When a breach is exposed, do we have a responsibility to see it? To shine a light and poke around? Search for what may have slipped through? Or are we better to let sleeping dogs die? And if not yet an actual breach, what is our responsibility to the potential? Do I look for cracks? Do I intentionally widen small cracks thus forcing power to see, in hope of repair and closure? Or by widening cracks, am I labeled an alarmist and do I lose credibility? In theory a breach is a breach. But what then if decisions are made (above my pay grade) to ignore the crack? To maintain status quo? To forego any search and rescue? Even if increased diligence results, is this enough?

This past week at work, in a new position, a potential breach introduced itself. At first management discouraged me from poking around because “it really isn’t our job.” It was not the way things had always been done. I took initiative and started poking around anyway. And in my role as alarmist, I found multiple alarming examples of neglect; or worse. And once the wanton disregard was exposed, management was suddenly on board. In the context of the circumstance, there were casualties; people got hurt. Search and rescue will be a delicate, difficult operation. In theory a breach is a breach. Yet here in the early stages, I have the impression that I am the proverbial messenger.

There are parallels. Look at our nation (work) and our government (management). We have a long history in which wanton disregard begets wanton disregard. So many have slipped through the cracks. So many inequities in housing, healthcare, childcare, education; too many to really, adequately count. And perhaps this is why we allow management (our government) to ignore the cracks, forego search and rescue, claim that efforts are underway, maintain status quo. We are overwhelmed. We are accustomed. We are complicit.