHM-1A
PARAPHRASED TEXT
‘We will rise no matter what’: community
perspectives of disaster resilience following
Hurricanes Irma and Maria in Puerto Rico
Category 4 Hurricane Maria made landfall
in the southeastern region of Puerto Rico
on September 20, 2017, with sustained
winds of 155 miles per hour. Only two
weeks after Hurricane Irma's eye passed
north of the island, leaving two-thirds of
Puerto Rico's population without power
and one-third without potable water,
Maria came (Scott, 2018). Public
buildings, commercial businesses, private
dwellings, cellular sites, and transit
infrastructure were all severely destroyed
by the hurricanes. The devastating
devastation triggered a humanitarian
disaster, with 2975 people losing their
lives (George Washington University
[GWU], 2018). Following the disasters, an
estimated 130,000 individuals fled Puerto
Rico (Sutter, 2018).
The government response that resulted
became the largest federal response to a
domestic tragedy in US history (U.S.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
[FEMA], 2018). Puerto Rican officials had
difficulty obtaining relief from other
states due to an active hurricane season
and a stretched federal budget, and the
island's geographic remoteness from the
continental United States compounded
matters (Government of Puerto Rico
[GPR], 2018). Residents of Puerto Rico
struggled to get proper medical care after
the disaster; many lost their jobs, schools

remained scarce.
Several years following the hurricanes, the
recovery is far from complete. In August 2018,
Puerto Rican officials submitted a congressionally
mandated strategic plan describing desired
investments totaling $139 billion dollars to ensure
the future of Puerto Rico (GPR, 2018). As of
December 2021, Puerto Rico received over $22
billion dollars with nearly $77 billion dollars
allocated to date (Central Office for Recovery,
Reconstruction, and Resiliency, 2021). Estimations
for Puerto Rico's complete recovery range
anywhere from a couple of years to well over a
decade (GPR, 2018).
This paper explores the community resilience in
Puerto Rico during the recovery phase as related to
perceptions of communication from community
leaders and residents following Hurricanes Irma
and Maria. Findings from community workshops,
focus groups, and interviews are used to draw
conclusions about the state of Puerto Rico. This
work was completed prior to additional disasters
affecting Puerto Rico, including earthquakes and
Coronavirus (COVID-19).
ORIGINAL TEXT
Shifting From Survival
Stark, A. M., White, A. E., Rotter, N. S., &
Basu, A. (2020). Shifting from survival to
Internet
to Supporting
supporting resilience in children and families
in the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons for
Article Resilience in Children
informing U.S. mental health priorities.
https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000781
and Families in the
Shifting From Survival to COVID-19 Pandemic:
Supporting Resilience in Lessons for Informing
Children and Families in U.S. Mental Health
were shuttered, and they lived in
damaged homes or shelters with limited
access to electricity, food, water, and
other necessities.
The recovery from the hurricanes has
taken several years and is still not
complete. Puerto Rican government
released a congressionally mandated
strategic plan in August 2018 detailing
$139 billion in desired investments to
safeguard the island's future (GPR, 2018).
Puerto Rico had received about $22
billion dollars as of December 2021, with
nearly $77 billion dollars allocated to
date (Central Office for Recovery,
Reconstruction, and Resiliency, 2021).
The estimated time for Puerto Rico's full
recovery ranges from a few years to well
over a decade (GPR, 2018).
This research examines community
resilience in Puerto Rico throughout the
recovery phase as it relates to community
leaders' and residents' perceptions of
communication following Hurricanes
Irma and Maria. Conclusions about the
state of Puerto Rico are based on findings
from community workshops, focus
groups, and interviews. This work was
accomplished before other tragedies
struck Puerto Rico, such as earthquakes
and the Coronavirus (COVID-19).
PARAPHRASED TEXT
the COVID-19
Pandemic: Lessons for
Informing U.S. Mental
Health Priorities
From within the turmoil of the current
coronavirus disease (COVID-19), there is an
emerging shift from coping with the
immediate impact of this generation-defining
experience to planning for the prolonged
transition to what will likely be a new normal.
Although available data suggest relatively
low risk for children developing severe
COVID-19 medical complications (Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC],
2020), the mental health impact of the
pandemic is an imminent public health
challenge. Most mental disorders begin in
childhood (Cree et al., 2018). Prior studies
suggest that experiencing mass disasters
and economic recession are associated with
increased risk for mental health disorders
(Golberstein, Wen, & Miller, 2020; Sprang &
Silman, 2013). Whereas environmental
stressors can increase children’s
susceptibility to mental health problems,
multiple protective factors offer opportunities
to promote children’s resilience, that is, the
capacity for positive adaptation in the face of
adversity. Resilience as a process
(Rosenberg, 2020) is a function of individual,
familial, and systemic factors (Masten,
2001). Here we consider implications for
U.S. clinical practice and policies based on
established risk and protective factors.
Factors such as anxiety
sensitivity (e.g., Marshall, Miles, & Stewart,
2010), antecedent mental health concerns
(Copeland, Shanahan, Costello, & Angold,
2009), medical conditions (e.g., CDC, 2020),
and a history of trauma (Nishith, Mechanic, &
Resick, 2000) are risk factors for
developing mental disorders. In contrast,
caregiving characterized by responsiveness,
warmth, structure, and monitoring confers
powerful protection (National Scientific
Council on the Developing Child,
2004; Southwick, Bonanno, Masten, Panter-
Priorities
Within the chaos of the current
coronavirus disease (COVID-19), a shift is
happening from dealing with the
immediate effects of this generation-
defining event to planning for the longer
transition to what will most likely be a
new normal. Although present statistics
imply a modest probability of serious
COVID-19 medical consequences in
children (Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention [CDC], 2020), the pandemic's
mental health impact is an impending
public health threat. The majority of
mental illnesses begin in childhood (Cree
et al., 2018). According to previous
research, mass disasters and economic
recession are linked to an elevated
incidence of mental health disorders
(Golberstein, Wen, & Miller, 2020; Sprang
& Silman, 2013). While environmental
stresses might raise children's
susceptibility to mental health disorders,
a variety of protective variables can help
children develop resilience, or the ability
to adjust positively in the face of
adversity. Individual, familial, and
systemic variables all contribute to
resilience as a process (Rosenberg, 2020).
(Masten, 2001). Based on proven risk and
protective factors, we evaluate the
implications for clinical practice and
policy in the United States. Factors such
as anxiety sensitivity (e.g., Marshall,
Miles, & Stewart, 2010), antecedent
mental health concerns (Copeland,
Shanahan, Costello, & Angold, 2009),
medical conditions (e.g., CDC, 2020),
and a history of trauma (Nishith,
Mechanic, & Resick, 2000) are risk
factors for developing mental disorders.
In contrast, caregiving characterized by
responsiveness, warmth, structure, and
monitoring confers powerful protection
(National Scientific Council on the
Developing Child, 2004; Southwick,
Bonanno, Masten, Panter-Brick, &
Brick, & Yehuda, 2014). Social support (e.g.,
caring relationships with adults and peers)
has also been shown to be protective for
children and families in the context of mass
disasters and pandemics (Earls, Raviola, &
Carlson, 2008; Pfefferbaum, Jacobs,
Houston, & Griffin, 2015). Neighborhood
quality and access to sufficient social
services and health care are important
systems-level protective factors in youth
(Ellis, Bianchi, Griskevicius, & Frankenhuis,
2017; Jenson & Fraser, 2015; Masten &
Powell, 2003).
However, pandemic-specific stressors may
undermine typical protective factors. In
addition to the stress of safeguarding familial
physical health from the novel coronavirus,
stay-at-home orders and public health
recommendations for physical distancing
have reduced access to a range of support
systems for children and families. Foremost,
the increased demands on parents and the
corresponding rise in parenting stress has
been apparent. Supporting children’s
academic goals through online distance
learning and reduced access to childcare
(e.g., through kinship care or daycare),
whereas coping with potential employment-
related transitions or losses are some of the
immediate concerns for parents. Schools,
sports teams, after-school programs, and
faith-based organizations provide children
with structure and opportunities for mastery
(Durlak & Weissberg, 2007). Although most
children may not suffer deleterious
psychological outcomes because of a
temporary loss of access to these
opportunities, the impact of prolonged
uncertainty and lack of socialization, skill-
based learning, social support, and reduced
physical activity may increase children’s
emotional distress and parenting challenges.
In addition, with more than 56,000 fatalities
to date in the United States alone (CDC,
2020), many families are grieving the loss of
loved ones, often without being able to
engage in traditional end-of-life rituals (e.g.,
in-person funerals) or access to typical
support systems. Finally, policy-relevant
organizations (American Academy of
Pediatrics, 2020; American Psychological
Association, 2020) also underscore that
increased parental stress, physical isolation,
Yehuda, 2014). Social support (e.g.,
caring relationships with adults and
peers) has also been shown to be
protective for children and families in
the context of mass disasters and
pandemics (Earls, Raviola, & Carlson,
2008; Pfefferbaum, Jacobs, Houston, &
Griffin, 2015). In youth, neighborhood
quality and access to adequate social
and health services are crucial system-
level protective factors (Ellis, Bianchi,
Griskevicius, & Frankenhuis, 2017;
Jenson & Fraser, 2015; Masten &
Powell, 2003).
Pandemic-specific stressors, on the
other hand, may impair traditional
protective factors. Stay-at-home orders
and public health recommendations for
physical distancing have decreased
access to a variety of support systems
for children and families, in addition to
the stress of protecting familial physical
health from the new coronavirus. The
growing expectations on parents, as
well as the resulting increase in
parenting stress, have been obvious.
Supporting children's academic
aspirations through online distance
learning and limited childcare options
(e.g., kinship care or daycare), as well
as coping with future job transfers or
losses, are some of the urgent issues
for parents. Structure and opportunity
for mastery are provided by schools,
sports teams, after-school programs,
and faith-based organizations for
youngsters (Durlak & Weissberg, 2007).
Although most children may not
experience negative psychological
consequences as a result of a
temporary loss of these opportunities,
the impact of prolonged uncertainty and
a lack of socialization, skill-based
learning, social support, and physical
activity on children's emotional distress
and parenting challenges may increase.
Furthermore, with over 56,000 deaths in
the United States alone (CDC, 2020),
many families are grieving the loss of
loved ones, frequently without access to
traditional end-of-life rituals (e.g., in-
person funerals) or traditional support
systems. Finally, policy-relevant
and surging unemployment rates may also
increase familial stress and risk for domestic
violence and child maltreatment.
Of note, families from minority and
underresourced communities are likely to be
disproportionately affected by the pandemic.
Crowded housing conditions (Valentino
DeVries, Lu, & Dance, 2020), working
essential or front-line jobs (e.g., grocery
store, public transportation), and even
preexisting medical risks (e.g., prevalence of
cardiometabolic diseases; Havranek et al.,
2015) that increase exposure or vulnerability
to COVID-19 could reflect psychosocial
precipitants. Additionally, differential access
to health care resources (e.g., Reiss, 2013),
mistrust of health systems, and beliefs about
mental health that impact engagement with
care (Abraído-Lanza et al., 2007; Jimenez,
Bartels, Cardenas, Dhaliwal, & Alegría,
2012) may exacerbate existing health
disparities.
Supporting children’s positive adaptation in
the context of the pandemic requires
immediate and planful alignment of mental
health practices and policies that support
children and their caregiver(s) and the
multiple systems (e.g., schools) within which
they live and develop. This has at least four
implications. First, recognizing children’s and
parents’ mental health needs must be a
public health mandate. Family-
centered mental health services that
prioritize whole-child and whole-person
assessments, including both mental health
and physical health needs, are important and
entail close care coordination between child
and adult mental health providers (Shonkoff
& Fisher, 2013). Second, policy and
precision medicine models will have to
implement tailored programs for those who
need long-term monitoring and differential
support that account for existing disparities
in health (e.g., Figueroa, Frakt, & Jha, 2020).
Third, improving long-term access to mental
health services is critical. Increased access
through telemedicine could be one solution.
However, planning efforts must carefully
consider additional solutions so as not to
exacerbate existing disparities in access to
technological solutions for underresourced
communities. Fourth, addressing mental
health concerns would entail short-term and
organizations (American Academy of
Pediatrics, 2020; American
Psychological Association, 2020) point
out that increased parental stress,
physical isolation, and rising
unemployment rates may all contribute
to family stress, as well as the risk of
domestic violence and child
maltreatment.
It's worth noting that families from
underserved and minority areas are
likely to be disproportionately affected
by the pandemic. Working vital or front-
line jobs, crowded housing situations
(Valentino DeVries, Lu, & Dance, 2020).
(e.g., grocery store, public
transportation), Preexisting medical
risks (e.g., the prevalence of
cardiometabolic disorders; Havranek et
al., 2015) that enhance COVID-19
exposure or vulnerability could be due
to psychosocial factors. Furthermore,
disparities in access to health care
resources (e.g., Reiss, 2013), mistrust
of health systems, and beliefs about
mental health that influence
engagement with care (Abrado-Lanza
et al., 2007; Jimenez, Bartels,
Cardenas, Dhaliwal, & Alegra, 2012)
may exacerbate existing health
disparities.
Supporting children's positive
adaptation in the face of the pandemic
necessitates the urgent and deliberate
alignment of mental health practices
and policies that assist children and
their caregivers, as well as the various
systems (e.g., schools) in which they
live and develop. This has at least four
consequences.
First and foremost, public health
mandates must recognize children's
and parents' mental health
requirements. Family-centered mental
health services that stress whole-child
and whole-person assessments,
covering both mental and physical
health issues, are critical, and they
necessitate strong collaboration
between child and adult mental health
practitioners (Shonkoff & Fisher, 2013).
Second, policy and precision medicine
models will need to develop customized
long-term solutions. Prior intervention efforts
after mass disasters suggest that
psychological first aid is effective (Everly &
Flynn, 2006; McCabe et al., 2014). Longer-
term solutions across multiple systems may
include capacity building by providing family-
based, trauma-informed trainings for current
mental health trainees who will be joining the
workforce, and also for school-based
personnel, who serve as the primary point of
service for mental health care for many
children in the United States (Ali et al.,
2019). Similarly, provision of mental health
services through primary care settings may
also be considered (Dayton et al., 2016).
Additional steps may include evaluating
licensure reciprocity across state lines or
within specific regions for mental health
providers.
The potential mental health burden of the
COVID-19 pandemic is evident. Promoting
children’s mental health resilience to the
pandemic is dependent on building systemic
resilience, through timely mental health
interventions and policies.
programs for those who require long-
term monitoring and differential support,
taking into consideration current health
inequities (e.g., Figueroa, Frakt, & Jha,
2020). Third, it is vital to improve long-
term access to mental health care. One
way could be to increase access
through telemedicine. However, new
solutions must be carefully considered
in planning efforts so that current
inequities in access to technological
solutions for underserved groups are
not exacerbated. Fourth, dealing with
mental health issues would necessitate
both short- and long-term solutions.
Psychological first aid has been shown
to be beneficial in the aftermath of
major disasters in the past (Everly &
Flynn, 2006; McCabe et al., 2014).
Longer-term solutions across multiple
systems could include building capacity
by providing family-based, trauma-
informed trainings for current and
incoming mental health trainees, as well
as school-based personnel, who serve
as the primary point of service for
mental health care for many children in
the United States (Ali et al.,2019).
Similarly, mental health therapies
delivered through primary care settings
should be considered (Dayton et al.,
2016). Additional stages could include
considering licensing reciprocity for
mental health physicians across state
lines or within specified regions.
The COVID-19 pandemic's potential
mental health impact is clear. Building
systemic resilience through timely
mental health interventions and policies
is essential for promoting children's
mental health resilience in the face of
the epidemic.