Global Health and Human Rights Database

Global Health and Human Rights Database.

• A free online database of law from around the world relating to health and human rights.Offers an interactive, searchable, and fully indexed website of case law, national constitutions and international instruments
• Features case law and other legal documents from more than 80 countries and in 25 languages.
• Provides 500 plain-language summaries and 200 original translations of case law previously unavailable in English.
• Developed by Lawyers Collective and the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at Georgetown University, in collaboration with over 100 partners from civil society, academic, and legal practice worldwide.
• Links to Additional Resources

 

 

 

 

Related articles

• New Reference Resource: Global Health and Human Rights Database
• Dictators Worldwide Demand Aid, Empowered UN, Global Socialism

NYTimes: Rethinking Our ‘Rights’ to Dangerous Behaviors

Related articles (Presented for informational purposes only, a diversity of views)

• Do Corporations Have a Right to Profit From Endangering Our Health?
• Dangerous behaviors and the corporate consumption complex.
• Rethinking Our ‘Rights’ to Dangerous Behaviors
• Do Corporations Have a Right to Profit From Endangering Our Health? [The Pump Handle]
• Did you know there’s a “corporate consumption complex” conspiring to make us think we have a “right” to do dangerous things?
• FDL Book Salon Welcomes Nicholas Freudenberg, Lethal, But Legal: Corporations, Consumption, and Protecting Public Health
• Face it kids, individual liberty and personal sovereignty are ideals that the Left cannot grasp
• Top lessons from 50 years of fighting the tobacco industry | Nicholas Freudenberg
• Rights vs. Authority

NobodyisFlyingthePlane

“What we need,” Freudenberg said to me, “is to return to the public sector the right to set health policy and to limit corporations’ freedom to profit at the expense of public health.”

Bittman contributes to the ongoing discussion here at NobodyisFlyingthePlane about how certain industries deflect public discourse from what is best for our citizens to what makes the most profit, no matter the consequences.

The author he quotes poses a series of questions which get at the heart of the matter.

“Shouldn’t science and technology be used to improve human well-being, not to advance business goals that harm health?”

Similarly, we need to be asking not “Do junk food companies have the right to market to children?” but “Do children have the right to a healthy diet?”

Essentially its a PR game. Do we let whole industries spin how the conversation is framed or do we let the…

View original post 339 more words

[Conversation Invitation] Military Interventions in the Broader Middle East: Effects on Nation Building and Education

Why am I posting this?
Because this is a public health issue.

From the Brookings Institution Upcoming Event summary

Events in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya have raised questions about the extent to which military intervention promotes nation building. As the prospect of military involvement in Syria seemingly draws inexorably closer, the urgency in accurately framing and seeking answers to this question through robust and frank debate is becoming increasingly clear.

Clear also is the crucial role of quality education in nation building, in combating poverty and promoting peace, social justice, and human rights.

Too frequently overlooked however, are the forms and consequences of military interaction with education when intervention is debated, authorized or takes place. In times of conflict education will suffer – and will do so through a myriad of ways: teachers and students may be killed, injured, imprisoned, or threatened; children may be recruited into the militaries of states and non-state armed groups; and schools and universities damaged or destroyed, deliberately or as collateral damage. Educational premises may, also, be used by military forces as barracks, for storage of munitions or even as firing positions and, in so doing, render them vulnerable to attack by opposition forces. Military support to education through construction of education facilities can sometimes be problematic. Individually and combined, all have the potential not only to harm education specifically, but also to undermine a commonly expressed motivation for military intervention: to facilitate nation building. The protection of education is inseparable from such endeavors.

The Brookings Doha Center – in partnership with the Protect Education in Insecurity and Conflict, a programme of the Education Above All Foundation – is pleased to invite you to a conversation with General Sir David Richards, former Chief of Defense Staff of the British Armed Forces and former principal military advisor to the British Prime Minster from 2010–2013. General Sir David Richards played a leading role in the UK’s military operations in Afghanistan and Libya and throughout his distinguished career at the very top of the UK armed forces and government.

To reserve a place for yourself and/or a guest, please RSVP with the names of those who wish to attend to dohacenter@brookings.edu.

 

For those wishing to view/listen to this event, here’s the email response I rec’d (within 24 hours!) from the Brookings Doha Center.

Please note that the full audio of the event will be made available within 48 hours of the event, the full transcript within 72 hours, and the full video of the event will be up approximately one week after the event. We will also have an event summary that will be posted in a week. All materials can be found on the event’s website page.

EVENT AGENDA

• Moderator

  • 

    Salman Shaikh

    Director, Brookings Doha Center

    Fellow, Saban Center for Middle East Policy

    @Salman_Shaikh1

• Speaker

  • General Sir David Richards

    Former Chief of the Defense Staff, UK

Consensual Sex In Elderly Care Homes – Ageism And Safety Concerns

Regardless of what one thinks about sex outside marriage, this issue is certainly not going to go away in the near and far future as long as the elderly are institutionalized and/or live in residential care facilities.

From the 25 June 2012 Medical News Today article

An article published in the Journal of Medical Ethics reveals that elderly care home residents are often needlessly denied consensual sex because of concerns regarding safety and ageism. 

Researchers from the Australian Centre for Evidence Based Aged Care state that even though elderly people, including those with early stage dementia, often still enjoy a sexual relationship in their own homes, but once they move into residential care, a sexual relationship is often frowned upon.

The researchers say that factors, such as safety fears, insufficient privacy, concerns about duty of care, anxieties about potential repercussions from relatives, and ageism often take away people’s “basic human right”, standing in the way of “a normal and healthy part of ageing.” ….

Related articles

• Care home patients with dementia being ‘denied sex’ (independent.co.uk)
• Safety fears and agism denying care home residents right to consensual sex (eurekalert.org)
• Nursing Homes Aren’t Letting Old People Have Enough Sex [Aging] (jezebel.com)
• Care centers deny elderly the right to sex: medical journal (rawstory.com)
• Dementia patients’ desires left in the cold (abc.net.au)