The criminalisation of intentionally harmful digital communications - Encouraging the responsible use of cyberspace or an offence of unnecessarily limited application?

<p>The Harmful Digital Communications Bill has recently been reported back from the Justice and Electoral Select Committee. The Bill seeks to deter, prevent and mitigate the harm caused to individuals through digital communications and to provide victims of harmful digital communications with a quick and efficient means of redress. In addition to modernising existing legislation and establishing a new civil enforcement regime, the Bill controversially introduces a new criminal offence of posting a harmful communication with the intent that the communication causes harm to a victim. Surprisingly, the offence differs significantly from comparable legislation abroad where neither a mens rea standard of intent is present nor a requirement that a victim must suffer serious emotional distress in order for an offender to be liable. This paper critiques the likely application of the offence and ultimately concludes that in light of differing legislation abroad and cases which have arisen since the enactment of the Communications Act in the United Kingdom, that the mens rea standard should be modified to include subjective recklessness, and the requirement that an intended victim must suffer actual harm should be removed.</p>

The criminalisation of intentionally harmful digital communications - Encouraging the responsible use of cyberspace or an offence of unnecessarily limited application?

<p>The Harmful Digital Communications Bill has recently been reported back from the Justice and Electoral Select Committee. The Bill seeks to deter, prevent and mitigate the harm caused to individuals through digital communications and to provide victims of harmful digital communications with a quick and efficient means of redress. In addition to modernising existing legislation and establishing a new civil enforcement regime, the Bill controversially introduces a new criminal offence of posting a harmful communication with the intent that the communication causes harm to a victim. Surprisingly, the offence differs significantly from comparable legislation abroad where neither a mens rea standard of intent is present nor a requirement that a victim must suffer serious emotional distress in order for an offender to be liable. This paper critiques the likely application of the offence and ultimately concludes that in light of differing legislation abroad and cases which have arisen since the enactment of the Communications Act in the United Kingdom, that the mens rea standard should be modified to include subjective recklessness, and the requirement that an intended victim must suffer actual harm should be removed.</p>

The effect of nudges on autonomy in hypothetical and real life settings

Nudges have repeatedly been found to be effective, however they are claimed to harm autonomy, and it has been found that laypeople expect this too. To test whether these expectations translate to actual harm to experienced autonomy, three online studies were conducted. The paradigm used in all studies was that participants were asked to voluntarily participate in a longer version of the questionnaire. This was either done in a hypothetical setting, where participants imagined they were asked this question, but did not answer it, and reported their expectations for autonomy; Or in an actual choice setting where participants answered the question and then reported their actual autonomy. The first study utilized the hypothetical setting and tried to replicate that laypeople expect nudges to harm autonomy with the current paradigm. A total of 451 participants were randomly assigned to either a control, a default nudge, or a social norm nudge condition. In the default nudge condition, the affirmative answer was pre-selected, and in the social norm nudge condition it was stated that most people answered affirmative. The results showed a trend for lower expected autonomy in nudge conditions, but did not find significant evidence. In Study 2, with a sample size of 454, the same design was used in an actual choice setting. Only the default nudge was found to be effective, and no difference in autonomy was found. In Study 3, Studies 1 and 2 were replicated. Explanation of the nudge was added as an independent variable and the social norm nudge condition was dropped, resulting in six conditions and 1322 participants. The results showed that participants indeed expected default nudges to harm their autonomy, but only if the nudge was explained. When actually nudged, no effect on autonomy was found, independent of the presence of an explanation.

Part III Conceptual Pillars, Ch.16 Harm Prevention

This chapter addresses how international environmental law originates from and revolves around the harm prevention rule. It focuses on three points of contention, each related to the role of due diligence in harm prevention, and each highlighted by recent judicial engagements with the harm prevention rule. First, it is generally accepted that a state's obligation to prevent environmental harm is not absolute, but requires due diligence in the face of risk of significant harm. However, it is unclear whether a failure to act diligently to avert harm on its own—absent actual harm—can amount to a breach of the harm prevention rule. Second, the relationship between the procedural and substantive dimensions of the harm prevention rule remains ambiguous. Third, there is some uncertainty as to where the line runs between the harm prevention obligation and the precautionary principle, given the focus of both notions on risk. These inter-related conceptual questions affect the harm prevention rule's function as a reference point for international environmental law.

Patterns of Safety Incidents in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

Introduction: Safety incidents preceding manifest adverse events are barely evaluated in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). This study aimed at identifying frequency and patterns of safety incidents in our NICU.Methods: A 6-month prospective clinical study was performed from May to October 2019 in a German 10-bed level III NICU. A voluntary, anonymous reporting system was introduced, and all neonatal team members were invited to complete paper-based questionnaires following each particular safety incident. Safety incidents were defined as safety-related events that were considered by the reporting team member as a “threat to the patient's well-being” which “should ideally not occur again.”Results: In total, 198 safety incidents were analyzed. With 179 patients admitted, the incident/admission ratio was 1.11. Medication errors (n = 94, 47%) and equipment problems (n = 54, 27%) were most commonly reported. Diagnostic errors (n = 19, 10%), communication problems (n = 12, 6%), errors in documentation (n = 9, 5%) and hygiene problems (n = 10, 5%) were less frequent. Most safety incidents were noticed after 4–12 (n = 52, 26%) and 12–24 h (n = 47, 24%), respectively. Actual harm to the patient was reported in 17 cases (9%) but no life-threatening or serious events occurred. Of all safety incidents, 184 (93%) were considered to have been preventable or likely preventable. Suggestions for improvement were made in 132 cases (67%). Most often, implementation of computer-assisted tools and processes were proposed.Conclusion: This study confirms the occurrence of various safety incidents in the NICU. To improve quality of care, a graduated approach tailored to the specific problems appears to be prudent.

Opioid substitution treatment and disasters: perspectives from Aotearoa New Zealand

In Aotearoa New Zealand, disaster risk management (DRM) aspires to protect the lives and livelihoods of people and places. It does this by encouraging people and communities to be disaster ready, while ensuring reduction of potential and actual harm from a disaster, responding immediately and directly following a disaster, and recovering so that there is ongoing regeneration and resiliency for the people and communities impacted by a disaster.

Opioid substitution treatment and disasters: perspectives from Aotearoa New Zealand

In Aotearoa New Zealand, disaster risk management (DRM) aspires to protect the lives and livelihoods of people and places. It does this by encouraging people and communities to be disaster ready, while ensuring reduction of potential and actual harm from a disaster, responding immediately and directly following a disaster, and recovering so that there is ongoing regeneration and resiliency for the people and communities impacted by a disaster.

Drug-Related Problems among Hospitalized Surgical Elderly Patients in China

There is a lack of data on drug-related problems (DRPs) among elderly patients from surgical departments. The current study is aimed at identifying and categorizing types of DRPs and assessing the severities of the DRPs. Medication orders for hospitalized patients aged ≥65 years from six surgery departments were reviewed to determine DRPs over 6 months in a tertiary teaching hospital of Chongqing, China. DRPs were classified based on the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe classification V8.02. The severity ratings of the DRPs were assessed using the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention classification. A total of 53,231 medication orders from 1,707 elderly patients were reviewed, and 1,061 DRPs were identified. Treatment safety (44.9%) was the most common DRP type. Drug selection (43.1%) and dose selection (43.1%) were the major causes of DRPs. A total of 75.1% of the DRPs were classified into severity categories B to D (causing no or potential harm), and 24.9% were classified as categories E to H (causing actual harm). DRPs are common in hospitalized elderly surgical patients. Pharmacists should provide medication order reviews in this vulnerable patient population.

Penalty and Compensation in Financial Commitments - A Critical Shariah Review

Purpose: The aim of this paper is to critically review the position of Shariah and contemporary ijtihād on penalty provisions in financial commitments. It is also to show that some relevant fiqh resolutions have dealt differently with similar issues despite the absence of any grounds for such differentiation and to show how penalty provision in contracts has been expanded to include what cannot be accommodated by Shariah principles. All this necessitates a review of those stances, as they may have both unnecessarily burdened the Islamic finance industry and challenged some Shariah principles. Methodology: This paper employs a qualitative research methodology that adopts textual and fiqh comparative analysis approaches. The methodology also incorporates a macro perspective for treating the subject by analyzing the issues being examined from the perspective of Maqāṣid al-Shariah (Shariah objectives) in consideration of existing market practices and needs. Findings: This study primarily indicates that penalties or compensation provisions in contracts are accepted if they are intended to prevent actual harm rather than for gain, because profiting merely through stipulation is forbidden in Islamic law. Originality: Although this paper addresses an issue that has been addressed before, it acquires significance and value by setting the basis for what constitutes a valid penalty provision in Islamic finance and by showing areas of conflict and inconsistency in some of the contemporary stands on the matter, thus necessitating a review of these stances.

A Path from Collective Threat to Eudaimonia: Mediating Role of Awe

How do people react to collective threats such as natural disasters or the COVID-19 pandemic? Magnificent catastrophic events might have an impact on emotions of not only those who experienced direct harm from it but also those who feel threat without actual harm. The current study demonstrated that such threat enhances self-transcendent values that further leads to general well-being, mediated by the emotion of awe. Two surveys were conducted immediately after a severe typhoon hit Japan (Study 1) and during the early phases of the COVID-19 spread in Japan (Study 2). Predisposition to feel negative awe predicted participants’ attention to both collective threat events, which led to an affirmation of self-transcendent values and general well-being. Furthermore, when participants were asked to recall a collective threat (vs. control event), they felt more awe which led to more engaged meaning making during the event, in turn predicting their affirmation of self-transcendent values.