an article by Mary Kaldor published in Eurozine
Dialogue between western European peace movements and human rights groups in the East made a crucial contribution to overcoming the division of the continent and laid the foundations for a global language of transnational civil society and humanitarianism.
The argument that ’89 was all about ‘catching up’ with the West overlooks this history.
Continue reading
Showing posts with label human_rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label human_rights. Show all posts
Wednesday, 4 December 2019
Friday, 15 November 2019
Do disabled people need a stronger social model: a social model of human rights?
an article by Maria Berghs (De Montfort University, Leicester, UK), Karl Atkin (University of York, UK) and Chris Hatton and Carol Thomas (Furness College, Lancaster University, UK) published in Disability & Society Volume 34 Issue 7-8 (2019)
Abstract
We introduce the social model of disability by reflecting on its origins and legacy, with particular reference to the work of the Union of the Physically Impaired against Segregation.
We argue that there has been a gradual rolling back of the rights and entitlements associated with the social model of disability. Yet no alternative for the social model has been proposed in response to such threats to disabled people’s human rights.
Disabled people need a stronger social model that acts as a means to a society which enables and ensures their rights; the right to live a dignified life, as well as to live in an environment that enables people to flourish with disability.
Full text (PDF 7pp)
Abstract
We introduce the social model of disability by reflecting on its origins and legacy, with particular reference to the work of the Union of the Physically Impaired against Segregation.
We argue that there has been a gradual rolling back of the rights and entitlements associated with the social model of disability. Yet no alternative for the social model has been proposed in response to such threats to disabled people’s human rights.
Disabled people need a stronger social model that acts as a means to a society which enables and ensures their rights; the right to live a dignified life, as well as to live in an environment that enables people to flourish with disability.
Full text (PDF 7pp)
Thursday, 14 November 2019
The war on rough sleeping: On the criminalization of homelessness in Hungary
an article by Vera Kovács published in Eurozine
Abstract
The criminalization of homelessness was written into the Hungarian constitution in 2018, which caused international uproar and condemnation by the UN. But punitive measures are not a speciality of the Orbán government. Many European countries have taken similar steps. But only Hungary has made a specific social situation – ‘habitually staying in a public space’ – a criminal offence punishable by jail. Though recent elections have shown some room for change, expectations remain low.
Continue reading
Abstract
The criminalization of homelessness was written into the Hungarian constitution in 2018, which caused international uproar and condemnation by the UN. But punitive measures are not a speciality of the Orbán government. Many European countries have taken similar steps. But only Hungary has made a specific social situation – ‘habitually staying in a public space’ – a criminal offence punishable by jail. Though recent elections have shown some room for change, expectations remain low.
Continue reading
Thursday, 14 February 2019
Expanding the Impact of the Psychology of Working: Engaging Psychology in the Struggle for Decent Work and Human Rights
an article by David L. Blustein and Maureen E. Kenny (Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA), Annamaria Di Fabio (University of Florence, Firenze, Italy) and Jean Guichard (Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers (Paris), France) published in Journal of Career Assessment Volume 27 Issue 1 (February 2019)
Abstract
Building on new developments in the psychology of working framework (PWF) and psychology of working theory (PWT), this article proposes a rationale and research agenda for applied psychologists and career development professionals to contribute to the many challenges related to human rights and decent work. Recent and ongoing changes in the world are contributing to a significant loss of decent work, including a rise of unemployment, underemployment, and precarious work across the globe.
By failing to satisfy human needs for economic survival, social connection, and self-determination, the loss of decent work undermines individual and societal well-being, particularly for marginalized groups and those without highly marketable skills.
Informed by innovations in the PWF/PWT, we offer exemplary research agendas that focus on examining the psychological meaning and impact of economic and social protections, balancing caregiving work and market work, making work more just, and enhancing individual capacities for coping and adapting to changes in the world of work.
These examples are intended to stimulate new ideas and initiatives for psychological research that will inform and enhance efforts pertaining to work as a human right.
Abstract
Building on new developments in the psychology of working framework (PWF) and psychology of working theory (PWT), this article proposes a rationale and research agenda for applied psychologists and career development professionals to contribute to the many challenges related to human rights and decent work. Recent and ongoing changes in the world are contributing to a significant loss of decent work, including a rise of unemployment, underemployment, and precarious work across the globe.
By failing to satisfy human needs for economic survival, social connection, and self-determination, the loss of decent work undermines individual and societal well-being, particularly for marginalized groups and those without highly marketable skills.
Informed by innovations in the PWF/PWT, we offer exemplary research agendas that focus on examining the psychological meaning and impact of economic and social protections, balancing caregiving work and market work, making work more just, and enhancing individual capacities for coping and adapting to changes in the world of work.
These examples are intended to stimulate new ideas and initiatives for psychological research that will inform and enhance efforts pertaining to work as a human right.
Wednesday, 18 April 2018
Here’s Why Human Rights in Healthcare Are Needed More Than Ever
a post by Ruth Campbell for Rights Info: Human Rights News, Views & Info
Image Credit: Ken Treloar / Unsplash
My Grandpa is getting old. Last year after a particularly bad fall, he spent four months in hospital.
The tall, slim man with coal black hair who used to be able to haul a whole sheep on his back across the family steading can’t move as quickly as he used to. His memory has been getting worse and worse – although he can still recall with alarming precision all of the grammar rules he learned at school.
When he was born in 1928, it would still be two whole decades before anyone had even heard of the NHS. His mother gave birth to him at home, with no doctor present so they didn’t have to pay for it.
A Growing Impact in Healthcare
He’ll be 90 this year, and has lived through medical, technological, and social changes which have revolutionised healthcare.
He’s seen diseases eradicated, hip replacements, heart transplants, IVF, medical technology advancing at a rate unfathomable for someone born in a house without electricity.
What he might not realise – indeed he might be the first to tell you, despite my best efforts, that human rights are only for terrorists and criminals – is that he’s also been witness to the growing impact of human rights in healthcare throughout his lifetime.
Continue reading
Image Credit: Ken Treloar / Unsplash
My Grandpa is getting old. Last year after a particularly bad fall, he spent four months in hospital.
The tall, slim man with coal black hair who used to be able to haul a whole sheep on his back across the family steading can’t move as quickly as he used to. His memory has been getting worse and worse – although he can still recall with alarming precision all of the grammar rules he learned at school.
When he was born in 1928, it would still be two whole decades before anyone had even heard of the NHS. His mother gave birth to him at home, with no doctor present so they didn’t have to pay for it.
A Growing Impact in Healthcare
He’ll be 90 this year, and has lived through medical, technological, and social changes which have revolutionised healthcare.
He’s seen diseases eradicated, hip replacements, heart transplants, IVF, medical technology advancing at a rate unfathomable for someone born in a house without electricity.
What he might not realise – indeed he might be the first to tell you, despite my best efforts, that human rights are only for terrorists and criminals – is that he’s also been witness to the growing impact of human rights in healthcare throughout his lifetime.
Continue reading
Tuesday, 17 April 2018
Reasonable Accommodation as a Gateway to the Equal Enjoyment of Human Rights: From New York to Strasbourg
an article by Delia Ferri (Department of Law, Maynooth University, Ireland) Social Inclusion Volume 6 Number 1 (2018)
Abstract
The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) explicitly embeds the concept of reasonable accommodation within the principle of non-discrimination. Article 2 of the CRPD unambiguously recognizes that reasonable accommodation is vital in enabling persons with disabilities to enjoy and exercise their rights on an equal basis with others.
This article argues that in the ten years since its entry into force, the CRPD has stimulated a process of cross-fertilization. In particular, it contends that the CRPD has played a crucial role in the advancement of disability equality, and in the recognition of reasonable accommodation as a gateway to the equal enjoyment of all human rights within the European human rights system.
By adopting a legal perspective and a traditional doctrinal approach, this article focuses on relevant European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law. It shows the gradual adoption by the ECtHR of the concept of reasonable accommodation as an essential element to remove specific barriers or disadvantages to which a particular disabled individual would otherwise be subject.
The primary emphasis of this short article is on the ECtHR case law and on the extent to which it has translated the CRPD and the work of the CRPD Committee into the European human rights system.
Full text (PDF 11pp)
Abstract
The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) explicitly embeds the concept of reasonable accommodation within the principle of non-discrimination. Article 2 of the CRPD unambiguously recognizes that reasonable accommodation is vital in enabling persons with disabilities to enjoy and exercise their rights on an equal basis with others.
This article argues that in the ten years since its entry into force, the CRPD has stimulated a process of cross-fertilization. In particular, it contends that the CRPD has played a crucial role in the advancement of disability equality, and in the recognition of reasonable accommodation as a gateway to the equal enjoyment of all human rights within the European human rights system.
By adopting a legal perspective and a traditional doctrinal approach, this article focuses on relevant European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law. It shows the gradual adoption by the ECtHR of the concept of reasonable accommodation as an essential element to remove specific barriers or disadvantages to which a particular disabled individual would otherwise be subject.
The primary emphasis of this short article is on the ECtHR case law and on the extent to which it has translated the CRPD and the work of the CRPD Committee into the European human rights system.
Full text (PDF 11pp)
The political economy of human rights organizations’ codes of ethics
an article by Saif AlZahir (University of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada) and Han Donker and John Nofsinger (University of Alaska Anchorage, USA) published in Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society Volume 16 Issue 1 (2018)
Abstract
Purpose
This paper scrutinizes the impact of socioeconomic, political, legal and religious factors on the internal ethical values of human rights organizations (HROs) worldwide. The authors aim to examine the Code of Ethics for 279 HROs in 67 countries and the social and legal settings in which they operate.
Design/methodology/approach
Using the framework of protect, respect and remedy, the authors look for keywords that represent the human rights lexicon in these three areas. In the protection of human rights, the authors select the terms: peace, transparency, freedom and security. For the respect of humans, the authors use the terms: dignity, equality, respect and rights. Sources of remedies come from justice and ethics. The analysis seeks to determine what political economy settings drive the ethical value choices of the organizations. Those choices are proxied by those keywords they mention in their Code of Ethics.
Findings
The analysis show that the scope of ethical values mentioned are higher when the HRO is in a country with more domestic violence, lower income inequality, French civil or Islamic legal origin and higher trust in politicians. In regard to the determinants of the ten keywords individually, the authors conclude that the status of the socioeconomic, political, religious and legal settings impact with local HROs mention each of the keywords: peace, justice, transparency, dignity, equality, ethics, respect, freedom, security and rights.
Research limitations/implications
The analysis is based on HROs that have a webpage in English and list the employee Code of Conduct.
Originality/value
This study is the first to examine the Code of Ethics for HROs. The authors demonstrate that country-specific characteristics help to drive their internal ethical values.
Abstract
Purpose
This paper scrutinizes the impact of socioeconomic, political, legal and religious factors on the internal ethical values of human rights organizations (HROs) worldwide. The authors aim to examine the Code of Ethics for 279 HROs in 67 countries and the social and legal settings in which they operate.
Design/methodology/approach
Using the framework of protect, respect and remedy, the authors look for keywords that represent the human rights lexicon in these three areas. In the protection of human rights, the authors select the terms: peace, transparency, freedom and security. For the respect of humans, the authors use the terms: dignity, equality, respect and rights. Sources of remedies come from justice and ethics. The analysis seeks to determine what political economy settings drive the ethical value choices of the organizations. Those choices are proxied by those keywords they mention in their Code of Ethics.
Findings
The analysis show that the scope of ethical values mentioned are higher when the HRO is in a country with more domestic violence, lower income inequality, French civil or Islamic legal origin and higher trust in politicians. In regard to the determinants of the ten keywords individually, the authors conclude that the status of the socioeconomic, political, religious and legal settings impact with local HROs mention each of the keywords: peace, justice, transparency, dignity, equality, ethics, respect, freedom, security and rights.
Research limitations/implications
The analysis is based on HROs that have a webpage in English and list the employee Code of Conduct.
Originality/value
This study is the first to examine the Code of Ethics for HROs. The authors demonstrate that country-specific characteristics help to drive their internal ethical values.
Saturday, 31 March 2018
Turns Out Spies Are Above the Law
an article by Theodore Stone for Rights Info (Human Rights News, Views & Info)
If there’s one thing we know about human rights and the law, it’s that no one is above it, right? Turns out, that’s not quite true.
The government has recently revealed that agents of The Security Service, more famously known as MI5, are allowed to carry out criminal activity within the United Kingdom.
The Prime Minister, Theresa May, has published a previously secret order on the governance of crimes committed by the Service. The order, known as the ‘Third Direction’, which dates back to 2014, instructs the Investigatory Powers Commission to oversee “security service participation in criminality”.
This is the first time the government has acknowledged that guidance exists to regulate this form of activity within the UK. However, the guidance concerning when British spies can commit crimes, and how far they can go, remains confidential.
Continue reading
There are many links to further information.
If there’s one thing we know about human rights and the law, it’s that no one is above it, right? Turns out, that’s not quite true.
The government has recently revealed that agents of The Security Service, more famously known as MI5, are allowed to carry out criminal activity within the United Kingdom.
The Prime Minister, Theresa May, has published a previously secret order on the governance of crimes committed by the Service. The order, known as the ‘Third Direction’, which dates back to 2014, instructs the Investigatory Powers Commission to oversee “security service participation in criminality”.
This is the first time the government has acknowledged that guidance exists to regulate this form of activity within the UK. However, the guidance concerning when British spies can commit crimes, and how far they can go, remains confidential.
Continue reading
There are many links to further information.
Friday, 23 March 2018
Where Do Our Rights Go When We Die?
a post by Harvey Slade and Ellie Collins for the Rights Info blog (Human Rights News, Views and Info)
Advances in medicine have meant that we’ve had to redefine what death is. It used to be easy – you were dead if your heart stopped working; if you couldn’t breathe. But now, we can restart hearts, and machines can breathe for you until you’re ready to take over again.
One neurologist says that “clinical death” doesn’t even have a consistent meaning. “You’re dead when your doctor says you’re dead,” apparently.
Life increasingly exists where previously it wouldn’t. The line of death is being pushed back – but what does death do to your rights?
Continue reading
Advances in medicine have meant that we’ve had to redefine what death is. It used to be easy – you were dead if your heart stopped working; if you couldn’t breathe. But now, we can restart hearts, and machines can breathe for you until you’re ready to take over again.
One neurologist says that “clinical death” doesn’t even have a consistent meaning. “You’re dead when your doctor says you’re dead,” apparently.
Life increasingly exists where previously it wouldn’t. The line of death is being pushed back – but what does death do to your rights?
Continue reading
Tuesday, 20 March 2018
Migration, migrants, and human security
an article by Bandana Purkayastha (University of Connecticut, USA) published in Current Sociology Volume 66 Issue 2 March 2018)
Abstract
This introductory article outlines a framework to bridge some of the current fragmentation and knowledge hierarchies in the sociological field of migration. The article builds on the insights – and epistemological roots – used in different parts of the world to reflect on 21st-century realities of migration and human security.
It considers international migrants, internally displaced persons, refugees and trafficked persons as part of a continuum of migrants who exhibit seasonal, temporary and long-term migration patterns.
The framework draws upon the scholarship of the Global South and North on political-economic processes that have historically influenced migration and migrants’ lives and continue to do so today. It considers the dominant approach used in studies of international migration and shows why it is necessary to go beyond the focus on nation-states and an emphasis on a particular group of migrants.
The framework weaves the insights of scholars who work on international, internal migration and forced migration, as well as the critical literatures on intersectionality and human rights to build an approach that centers questions of migrants’ human security. The framework emphasizes the glocal – i.e. intersecting global-national-local – terrains of migration and discusses human security within glocal terrains.
Abstract
This introductory article outlines a framework to bridge some of the current fragmentation and knowledge hierarchies in the sociological field of migration. The article builds on the insights – and epistemological roots – used in different parts of the world to reflect on 21st-century realities of migration and human security.
It considers international migrants, internally displaced persons, refugees and trafficked persons as part of a continuum of migrants who exhibit seasonal, temporary and long-term migration patterns.
The framework draws upon the scholarship of the Global South and North on political-economic processes that have historically influenced migration and migrants’ lives and continue to do so today. It considers the dominant approach used in studies of international migration and shows why it is necessary to go beyond the focus on nation-states and an emphasis on a particular group of migrants.
The framework weaves the insights of scholars who work on international, internal migration and forced migration, as well as the critical literatures on intersectionality and human rights to build an approach that centers questions of migrants’ human security. The framework emphasizes the glocal – i.e. intersecting global-national-local – terrains of migration and discusses human security within glocal terrains.
Tuesday, 13 March 2018
Linkage leverage democratization and liberalization: is promoting democracy the same as promoting human rights?
an article by Sara Kahn-Nisser (The Open University of Israel, Ra’anana, Israel) published in Policy Studies Volume 39 Issue 1 (January 2018)
Abstract
Research on transnational human rights promotion and democratization often assumes that human rights promotion and democratization promotion are the same. But evidences from recent studies give reasons to question this assumption.
This article compares the EU’s influence on democratization and human rights reforms in 29 countries in East-Europe West-Asia, the Middle East, and North-Africa. The results indicate that the impact of the EU on human rights protection is more notable than its impact on democracy levels.
The article explains these results based on the lower level of threat to regime survival as a result of human rights reform, compared to democratization; the transmission of a clear message regarding the importance of the issue of human rights to the EU and to the member states; and the strong economic leverage the EU possess.
The article draws policy implications including matching each policy goal with the most effective instruments to achieve it. The most effective human rights promotion instrument is economic pressure whereas democratization is more influenced by emulation processes than by economic pressure.
Abstract
Research on transnational human rights promotion and democratization often assumes that human rights promotion and democratization promotion are the same. But evidences from recent studies give reasons to question this assumption.
This article compares the EU’s influence on democratization and human rights reforms in 29 countries in East-Europe West-Asia, the Middle East, and North-Africa. The results indicate that the impact of the EU on human rights protection is more notable than its impact on democracy levels.
The article explains these results based on the lower level of threat to regime survival as a result of human rights reform, compared to democratization; the transmission of a clear message regarding the importance of the issue of human rights to the EU and to the member states; and the strong economic leverage the EU possess.
The article draws policy implications including matching each policy goal with the most effective instruments to achieve it. The most effective human rights promotion instrument is economic pressure whereas democratization is more influenced by emulation processes than by economic pressure.
Sunday, 4 March 2018
Why Can’t Mental Health Patients Make Decisions About Their Own Treatment?
a post by Abby Buttle for the Rights Info blog
The law in England and Wales currently allows for mental health patients to be treated against their consent, even if they are able to give it. Is this consistent with their human rights?
In a recent report [linked], the Law Commission [linked] suggested that the UK Government should consider following Northern Ireland in getting rid of existing mental health legislation, and replacing it with a single test for whether the patient lacks mental capacity (being able to make your own decisions). The Law Commission argued that such a move would place ‘the person at the centre of decision-making’ and tackle ‘the stigma and discrimination faced by those with mental health problems’.
There are clear human rights problems with the current discriminatory treatment of mental health patients. However, many people disagree about whether a single capacity test really solves the problem of when the law should respect a person’s decision.
Continue reading and you will find links to legislation for England and Wales regarding this issue.
The law in England and Wales currently allows for mental health patients to be treated against their consent, even if they are able to give it. Is this consistent with their human rights?
In a recent report [linked], the Law Commission [linked] suggested that the UK Government should consider following Northern Ireland in getting rid of existing mental health legislation, and replacing it with a single test for whether the patient lacks mental capacity (being able to make your own decisions). The Law Commission argued that such a move would place ‘the person at the centre of decision-making’ and tackle ‘the stigma and discrimination faced by those with mental health problems’.
There are clear human rights problems with the current discriminatory treatment of mental health patients. However, many people disagree about whether a single capacity test really solves the problem of when the law should respect a person’s decision.
Continue reading and you will find links to legislation for England and Wales regarding this issue.
Thursday, 1 March 2018
Hopes And Fears: We Asked Erasmus Students About Their Rights As Brexit Draws Closer
a post by Ewan Somerville for the Rights Info blog [Human Rights News, Views & Info]
It’s one of the most popular programmes offered by the EU, but after 30 years Britain’s ties with Erasmus+ are hanging in the balance.
Hundreds of thousands of students have been sent or hosted by UK universities on exchanges in 34 European countries, but as the Brexit negotiations continue the future UK relationship with the scheme is uncertain. So we thought we’d hear from some Erasmus students who have just studied in Britain.
What’s Erasmus+ All About?
Run by the European Commission, Erasmus+ is a programme connecting European university institutions and departments for exchanges and research. Since its launch in 1987, the scheme has grown to encompass all 28 EU member states and six non-EU members. Young people are able to harness the European links their university has, to spend between three and 12 months abroad at a partner institution – made all the more accessible by a monthly grant of around 300 euros. The European Commission sets budgets for the programme in seven-year blocks, with 14.7 billion euros allotted between 2014 and 2020.
Continue reading
It’s one of the most popular programmes offered by the EU, but after 30 years Britain’s ties with Erasmus+ are hanging in the balance.
Hundreds of thousands of students have been sent or hosted by UK universities on exchanges in 34 European countries, but as the Brexit negotiations continue the future UK relationship with the scheme is uncertain. So we thought we’d hear from some Erasmus students who have just studied in Britain.
What’s Erasmus+ All About?
Run by the European Commission, Erasmus+ is a programme connecting European university institutions and departments for exchanges and research. Since its launch in 1987, the scheme has grown to encompass all 28 EU member states and six non-EU members. Young people are able to harness the European links their university has, to spend between three and 12 months abroad at a partner institution – made all the more accessible by a monthly grant of around 300 euros. The European Commission sets budgets for the programme in seven-year blocks, with 14.7 billion euros allotted between 2014 and 2020.
Continue reading
Monday, 19 February 2018
Water into gas should not go
a post by Rosalind English for the UK Human Rights Blog [from One Crown Office Row]
Southern Gas Networks Plc v Thames Water Utilities Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 33, 25 January 2018 – read judgment
When the supply of gas to your house fails, you are entitled to compensation from the gas undertaker for the inconvenience. If that failure has been caused by another utility’s burst water main, the gas undertaker may seek to recoup its expenses for repair to its own infrastructure and the compensation it has had to pay out to consumers. A simple enough picture.
But behind this straightforward seeming network of liabilities is a labyrinth of common law and statutory relationships whose exploration is not for the faint hearted. As society’s dependence on the provision of energy, water and sewage services grew, during the Industrial Revolution and beyond, parliament had to think of ways to level the playing field between these increasingly centralised powers. This is not a trend that will go away, as the gas, electricity and fibre optic cables become ever more essential to the way we live our lives.
Continue reading
Southern Gas Networks Plc v Thames Water Utilities Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 33, 25 January 2018 – read judgment
When the supply of gas to your house fails, you are entitled to compensation from the gas undertaker for the inconvenience. If that failure has been caused by another utility’s burst water main, the gas undertaker may seek to recoup its expenses for repair to its own infrastructure and the compensation it has had to pay out to consumers. A simple enough picture.
But behind this straightforward seeming network of liabilities is a labyrinth of common law and statutory relationships whose exploration is not for the faint hearted. As society’s dependence on the provision of energy, water and sewage services grew, during the Industrial Revolution and beyond, parliament had to think of ways to level the playing field between these increasingly centralised powers. This is not a trend that will go away, as the gas, electricity and fibre optic cables become ever more essential to the way we live our lives.
Continue reading
Sunday, 4 February 2018
Suicide: How Human Rights Come into Play When the Worst Happens
a post by Matthew Keliris-Thomas for the Rights Info blog
Seven years ago today [11 December 2017], the House of Lords made a landmark judgment about the state’s duty to protect people at risk of suicide.
While the Suicide Act 1961 decriminalised taking (or trying to take) your own life, the state is still responsible for protecting people who are at risk.
The decision in the Savage Case in 2008 helped to strengthen the laws behind this, extending these human rights protections to people in hospitals. Here’s why it’s so important, and how our human rights come into play.
What Was the Savage Case About?
The full name for the case is Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, and it was heard in the House of Lords. Cases don’t go to the House of Lords anymore, instead, the highest court in the UK is the Supreme Court.
It essentially ruled that hospitals are responsible for protecting patients who are at risk of suicide. It centered around a woman who was being treated in a secure psychiatric ward who was able to walk out of the hospital and onto nearby train tracks where she died. She had been an inpatient several times before, and had developed severe paranoia and delusions, as well as previously attempting to jump out of the window in an effort to escape.
The court ruled she had deserved better protection. This comes from Article 2 of the Human Rights Convention, the right to life. As well as stopping the state unlawfully taking the life of any citizen, it also imposes an obligation on states to safeguard lives they are responsible for. The Savage case ensured hospitals are included within this.
This case also emphasised the vital need for personal considerations in the way hospitals fulfill their duty to patients. The judges went much further than just creating a basic legal test, stressing that attempts to prevent suicide should be for the patient’s benefit. So, hospitals must consider staff training, a proper system for monitoring mental health issues, and, crucially, respond to each patient’s needs.
For example, keeping a patient locked up or secluded might do more harm than good. Instead, the court said each patient’s independence should be the focus, along with a good quality of life. This considered approach has been reflected in the increased reliance on human rights to make sure vulnerable people receive full and fair treatment.
Continue reading
I am finding this difficult to comprehend. I have a right to life under the European Convention of Human Rights. What if I do not want to exercise that right? I would like to see broader discussion around this topic.
Seven years ago today [11 December 2017], the House of Lords made a landmark judgment about the state’s duty to protect people at risk of suicide.
While the Suicide Act 1961 decriminalised taking (or trying to take) your own life, the state is still responsible for protecting people who are at risk.
The decision in the Savage Case in 2008 helped to strengthen the laws behind this, extending these human rights protections to people in hospitals. Here’s why it’s so important, and how our human rights come into play.
What Was the Savage Case About?
The full name for the case is Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, and it was heard in the House of Lords. Cases don’t go to the House of Lords anymore, instead, the highest court in the UK is the Supreme Court.
It essentially ruled that hospitals are responsible for protecting patients who are at risk of suicide. It centered around a woman who was being treated in a secure psychiatric ward who was able to walk out of the hospital and onto nearby train tracks where she died. She had been an inpatient several times before, and had developed severe paranoia and delusions, as well as previously attempting to jump out of the window in an effort to escape.
The court ruled she had deserved better protection. This comes from Article 2 of the Human Rights Convention, the right to life. As well as stopping the state unlawfully taking the life of any citizen, it also imposes an obligation on states to safeguard lives they are responsible for. The Savage case ensured hospitals are included within this.
This case also emphasised the vital need for personal considerations in the way hospitals fulfill their duty to patients. The judges went much further than just creating a basic legal test, stressing that attempts to prevent suicide should be for the patient’s benefit. So, hospitals must consider staff training, a proper system for monitoring mental health issues, and, crucially, respond to each patient’s needs.
For example, keeping a patient locked up or secluded might do more harm than good. Instead, the court said each patient’s independence should be the focus, along with a good quality of life. This considered approach has been reflected in the increased reliance on human rights to make sure vulnerable people receive full and fair treatment.
Continue reading
I am finding this difficult to comprehend. I have a right to life under the European Convention of Human Rights. What if I do not want to exercise that right? I would like to see broader discussion around this topic.
Saturday, 3 February 2018
Why It’s Vital to Improve Experiences for Mental Health Patients
a post by Mike Jones for the Rights Info blog
Both our mental and physical health are crucial issues surrounding our human rights.
Not only is there a right to health, the very basis of our human rights is equality and a lack of discrimination, something which is also reinforced by Equality Act 2010.
Improving care for mental health is a vital part of this and, in fact, requires only one focus. The focus of all health care services needs to be centred on the individual, with patient-focused care at the heart of treatment, no matter what the issue. This is especially true when providing mental health care.
But how do we make sure this happens, while putting human rights at the heart of health care?
Both our mental and physical health are crucial issues surrounding our human rights.
Not only is there a right to health, the very basis of our human rights is equality and a lack of discrimination, something which is also reinforced by Equality Act 2010.
Improving care for mental health is a vital part of this and, in fact, requires only one focus. The focus of all health care services needs to be centred on the individual, with patient-focused care at the heart of treatment, no matter what the issue. This is especially true when providing mental health care.
But how do we make sure this happens, while putting human rights at the heart of health care?
Monday, 18 December 2017
Are human rights enough?
an article by Samuel Moyn published in Eurozine (originally in Vikerkaar)
The Universal Declaration between welfare state and neoliberal globalization
Imagine that one man owned everything. Call him Croesus, after the king of ancient lore who, Herodotus says, was so ‘wonderfully rich’ that he ‘thought himself the happiest of mortals’. Impossibly elevated above his fellow men and women, this modern Croesus is also magnanimous. He does not want people to starve, and not only because he needs some of them for the upkeep of his global estate. Croesus insists on a floor of protection, so that everyone living under his benevolent but total ascendancy can escape destitution. Health, food, water, even vacations, Croesus dispenses them all.
In comparison with the world in which we live today, where many do not enjoy these benefits, Croesus offers a kind of utopia. It is the one many believe was foreseen in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), and it has become our own, with the rise in the past half-century of the international human rights movement – especially now that this movement has belatedly turned its attention to the economic and social rights that the declaration originally promised. In this utopia, it is no longer a matter of haves versus have-nots. The worst-off have enough. But they are in a yawning hierarchy, far beneath the have-mores.
Continue reading
The Universal Declaration between welfare state and neoliberal globalization
Imagine that one man owned everything. Call him Croesus, after the king of ancient lore who, Herodotus says, was so ‘wonderfully rich’ that he ‘thought himself the happiest of mortals’. Impossibly elevated above his fellow men and women, this modern Croesus is also magnanimous. He does not want people to starve, and not only because he needs some of them for the upkeep of his global estate. Croesus insists on a floor of protection, so that everyone living under his benevolent but total ascendancy can escape destitution. Health, food, water, even vacations, Croesus dispenses them all.
In comparison with the world in which we live today, where many do not enjoy these benefits, Croesus offers a kind of utopia. It is the one many believe was foreseen in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), and it has become our own, with the rise in the past half-century of the international human rights movement – especially now that this movement has belatedly turned its attention to the economic and social rights that the declaration originally promised. In this utopia, it is no longer a matter of haves versus have-nots. The worst-off have enough. But they are in a yawning hierarchy, far beneath the have-mores.
Continue reading
Sunday, 1 October 2017
The Highs and Lows of the UK's Business and Human Rights Laws
an article by Anna Dannreuther and Hayley Chapman for Rightsinfo June 2017
Today [16 June 2017] marks 6 years since the UN Human Rights Council adopted the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. To celebrate, we are looking at three fantastic things the UK has done to ensure that businesses respect human rights, and two areas where it could vastly improve.
But first, a bit of background…
The dramatic expansion of international commercial activity over the past 50 years has put the issue of human rights in business firmly on the global policy agenda. This explosion in cross-border activity led to the emergence of ‘governance gaps’, where corporations found that their operations were less strictly regulated in some countries than others – creating a “permissive environment for wrongful acts”. As a result, there was a string of human rights violations involving business during the 90s and early 2000s, including the Nike sweatshop allegations, the Deepwater Horizon BP oil spill, and the Rana Plaza collapse in Bangladesh.
Continue reading
There’s lots of links to corroborating data some of which, obviously, will not make pleasant reading.
Today [16 June 2017] marks 6 years since the UN Human Rights Council adopted the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. To celebrate, we are looking at three fantastic things the UK has done to ensure that businesses respect human rights, and two areas where it could vastly improve.
But first, a bit of background…
The dramatic expansion of international commercial activity over the past 50 years has put the issue of human rights in business firmly on the global policy agenda. This explosion in cross-border activity led to the emergence of ‘governance gaps’, where corporations found that their operations were less strictly regulated in some countries than others – creating a “permissive environment for wrongful acts”. As a result, there was a string of human rights violations involving business during the 90s and early 2000s, including the Nike sweatshop allegations, the Deepwater Horizon BP oil spill, and the Rana Plaza collapse in Bangladesh.
Continue reading
There’s lots of links to corroborating data some of which, obviously, will not make pleasant reading.
Tuesday, 15 August 2017
Self-reflection on privacy research in social networking sites
Ralf De Wolf (Vrije Universiteit, Brussel, Belgium; Ghent University, Belgium), Ellen Vanderhoven and Tammy Schellens (Ghent University, Belgium), Bettina Berendt (KU Leuven, Herverlee, Belgium) and Jo Pierson (Vrije Universiteit, Brussel) published in Behaviour & Information Technology Volume 36 Issue 5 (2017)
Abstract
The increasing popularity of social networking sites has been a source of many privacy concerns. To mitigate these concerns and empower users, different forms of educational and technological solutions have been developed.
Developing and evaluating such solutions, however, cannot be considered a neutral process. Instead, it is socially bound and interwoven with norms and values of the researchers.
In this contribution, we aim to make the research process and development of privacy solutions more transparent by highlighting questions that should be considered.
(1) Which actors are involved in formulating the privacy problem?
(2) Is privacy perceived as a human right or as a property right on one’s data?
(3) Is informing users of privacy dangers always a good thing?
(4) Do we want to influence users’ attitudes and behaviours?
(5) Who is the target audience?
We argue that these questions can help researchers to better comprehend their own perspective on privacy, that of others, and the influence of the solutions they are developing. In the discussion, we propose a procedure called ‘tool clinics’ for further practical implementations.
Abstract
The increasing popularity of social networking sites has been a source of many privacy concerns. To mitigate these concerns and empower users, different forms of educational and technological solutions have been developed.
Developing and evaluating such solutions, however, cannot be considered a neutral process. Instead, it is socially bound and interwoven with norms and values of the researchers.
In this contribution, we aim to make the research process and development of privacy solutions more transparent by highlighting questions that should be considered.
(1) Which actors are involved in formulating the privacy problem?
(2) Is privacy perceived as a human right or as a property right on one’s data?
(3) Is informing users of privacy dangers always a good thing?
(4) Do we want to influence users’ attitudes and behaviours?
(5) Who is the target audience?
We argue that these questions can help researchers to better comprehend their own perspective on privacy, that of others, and the influence of the solutions they are developing. In the discussion, we propose a procedure called ‘tool clinics’ for further practical implementations.
Tuesday, 21 March 2017
Judgement without justice: on the efficacy of the European human rights régime
an article by Petra Guasti (Czech Academyu of Sciences, Institute of Sociology, Czech Republic), David S. Siroky (Arizona State University, Tempe, USA) and Daniel Stockemer (University of Ottawa, Canada) published in Democratization Volume 24 Issue 2 (2017)
Abstract
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is widely regarded as the most important human rights court worldwide. This article investigates the extent to which the court addresses cases from countries with the worst human rights performance. Using a new data set on all ECtHR judgments from 1995–2012, the analysis suggests that the ECtHR does not deliver its judgments against members of the Council of Europe with the worst human rights records, but instead against more democratic and affluent states.
The reason is that litigating in front of a supranational court requires capacities that vulnerable people are unlikely to possess, except when aided by transnational advocacy groups.
However, more judgements are issued against countries that lack independent judiciaries, where cases are less likely to be resolved at the domestic level. While the ECtHR might not address the worst human rights crimes, it plays a subsidiary role in the European human rights protection system by compensating for weak domestic judiciaries.
However, the court's inability to independently pursue litigation, together with the lack of capacity in some countries to bring cases forward, have hampered more effective protection of human rights for the most vulnerable in Europe.
Abstract
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is widely regarded as the most important human rights court worldwide. This article investigates the extent to which the court addresses cases from countries with the worst human rights performance. Using a new data set on all ECtHR judgments from 1995–2012, the analysis suggests that the ECtHR does not deliver its judgments against members of the Council of Europe with the worst human rights records, but instead against more democratic and affluent states.
The reason is that litigating in front of a supranational court requires capacities that vulnerable people are unlikely to possess, except when aided by transnational advocacy groups.
However, more judgements are issued against countries that lack independent judiciaries, where cases are less likely to be resolved at the domestic level. While the ECtHR might not address the worst human rights crimes, it plays a subsidiary role in the European human rights protection system by compensating for weak domestic judiciaries.
However, the court's inability to independently pursue litigation, together with the lack of capacity in some countries to bring cases forward, have hampered more effective protection of human rights for the most vulnerable in Europe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
