scholarly journals Aging, mental illness and COVID-19: Focusing research on vulnerable populations

Aging Brain ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 100007
Author(s):  
Joshua Gordon ◽  
Jovier D. Evans
Author(s):  
Gemma Richardson

Social media has added a new dynamic for those living with mental illness. There are several benefits to using social media to obtain information and support for mental health issues, but there are also new challenges and drawbacks. This chapter explores social media for mental health initiatives, with a focus on two case studies: Facebook's suicide prevention tools and the Bell Let's Talk campaign. These case studies highlight the unique ways that social media can be harnessed to raise awareness and provide support and resources to vulnerable populations, while also providing insights into the challenges of utilizing these platforms.


2019 ◽  
pp. 343-352
Author(s):  
Amy Fettig ◽  
David C. Fathi

This chapter explores how civil society advocacy campaigns working to reform and abolish solitary confinement are interacting with recent and ongoing federal litigation. The authors posit that the evolution of policy, practice, litigation, and public knowledge regarding solitary confinement is pushing the law forward. Momentum for greater legal protections is growing in the courts and the combination of people power and jurisprudential development is leading to substantial new protections for prisoners, including the exclusion of vulnerable populations, such as youth, people with mental illness, and pregnant women, from solitary confinement. Additionally, courts are increasingly questioning the extreme duration of solitary confinement in the United States and the reasons used to justify it, such as automatic solitary confinement of people sentenced to death. At the same time, state departments of corrections are settling class action lawsuits brought on behalf of prisoners in solitary confinement by agreeing to major policy innovations and alternatives to the use of segregation.


Author(s):  
Gemma Richardson

Social media has added a new dynamic for those living with mental illness. There are several benefits to using social media to obtain information and support for mental health issues, but there are also new challenges and drawbacks. This chapter explores social media for mental health initiatives, with a focus on two case studies: Facebook's suicide prevention tools and the Bell Let's Talk campaign. These case studies highlight the unique ways that social media can be harnessed to raise awareness and provide support and resources to vulnerable populations, while also providing insights into the challenges of utilizing these platforms.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-54
Author(s):  
Lauren Amos

People with a mental illness (PWMI) are among the most vulnerable populations in the country, yet are far more likely to be incarcerated than people without a mental illness. PWMI are more likely to be wrongfully convicted for several reasons.At the onset of an investigation, PWMI are more likely to become suspects. Symptoms of mental illness breed fear and misunderstanding, arousing suspicion of a PWMI in the first place. Once approached by police, PWMI are more likely to escalate the initial encounter, leading to arrest and further interrogation. Through the lens of the Reid Technique, police misinterpret symptoms of mental illness as signs of guilt. Police continue using the Reid Technique to extract a confession. Mid- interrogation, PWMI are less likely to invoke Miranda rights. Without counsel, PWMI are more susceptible to minimization and maximation techniques, leading to higher rates of false confessions and ultimately, false convictions. These issues are significantly exacerbated for PWMI of color, who experience additional racial bias. From the beginning of an investigation to the end, the justice system seems perversely calculated to target innocent PWMI, rather than protect them. The case of James Blackmon demonstrates how an innocent PWMI can be railroaded into a false confession and wrongful conviction. This paper details Blackmon’s case, analyzes how each step of an investigation endangers PWMI, and examines possible solutions to protect innocent PWMI.  


2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-524
Author(s):  
Brent Pollitt

Mental illness is a serious problem in the United States. Based on “current epidemiological estimates, at least one in five people has a diagnosable mental disorder during the course of a year.” Fortunately, many of these disorders respond positively to psychotropic medications. While psychiatrists write some of the prescriptions for psychotropic medications, primary care physicians write more of them. State legislatures, seeking to expand patient access to pharmacological treatment, granted physician assistants and nurse practitioners prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications. Over the past decade other groups have gained some form of prescriptive authority. Currently, psychologists comprise the primary group seeking prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications.The American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacotherapy (“ASAP”), a division of the American Psychological Association (“APA”), spearheads the drive for psychologists to gain prescriptive authority. The American Psychological Association offers five main reasons why legislatures should grant psychologists this privilege: 1) psychologists’ education and clinical training better qualify them to diagnose and treat mental illness in comparison with primary care physicians; 2) the Department of Defense Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (“PDP”) demonstrated non-physician psychologists can prescribe psychotropic medications safely; 3) the recommended post-doctoral training requirements adequately prepare psychologists to prescribe safely psychotropic medications; 4) this privilege will increase availability of mental healthcare services, especially in rural areas; and 5) this privilege will result in an overall reduction in medical expenses, because patients will visit only one healthcare provider instead of two–one for psychotherapy and one for medication.


1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-275
Author(s):  
O. Lawrence ◽  
J.D. Gostin

In the summer of 1979, a group of experts on law, medicine, and ethics assembled in Siracusa, Sicily, under the auspices of the International Commission of Jurists and the International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Science, to draft guidelines on the rights of persons with mental illness. Sitting across the table from me was a quiet, proud man of distinctive intelligence, William J. Curran, Frances Glessner Lee Professor of Legal Medicine at Harvard University. Professor Curran was one of the principal drafters of those guidelines. Many years later in 1991, after several subsequent re-drafts by United Nations (U.N.) Rapporteur Erica-Irene Daes, the text was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly as the Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and for the Improvement of Mental Health Care. This was the kind of remarkable achievement in the field of law and medicine that Professor Curran repeated throughout his distinguished career.


2008 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 8-8
Author(s):  
Richard T. Katz

Abstract The author, who is the editor of the Mental and Behavioral Disorders chapter of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, comments on the previous article, Assessing Mental and Behavioral Disorder Impairment: Overview of Sixth Edition Approaches in this issue of The Guides Newsletter. The new Mental and Behavioral Disorders (M&BD) chapter, like others in the AMA Guides, is a consensus opinion of many authors and thus reflects diverse points of view. Psychiatrists and psychologists continue to struggle with diagnostic taxonomies within the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, but anxiety, depression, and psychosis are three unequivocal areas of mental illness for which the sixth edition of the AMA Guides provides M&BD impairment rating. Two particular challenges faced the authors of the chapter: how could M&BD disorders be rated (and yet avoid an onslaught of attorney requests for an M&BD rating in conjunction with every physical impairment), and what should be the maximal impairment rating for a mental illness. The sixth edition uses three scales—the Psychiatric Impairment Rating Scale, the Global Assessment of Function, and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale—after careful review of a wide variety of indices. The AMA Guides remains a work in progress, but the authors of the M&BD chapter have taken an important step toward providing a reasonable method for estimating impairment.


2002 ◽  
Vol 117 (2) ◽  
pp. 114-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha M McKinney ◽  
Katherine M Marconi ◽  
Paul D Cleary ◽  
Jennifer Kates ◽  
Steven R Young ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document