Chapter Is coercion ever beneficent?

Early intervention in mental health seeks to improve the wellbeing of as many people as possible, by intervening at an early stage in the onset of illness, or by taking preventative action in ‘at risk’ populations. The paradigm is rhetorically powerful, and it is easy to talk in terms of it helping to deliver rights to health and realise social justice. However, in spite – or perhaps because – of the apparently unarguable desirability of such goals, it is harder to discuss rights to dissent. In this respect the risk of coercion is an issue that should be discussed, especially because of the stigmatizing effect that the labelling associated with early intervention may have in mental health contexts. Here we explore this issue, with a particular focus on its practical and ethical implications in relation to UK policy for treating Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and mild Conduct Disorder in young people

(De)humanization and (Dis)trust:Representations of Muslims in the UK Newspapers Following the 7/7 London Bombings

Dehumanization and distrust can have devastating consequences for intergroup relations. Until now, few studies have examined the ways in which both (de)humanizing and (dis)trustful discourse are presented in popular media. Recognizing the detrimental effects of terrorism on intergroup attitudes and the power of media in influencing social and political attitudes, the present research examined the frequency of (de)humanizing and (dis)trustful statements in newspaper coverage of the July 7, 2005, London bombings in the aftermath and at the 10-year anniversary of the attack. Drawing from theoretical work on dehumanization, it was expected that (de)humanizing content in media coverage about a stereotyped outgroup would be linked to (dis)trust of that group, and would also be linked to political orientation of the media source. Primary analyses were conducted using an existing manual coding framework for frequency of (de)humanizing and (dis)trustful statements. Results from the coding show that dehumanizing and distrusting discourse was more frequent than humanizing and trusting discourse. Whereas dehumanization was significantly correlated with distrust only in the right-wing source, humanization was significantly correlated with trust only in the left-wing source. The findings advance theoretical understandings of (de)humanization and humanization as they manifest in media discourse following a terrorist event, and how these relate to outgroup (dis)trust. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved) Public Significance Statement: An analysis of UK newspaper coverage of the 7/7 bombings in London revealed a high frequency of dehumanizing discourse about Muslims, particularly in the aftermath (compared to the 10-year anniversary). Further, results varied based on political orientation of the source, such that dehumanization of Muslims was associated with distrust in the right-wing news source, whereas humanization was associated with trust in the left-wing news source

(De)humanization and (Dis)trust: representations of Muslims in the UK newspapers following the 7/7 London bombings

Dehumanization and distrust can have devastating consequences for intergroup relations. Until now, few studies have examined the ways in which both (de)humanizing and (dis)trustful discourse are presented in popular media. Recognizing the detrimental effects of terrorism on intergroup attitudes and the power of media in influencing social and political attitudes, the present research examined the frequency of (de)humanizing and (dis)trustful statements in newspaper coverage of the July 7, 2005, London bombings in the aftermath and at the 10-year anniversary of the attack. Drawing from theoretical work on dehumanization, it was expected that (de)humanizing content in media coverage about a stereotyped outgroup would be linked to (dis)trust of that group, and would also be linked to political orientation of the media source. Primary analyses were conducted using an existing manual coding framework for frequency of (de)humanizing and (dis)trustful statements. Results from the coding show that dehumanizing and distrusting discourse was more frequent than humanizing and trusting discourse. Whereas dehumanization was significantly correlated with distrust only in the right-wing source, humanization was significantly correlated with trust only in the left-wing source. The findings advance theoretical understandings of (de)humanization and humanization as they manifest in media discourse following a terrorist event, and how these relate to outgroup (dis)trust. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved) Public Significance Statement: An analysis of UK newspaper coverage of the 7/7 bombings in London revealed a high frequency of dehumanizing discourse about Muslims, particularly in the aftermath (compared to the 10-year anniversary). Further, results varied based on political orientation of the source, such that dehumanization of Muslims was associated with distrust in the right-wing news source, whereas humanization was associated with trust in the left-wing news source

Two Poems by Friedrich Rückert translated by Alex McKeown.

Translations from the German of two poems by Friedrich Rückert (1788-1866). Both poems look back to the Persian poet Khwāja Shams-ud-Dīn Muḥammad Ḥāfeẓ-e Shīrāzī (1315-1390), commonly known as Hafiz. The first poem, 'Home', uses Hafiz's 'Takhallus' towards the end, but is an original poem by Rückert; the second, 'Bliss', is a translation of Rückert's translation from the Persian

Smarter Than Thou, Holier Than Thou: The Dynamic Interplay Between Cognitive and Moral Enhancement

The debate about the desirability of using drugs to enhance human skills encompasses cognitive abilities such as memory and attention, and moral capacities such as emotional empathy and a sense of fairness. These two strands of literature in bioethics have grown relatively independent from each other, and an implicit framing assumption has emerged suggesting that apparently morally neutral cognitive capacities and paradigmatically moral capacities are distinct and vary independently of each other. Here, we identify key distinctions between competing accounts of cognitive enhancement and moral enhancement and argue that, despite the polarized nature of the bioethical debate, cognitive and moral capacities are intertwined. For example, moral behavior can be improved by enhancing “morally neutral” abilities such as attention span; and cognitive skills can be honed by means of socio-moral interaction. Further, cognitive skill is frequently assigned the abstract status of virtue and treated in the same way as more paradigmatically “moral” traits. We argue that the distinction between moral and cognitive enhancement is more apparent than real, since despite being nominally treated as distinct, cognitive and moral skills are frequently interdependent. As such we present evidence to support the claim that the enhancement of these two kinds of capacities cannot be clearly disaggregated from each other in the way that the theoretical poles of the debate in the literature suggest. We synthesize relevant scientific and bioethical literature and combine it with a line of analysis derived from Peter Hacker to show more clearly the terms of what can be said intelligibly about cognitive and moral skills and their enhancement. As a result of this analysis, we conclude that ethical questions in human bioenhancement are only fully intelligible at the level of persons imbued with feelings, thoughts, intentions, desires, values, and abilities, embedded within a particular social context, rather than at the level of pharmacological modulation of particular cognitive or affective capacities which, though conceptually distinguishable, in the embodied context of moral agency are profoundly intertwined

Revalidation and quality assurance: the application of the MUSIQ framework in independent verification visits to healthcare organisations

Objectives We present a national evaluation of the impact of independent verification visits (IVVs) performed by National Health Service (NHS) England as part of quality assuring medical revalidation. Organisational visits are central to NHS quality assurance. They are costly, yet little empirical research evidence exists concerning their impact, and what does exist is conflicting. Setting The focus was on healthcare providers in the NHS (in secondary care) and private sector across England, who were designated bodies (DBs). DBs are healthcare organisations that have a statutory responsibility, via the lead clinician, the responsible officer (RO), to implement medical revalidation. Participants All ROs who had undergone an IVV in England in 2014 and 2015 were invited to participate. 46 ROs were interviewed. Ethnographic data were gathered at 18 observations of the IVVs and 20 IVV post visit reports underwent documentary analysis. Primary and secondary outcome measures Primary outcomes were the findings pertaining to the effectiveness of the IVV system in supporting the revalidation processes at the DBs. Secondary outcomes were methodological, relating to the Model for Understanding Success in Quality (MUSIQ) and how its application to the IVV reveals the relevance of contextual factors described in the model. Results The impact of the IVVs varied by DB according to three major themes: the personal context of the RO; the organisational context of the DB; and the visit and its impact. ROs were largely satisfied with visits which raised the status of appraisal within their organisations. Inadequate or untimely feedback was associated with dissatisfaction. Conclusions Influencing teams whose prime responsibility is establishing processes and evaluating progress was crucial for internal quality improvement. Visits acted as a nudge, generating internal quality review, which was reinforced by visit teams with relevant expertise. Diverse team membership, knowledge transfer and timely feedback made visits more impactful