Search

Objectives: Schizophrenia represents one of the most stigmatised of mental disorders. Despite public awareness campaigns to raise awareness and increase understanding of mental health disorders, schizophrenia continues to be poorly understood. In this context, this study aims to provide a descriptive analysis of reporting on schizophrenia in the Irish online print news media. Methods: Online printed news articles which made reference to schizophrenia or related terms in 2021, the latest year for which full date was available, were collected. A list of criteria considered good reporting practise on mental illness in the media was curated. Additionally, a scale was developed based on these criteria to assign a valence to each article in terms of characteristics that were either stigma reinforcing or stigma challenging. Results: A total of 656 articles were included in the analysis. A majority of articles were found to avoid stigma reinforcing criteria (e.g. use of pejorative language). By contrast, few characteristics considered stigma challenging criteria were being endorsed (e.g. inclusion of a first person account). Overall sample valences show good reporting practises, but also suggested targets for improvement. Conclusions: While Irish online print news reports on schizophrenia and related illnesses avoid many stigmatising characteristics, many opportunities to challenge stigma remain.

In the last three decades, early intervention for psychosis (EIP) services have been established worldwide and have resulted in superior symptomatic and functional outcomes for people affected by psychotic disorders. These improved outcomes are a result of reducing delays to treatment and the provision of specialised, holistic interventions. The COVID-19 pandemic poses significant challenges to the delivery of these services, such as undetected cases or long delays to treatment. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic will likely increase the mental health needs of communities, including the incidence of psychotic disorders. In this perspective piece, we provide suggestions as to how EIP services can adapt within this environment, such as utilising novel technologies. Finally, we argue that despite the economic consequences of the pandemic, the funding for mental health services, including EI services, should be increased in line with the need for these services during and beyond the pandemic.

peer-reviewed To date, Ireland has been a leading light in the provision of youth mental health services. However, cognisant of the efforts of governmental and non-governmental agencies working in youth mental health, there is much to be done. Barriers into care as well as discontinuity of care across the spectrum of services remain key challenges. This editorial provides guidance for the next stage of development in youth mental care and support that will require significant national engagement and resource investment. peer-reviewed

“The word I would use to describe my position on the bench is lonely.” So said Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2007, when asked to comment on her position on the U.S. Supreme Court after the resignation of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. After a year as the Court's only woman, Ginsburg had begun to feel the solitude that comes from judging alone, being the Court's only descriptive and often symbolic representative of women's interests. Ginsburg's position was not, sadly, as rare as we might hope in industrialized democracies. Although some countries, such as Canada, have had near majorities of women on their respective high courts, other countries, such as the United Kingdom, continue to have only one woman on their national tribunals.

Objectives: Three patients presenting with a first episode of psychosis each had a past history of social phobia. We sought to explore the literature on the co-occurrence of these disorders and investigate three hypotheses to explain this: (1) the chance co-occurrence of two illnesses with distinct aetiologies; (2) two clinical presentations reflecting different points on the same spectrum of illness; and (3) two distinct disorders representing different end points resulting from the same aetiology.Method: A literature review of Embase, PubMed and Psych Lit was performed.Results: We found no reports on social phobia preexisting an episode of psychosis, and prevalence studies indicate that their chance co-occurrence is extremely unlikely. Psychological explanations for co-occurrence include attributional theories, and theories related to cognitive biases and loss of self-esteem.Conclusion: There is a phenomenological overlap between social phobia and paranoia but the two concepts should and can be distinguished. Epidemiological studies indicate that their chance occurrence as two unrelated disorders is unlikely. Most people with one of these disorders do not develop the other and hypothesis (2) is also unlikely. There is increasing speculation that anxiety, and in particular social phobic symptoms have a central role in the development of psychotic symptoms. The greatest evidence was found to support hypothesis (3).However, it seems more likely that social phobia and psychosis, rather than representing manifestations of the same illness, instead are implicated in a complex interaction where symptoms which characterise social phobia and psychosis, have the capacity to affect, alter and possibly provoke each other. The recognition and treatment of co-occurring anxiety disorders, especially social phobia with psychosis, may have an important impact on prognosis and quality of life.

In announcing his nomination of Clarence Thomas to the United States Supreme Court on July 2, 1991, George Bush described him as “a fiercely independent thinker with an excellent legal mind,” and proclaimed his belief that Thomas would “be a great Justice.” While many legal and political commentators had predicted that Clarence Thomas stood an excellent chance of being Bush's nominee to replace the retiring Thurgood Marshall, few were quick to echo Bush's assessment that Thomas was:… the best qualified at this time …. Clarence Thomas … fits my description of the best man at the right time. … I kept my word to the American people and to the Senate by picking the best man for the job on the merits. (New York Times, 2 July 1991)Even as Bush offered Thomas's name in nomination, the skeptics were muttering about the hyperbole that surrounded the announcement. Thomas's total lack of courtroom experience and his generally undistinguished record as a jurist led many to question his qualifications to serve on the High Court. Concern with his general absence of legal credentials prompted the American Bar Association's Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary to rate Thomas merely as “Qualified”—making him the only nominee with such a low rating to serve on the Supreme Court.The authority and prestige of the United States Supreme Court have always rested on its support from the other branches of government and, perhaps even more importantly, on the support of the American public.

A quarter-century has passed since the U.S. Supreme Court decided Roe v. Wade in 1973. In recognition of the intense debates that continue to surround the question of abortion rights, the editors present the following forum, based on Eileen McDonagh's recent book, Breaking the Abortion Deadlock, published by Oxford University Press. The discussion was first presented at the 1997 Meetings of the American Political Science Association in Washington, D.C., on a panel moderated by Sue Davis, University of Delaware.

Claire L. Felbinger passed away suddenly at her home on Wednesday, May 28, due to a complication from multiple sclerosis (MS). At the time of her death, she had been employed at the Japan International Transport Institute.

The twenty participants in this seminar came from a variety of colleges and universities that ranged from major research institutions to small teaching colleges. The academic ranks and interests of those in attendance also were diverse. This heterogeneity of participants was intentional and designed to facilitate a meaningful exchange of ideas and perspectives on the topics to be discussed. Formal class sessions were held for three and one-half hours each morning. The instructor made herself available for individual discussions later each day. Seminar participants were urged to take advantage of the unique location of the seminar. It was held at the APSA convention site only a few blocks away from the Martin Luther King, Jr. birth site and the MLK Center for Nonviolent Social Change.The focus of this seminar in the main was to explore the role that interest groups have played and are likely to continue to play in the judicial process. Our focus was on the federal level, particularly the United States Supreme Court. Given the varied backgrounds and interests of those attending this seminar, it was believed that such an approach would provide a broader and richer understanding of not only the development of law concerning civil rights but also of the judicial process itself.After introductions the first morning, we immediately launched into a discussion of the readings for the day. They were designed to acquaint the participants with some of the literature on interest group litigation. Interestingly, however, the focus of our attention was immediately turned to the idea of “group” and what was meant by interest group or social movement. Several participants had been grappling with these questions in their own research, and others had had extensive experience in a diverse set of groups. A lengthy discourse from varied perspectives then ensued.

gress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion or restricting the free exercise of religious beliefs. The language employed is enigmatic, reflecting the delicate balance that the Constitution seeks to strike among the individual, the state and religion. The mosaic of religious groups in colonial America and the concern by the Founders to protect their religious freedom was "one of the forces that ultimately led to the adoption of a secular Constitution that included specific mention of free exercise and disestablishment" (Pfeffer, 1977: 13). As the branch of government whose responsibility it is to decide the constitutionality of federal and state laws that challenge the relationship between religion and the state, the judiciary is faced with the unenviable task of adjudicating disputes that fall within the language of the First Amendment. Since the 1940s, when it first began applying the religion clauses to the states, the Court has ruled on the constitutionality of prayer and Bible reading in public schools, government assistance to parochial schools as well as general issues of what the state may legitimately demand from an individual without impinging on the free exercise of his or her religious beliefs. The aim of the Court has been to strike a balance between respect for the role of religion in American public life while prohibiting state preference for any religious faith. It is hardly surprising, then, that the fruits of its labors have been greeted with less than unanimous satisfaction from the competing interests of religious and non-religious groups. To expect anything more would be to discount the complex question of what limits the Constitution places on religion as a moral and educational component in our public and social order. Public school systems have often been the battleground for the most controversial cases involving religion and state. While these cases now most often involve prayer or government assistance to parochial schools, the first great debate involving religious instruction in the public schools-the teaching of creationism or evolution as the basis for the origins of man-has returned to the courts albeit in a more sophisticated form. This essay addresses the impact that the new wave of "creationism-evolution" cases recently decided in the federal courts have had on the place of religion in the public schools. Specifically, we look