Coronavirus in New York: Could We Have Been Better Prepared?

In early spring New York City is usually more exuberant than ever. New Yorkers and tourists throng the parks, and even the dingiest streets look inviting, festooned with pink and white blossoms.

This year, of course, everything is different. A week ago, when it still seemed reasonable to take the subway to Manhattan, I found Central Park nearly empty, the way it is on the coldest day of the year. In the following days, as the diagnosed cases in the city grew to nearly 10,000, I decided to stay in my neighborhood. I walked past the apartment buildings and shuttered shops, trying to keep my attention on the daffodils and crocuses instead of pedestrians in face masks.

With the number of cases on the rise, this week Governor Cuomo imposed further restrictions on individuals and businesses. Now, only businesses providing essential services are permitted to remain open, and parks will be monitored for violations of the social distancing rules. The authorities are scrambling to raise healthcare capacity in preparation for a spike in serious cases.

New Yorkers pride themselves on their resilience. They are quick to adapt to difficult situations, and many look for ways to assist those in need.

As closures, cancellations and social distancing became the new normal, my Facebook feed was flooded with clever memes, and radio programs started running long segments on ways to occupy ourselves within four walls.

Right now, that’s the best we can do. Despite technological advancements, we are still extremely vulnerable to infectious diseases. In past centuries these sorts of epidemics were regarded as natural disasters: unpredictable and deadly, like floods and earthquakes. People did what they could to survive them, but no one expected to prevent or reverse them. Though we’re loathe to admit it, in the U.S. we are now dealing with the coronavirus in a similar way.

Still, unlike in the case of an earthquake, U.S. authorities could have predicted the spread of the virus at least a month ahead of the first diagnosed cases. On Jan 23rd, China shut down Wuhan, a city with a population of 11 million. A week later, the W.H.O. declared a global health emergency, and in the last week of February coronavirus cases in Italy began to spike exponentially.

And yet in New York, it was business as usual. Few travel restrictions were put in place, and (as far as I know) no one instructed hospitals to prepare for what was happening overseas. Even when anxiety began to rise with the first U.S. diagnoses, the government was slow to react.

Teaching as an adjunct on two college campuses, I had no choice but follow the official guidelines. I took the subway, held classes, ate at fast-food restaurants even as these activities began to feel increasingly unsafe. As usual, students often came to class sick, and I also taught with a head cold for a few days in February. Having little job security, I’ve gotten used to coming to work with a sore throat or a runny nose, as many of my colleagues do.

In the past week, we’ve made radical changes to our routines, trying to avoid social contact as much as possible. We worry about the possibility of catching the virus by passing someone too closely on the street or touching any surface outside our homes. If anyone in a public so much as clears their throat we assume that they are infected and judge them for putting us at risk.

But the more than 15,000 cases that have been diagnosed in New York City so far haven’t appeared here overnight. I’m sure that many of them were here on the week of March 2nd, when everyone still went to work, and many social events were still taking place; or the week of March 9th when after two days of class and a Twitter offensive the City University system decided to close.

In holding off the shut down, I would like to believe that our political leaders, Governor Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio, were motivated by the same attachment to our ordinary, predictable lives that made the rest of us overlook the lessons of China and Italy. Yet even if this was so, if there was no political self-interest, I think that the politicians are still responsible for the scale of this disaster.

Despite the approachable images politicians strive to create, setting aside sentiment and faulty intuition is part of their jobs. Politicians have — or ought to have — experts who should help them make rational, informed decisions.

They did not make such decisions. Even if, given our democratic system, a full shut down wasn’t possible before the spread of COVID-19 within U.S. borders became evident, there were many measures leaders could have taken to slow the spread of the virus. Restricting large gatherings, moving university instruction online, ensuring sick workers could stay home with pay, and instructing business to implement telecommuting when possible — are all policies that could have been put in place without too much damage to the economy.

Right now we all need to focus on keeping ourselves and others safe. Ensuring that hospitals have enough beds and equipment, and that people who’ve lost their income can continue to live with dignity are our highest concerns.

But I hope that when the epidemic is over we can also learn some of the lessons that it has taught us about the government’s role in preparing for such disasters, and about our responsibility for each other’s safety and well-being in ordinary times.