I have my personal interest in researching the topic of individual autonomy before, during and after the nuclear disaster, it’s repercussion on safety of individuals and groups. I touch such concepts as individual autonomy, rules, safety, independence. The aim of this study is to understand the boundaries of person's autonomy vs following the set of rules and guidelines in a sudden, critical and under-explored situation.

Autonomy is a special type of freedom

Individual autonomy is about a person's ability to act on his or her own values and interests. Autonomy relies on the agency of a moral being to exercise his or her own decisions about his or her being.

Autonomy of a human during, before and after the nuclear disaster may be substantially limited. Freedom of action as well as freedom of the will is limited by rules and instructions applicable in the extreme situation of a disaster, also by external circumstances such as radiation, fires, destroyed infrastructure, informational uncertainty.

---

My grandfather was one of liquidators of the Chernobyl disaster. He was at the station overall 4 times during the first year after the explosion, dealing with it's outcomes as an engineer. His first trip to Chernobyl was within the first weeks after the catastrophe, basically when the events of the Netflix series “Chernobyl" take place, he was there as well and saw everything from the inside with his own eyes. His mission was classified so there were not many facts he could share with me. However, when I asked him, why, in his opinion the Chernobyl catastrophe happened at all, his answer was…"human arrogance”.

---

By that he meant responsible persons acting against the set rules, allowing the shutdown of security levels that lead to inevitable and unstoppable reaction within a fraction of seconds, devastating lives, nature and overall world safety for years to come.

What level of autonomy might these decision makers have?

The trilemma

Disaster as a new abrupt context may promote or constrain individual autonomy. In the trilemma or an “impossible trinity” below, only two positions can be pursued at the same time.

1.Rules and Instructions

---

*
There was a turtle by the name of Bert
*

*and Bert the turtle was very alert;
*

when danger threatened him he never got hurt

t
he knew just what to do

---

Duck and Cover

To educate children and public on how to protect themselves in case of an attack during the Cold War a short educational film and school drills were introduced in 1950s. “Duck and Cover” features Burt the Turtle facing danger and protecting himself by two simple actions: dropping to the ground (duck) and finding the shelter (cover). In case of an attack children should do the same: lay under their desks and cover their heads and necks with hands. The film also shows different cases when children and young people in groups and individually apply the Duck and Cover action plan in different situations.

The Duck and Cover rules were mocked and even considered manipulative, created to scare americans with the Soviet threat.

The difficulty in following even simple rules lies in people’s natural instinct to run from danger and reunify with family members. Overcoming these instincts requires preparation and education as part of public communications and schooling.

2. Safety

And still, would these simple actions actually save anyone in case of a nuclear explosion?

The advice to cover your head with anything available, like a picnic blanket and newspaper shown in the short film may seem absurd at first when one considers the capabilities of a nuclear weapon and radiation. But even a thin barrier such as cloth can reduce the severity of burns on the skin from the thermal radiation.

Some examples of Nagasaki survivors show that even the slightest barrier between you and the radiation may save you.

Akiko Takakura survived the effects of a 16 kt atomic bomb at a distance of 300 meters from the hypocenter, with only minor injuries, due in most part to her position in the lobby of the bank of Japan, a reinforced concrete building, at the time of the nuclear explosion.[16][17] In contrast, the unknown person sitting outside, fully exposed, on the steps of the Sumitomo bank, next door to the bank of Japan, received third-degree burns and was then likely killed by the blast, in that order, within 2 seconds.

Would this person be saved from death or at lest reduced the severity of exposure if he knew and followed the Duck and Cover rule?

3.Independence

What is the possible level of independence in someone’s actions when it comes to surviving a nuclear disaster? You have to act in a sudden, abrupt situation, against your instincts, in a limited time (seconds).

Although there are strict, science- and evidence-backed rules on how to act when the nuclear explosion takes you by surprise, the decisions one makes in this situation depend on the level of personal autonomy. There are also such factors as variability in personal traits, how individuals detect and evaluate threats, importance to comply with social norms and time-pressure.

Robots go where humans cannot: autonomy and technology

Uncrewed vehicles with special equipment can detect radiation. Drones can relatively quickly survey large areas, reach out to dangerous or difficult to enter zones. They can fly into structures, be programmed to repeat routs, so that humans can collect and compare data about radiation levels before visiting such objects, remaining protected from unnecessary exposure to radiation.

Robots can play an important role in recovery operations where rescue teams may be in danger, however robots currently used are limited in their ability to interact and cooperate with humans. Autonomy of rescue robots still to be developed.

When Fucusima disaster occured, Japan had no robots, able to enter the debris of nuclear reactor. Five years after the accident, however, robots are finally ready to enter the ruined reactors en masse. They are now expected to play an essential part in the daunting task of decontaminating and dismantling the reactors.

In my opinion robots make a huge change in the aspect of safety after the nuclear disaster, they follow the rules because this is how they are made. Nut how about their independence in making decisions, when it comes to saving irregular human beings with their irregular behaviour?