Surveying the Geneva impasse: Coercive care and human rights Wayne Martin, Sándor Gurbai International Journal of Law and Psychiatry Volume 64, May–June 2019, Pages 117-128 Researchers from Workstream 4, focusing on ‘insight’, publish a new paper in the International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, looking at the differences between ‘coercive’ and ‘non-consensual’ care interventions under the United
-
Surveying the Geneva impasse: Coercive care and human rights
-
Objectivity in science and law: A shared rescue strategy
A new study by Matthew Burch (WS4), and Katherine Furman is published in International Journal of Law and Psychiatry (Vol 64, May-June 2019). Objectivity in science and law: A shared rescue strategy “The ideal of objectivity is in crisis in science and the law, and yet it continues to do important work in both practices. This
-
Open Access Gateway Misevaluating the Future: Affective Disorder and Decision-Making Capacity for Treatment – A Temporal Understanding
A new study from MHJ researchers using in-depth interviews with patients/service users experiencing mood disorder. The study aims to understand how the future is experienced from the standpoint of severe depression and mania and how this impacts on decision-making capacity for treatment. It proposes that self -determination can be effected – both in severe depression
