“Good and Evil” narratives in Islamic State media and Western government statements

This article uses a critical discourse and documentary analysis to explore “Good and Evil” narratives in Islamic State (IS) media and in the official policy statements of the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom. The analysis initially considers how IS and Western governments define the other as “Evil” drawing from premodern Manichean and Abrahamic religious conventions. It then interprets how these entities subscribe to a post-Enlightenment ethic that associates the triumph of “Good” over “Evil” with science, reason and technological innovation. Distinct from similar analyses that emphasise the persuasive power of religion, this article reflects on how IS and Western governments use conflicting religious and philosophical imperatives to articulate their strategic political agendas. It further interprets how these agendas become ideologically convincing, through reflexive communication.     

Re-Evaluating ‘Best Interests’ in the Wake of Raqeeb v Barts NHS Foundation Trust & Anors

In Raqeeb v Barts NHS Foundation Trust, the latest of a number of cases concerning whether a child can travel abroad for treatment that doctors in the UK do not consider to be in their best interests, the High Court held that the hospital had acted unlawfully by failing to consider the child's rights under EU law when refusing to allow her to travel. Although this derogation could be justified on public policy grounds, as such treatment was, on the facts, in her best interests, no further interference with her rights was justified. In making this finding, the court recognised the ‘stress’ that such a case placed on the best interests test, lending weight to the argument for moving instead to a risk of significant harm threshold for judicial intervention in parental decisions, which better accounts for legitimate differences of value and strikes a better balance under Article 8 ECHR.     

Surrogacy: is there a case for legal prohibition?

Surrogacy arrangements are a complex and challenging issue for legal regulation. On the one hand, if we wish to promote personal autonomy and enable the infertile to experience parenthood, there is a case for allowing these arrangements to proceed. However, objections to legal sanctioning of surrogacy include concerns for the surrogate and the child born through the surrogacy arrangement. Legally sanctioning surrogacy may also adversely affect social conceptions of women's roles or may be considered a form of commodifying women's reproductive capacities. This article examines these challenges to allowing surrogacy, but concludes that surrogacy should not be legally prohibited.     

Choosing Healthplans All Together: a deliberative exercise for allocating limited health care resources

CHAT (Choosing Healthplans All Together) is an exercise in participatory decision making designed to engage the public in health care priority setting. Participants work individually and then in groups to distribute a limited number of pegs on a board as they select from a wide range of insurance options. Randomly distributed health events illustrate the consequences of insurance choices. In 1999-2000, the authors conducted fifty sessions of CHAT involving 592 residents of North Carolina. The exercise was rated highly regarding ease of use, informativeness, and enjoyment. Participants found the information believable and complete, thought the group decision-making process was fair, and were willing to abide by group decisions. CHAT holds promise as a tool to foster group deliberation, generate collective choices, and incorporate the preferences and values of consumers into allocation decisions. It can serve to inform and stimulate public dialogue about limited health care resources.     

A Dialectical Approach to Online Propaganda: Australia’s United Patriots Front,Right-Wing Politics,and Islamic State

Abstract

This article examines how the United Patriots Front (UPF), an Australian far-right organization, has communicated its ideology with reference to right-wing politics in Australia, Western Europe, and the United States, and through allusions to Islamic State. The investigation uses critical discourse and documentary analysis and a framework derived from the theory of Pierre Bourdieu to analyze textual and audiovisual postings on UPF Facebook pages, YouTube channels, and Twitter accounts. Relevant to the discussion are Bourdieu’s interdependent theories on “doxa” as a condition in which socially constructed phenomena appear self-evident, and “habitus” and “field,” which explain how structures and agents, through their reflexive behavior, become dialectically situated.     

Culture,Obesity Stereotypes,Self-Esteem,and the “Thin Ideal”: A Social Identity Perspective

Recent concerns with the increasing prevalence of overweight and obesity among children and adults indicate the need to better understand the psychosocial correlates of weight. We examined the relationships among negative stereotypes of obesity, thin ideal beliefs, perceptions of the causes of obesity and of control over weight, body esteem, and global self-esteem. A negative correlation between beliefs in control over one's weight and self-esteem was mediated by both negative attitudes toward obesity and thin idealization. Additionally, body esteem and gender were related but this relationship was mediated by beliefs in control over weight and valuation of the thin ideal. Central to the theoretical foundation of this research, however, was the observed negative correlation between negative attitudes toward obesity and self-esteem. This relationship was mediated primarily by the belief that obesity is caused by personality shortcomings. This last finding is explained from a social identity perspective.     

Tissue donation: ethical guidance and legal enforceability

The legal and ethical framework regulating the use of tissue donated for medical research in Australia provides clear direction on the appropriate use of donated tissue in many instances. However, this article argues that the current framework may be inadequate to address some of the problems that may arise from misuse of such tissue. It argues that the Human Tissue Acts do not provide a sufficiently broad system of regulation and require updating. It also notes that as much of Australian research practice is regulated through ethics guidelines, which do not have the status of law, in some cases this approach may fail to provide remedies for those whose tissue is used inappropriately.