Influential Ethics for April

In the blocks below, please find your weekly bio-politics articles in a blog-style layout. If you have any questions or concerns about the research or writing, please reach out to me! I post one bio-ethics blogacle a week followed by an international relations/propaganda piece the following week. These topics are either about current issues or issues I find important yet are not discussed enough. In months with five weeks, I will post in the first three weeks and post in the fourth or fifth week, depending on my timetable based on my ghostwriting schedule.

Questions to consider

Week One:

Questions to consider

Criminals and Healthcare: Should They Receive the Same Treatment? (Part Two of Five)

The previous/first post regarding this topic discusses criminality and what it means to be a criminal. The topic of healthcare in general is a broad concept, and there isn’t a one–size–fits–all meaning. Instead, healthcare in general is (or should be) a deeply personal endeavor and should be treated with care and caution to ensure the person’s needs are met without denying someone else their right to medical care. In the prison system, healthcare is viewed more as a physical necessity than a personal means to create a well–adapted human being.

A second important discussion regarding this topic is around the concept of treatment. What is treatment? Does this or should this involve treatment options from the prison system and the religious and ethical views of those in charge? For example, if criminal A, let’s call them Aric, is in prison because they robbed a bank and killed someone in the process. Should the warden ensure their physical and medical safety even if robbing and killing goes against the warden’s personal beliefs?

If Aric received treatment for depression and anxiety before they were arrested, in theory, they should receive some form of treatment for depression and anxiety in prison for their general wellbeing. If the warden is of the opinion that depression and anxiety aren’t legitimate medical diagnosis and belives that these ailments are “just in the inmates’ head”, there is a very real possibility that Aric won’t receive adequate care for these ailments. This could lengthen their prison sentence because of behaviors that could put them at risk of offending in prison due to withdrawal symptoms or the inability to control their actions due to severe anxiety.

In this case, the treatment at the hands of the prison only focuses on Aric’s physical needs, not their psychological ones. Does this mean the treatment they receive is less than their fellow inmates who don’t have chronic medication needs for non–physical ailments? Further treatment options for Aric could be withheld if they treated their depression and anxiety at home with herbal remedies and meditations. It’s quite uncommon for prisons to stock herbal remedies for their inmates since industrial grade medication can be purchased in bulk.

As for meditations, the prison system is built around structure; discipline; scheduled time for meals, showers, recreation; and inspections. This leaves very few minutes leftover for Aric to complete their meditations as part of their at–home treatment of depression and anxiety. The system is built for high–capacity reformation of the self, not personalized reformation of self–worth and self–care. In this case, Aric’s medical needs are completely ignored by the system. By the time Aric has the capacity (if at all) to fight it or try to change the status quo, their prison sentence might be complete.

There is another aspect of criminality and healthcare that deals with sexual and emotional needs. These needs are usually met by a family structure from before a criminal, let’s call them Baric, was sent to prison. A support structure for Baric may have been in place before they went to prison in the form of a close–nit family and friends necessary for the general human experience: companionship. Spending weekends with siblings and/or friends could have been the norm for Baric before he left, and once in prison, this support network vanished.

In many countries, sex is seen as a right that is tied to autonomy and personal freedom. If Baric lives in any of these countries or states where these values are upheld and prioritized, they could engage in conjugal visits between themselves and their partner. In general, these rights are understood as an important part of the human condition, and wardens worldwide understand that sexual relationships are just as important as familial ones.

Many of Baric’s friends and family could refuse to visit him in prison which could affect their mental state and ability to function as a model inmate. The question of “Why should we visit someone who has done terrible things?” could be on the minds of Baric’s previously formed support network, and from the prisons’ standpoint, they don’t have an obligation to ensure any of their inmates maintain friendships or relationships with people on the outside.

Their responsibilities are to the general population outside the prison: By keeping criminals behind bars, they can ensure the medical safety of their fellow citizens (they won’t need to enter a medical facility if dangerous people don’t have access to them). Their second responsibility includes the inmates' physical needs to ensure they are (relatively) healthy when they leave and don’t burden the state further with ongoing physical therapy as a result of the actions of the other inmates and guards.

I will post the Questions to Consider and the reference list in the final part.

Do you agree? Whose personal values should healthcare focus on in this case?

Do you think criminals should be separated by crime severity, or is a criminal a criminal?

Should treatment be personalized according to the person or the availability of medications?

Do you think a person's behavior from inside a prison is a good indicator of what they will do when they get out?

How would the other inmates know? Should they be told of this discrepancy even if it could put Aric in danger? Why do you think this?

Do you agree? Do you think reformation is possible in the prison system or are the prisons just a place to separate the lawbreakers from the rest of the population?

Should the prison prioritize Baric’s psychological health as much as they prioritize their physical health?

Do you think inmates should have access to their support structure in prison? What if this support structure was the reason Baric is in prison?

Do you think partners of criminals should be considered important for the inmates' rehabilitation?

What do you consider a 'dangerous person'?

Questions to consider

Week Two:

Questions to consider

If this directly affected Songli, do you think their parents had a responsibilty to tell them?

If these complications were severe, do you think Songli's parents were justified in lying to them to keep them safe from an emotional perspective?

If a political career is ruined, is it because of the politician or by their family and freinds associated with them?

The Danger of Lying, or Endangered Lying? Part One (Part One of Four)

What is lying and is there a difference between lying and political messages? To answer this question, we first have to consider why honesty can be cast away so easily in any circumstance that requires it. What is honesty? Is it a means to be truthful at all times despite the consequences or is it a personal stake in whatever the truth will reveal? In this case, the concept of “a little white lie” comes to mind. What is a white lie? Is this a concept in your country or culture? A white lie is when something false is told, but the repercussions of this lie aren’t important so it’s considered a safe lie. No one gets hurt and the person being lied to (let’s call them Songli) might not even know they had been lied to. In theory, these lies seem insignificant in the grand scheme of things but only if Songli remains in the dark about the lie. Forever.

What happens when Songli finds out about this —seemingly harmless— lie days, weeks, months, or years after the lie was told? Will their trust be broken after all this time or will the passage of time soothe any resentment they may have had at the time? What if the white lie directly affected Songli and they moved through life without understanding the consequences of this lie? If they didn’t know any better, how could they have done anything to protect themselves against the actions and consequences of the lie and those who were in the know? The truth is that they wouldn’t have been able to do any of this because of their ignorance about what was going on around them. If this lie was a small white lie at the start but turned into a bigger lie because of circumstance outside the lair’s control, should Songli have been made aware of this lie?

It could have been a lie (albeit small) about their medical history as a child where their parents were too ashamed to tell others and Songli themselves, assuming that the truth would come out eventually. Something like “You had your tonsils out and everything went fine.” instead of the truth “You had your tonsils out but there were post op. complications and you spent some time in the hospital.” To a child, (Songli), they might not have understood why they needed to go to hospital after their throat was sore, but to avoid scaring them, Songli’s parents may have omitted the hospitalization when they were a young child (after they recovered) and just forgot to mention it as Songli grew up.

What if these complications were a result of something more serious during the general anesthetic or post-op recovery and the doctors at the time just didn’t know how to treat this? If Songli needs to go for an operation as an adult, this white lie their parents told them as a child (to keep Songli from worrying about their health) could endanger them while on the operating or recovery table.

What does this have to do with political lying? If Songli’s parents were, in fact, not parents but leaders of a political party/head of their government instead, the lies they tell will affect more than Songli and their level of emotional safety regarding what happened to them in hospital. In this case, Songli could believe the general population and trusting of the government since it is assumed that the government has their best interest’s at heart. Political lying is known as disinformation, and this is a clever way of stating that the information might not be accurate while not stating explicitly that lying is involved.

It’s only natural that disinformation is present in politics: Political parties are run by people, and people have their own agendas, regardless of how social their political system is. These might not be personal agendas: These agendas could instead involve the agenda of a differing opinion of the populous, one that the politician may not agree with. The question as to why they chose to run in an area where they disagree with the status quo is a discussion for another day, however.

Let's say Songli is the politician in this case. If they ran a campaign with a focus on health, at-home treatments, and out-of-hospital care for minor operations (like a tonsillectomy), because of their fast recovery and positive experience after they had their tonsillectomy, their campaign would be dishonest from the start and they would be none the wiser. The little white lie their parents told them as a child would have snow balled into a full campaign and this campaign would have the possibility to ruin their political career if the truth (lengthy hospital stay) surfaced.

The dangers of this weren’t considered when Songli’s parents made the decision to lie, but Songli will have to deal with the consequences regardless. The result is the following: The dangers of their complicated tonsillectomy would directly affect their political career and bring about a new set of danger, the likes of which Songli, their parents, and their political party wouldn’t be able to counter easily based on the nature of this dishonesty, intentional or not.

I will post the Questions to Consider and the reference list in the final part.

Do you think "Honesty is the best policy" in all situations?

Do you have this in your family?

Do you think ignorance is an excuse for lying, even by accident?

If a child can't remember something like this, is it the parents' responsibility to tell them?

If Songly found out afterwards and reacted poorly, do you think they would be justified in doing so because they were lied to as a child?

Should the government be trusted at all times? If not, why/when not?

Do you think personal agendas have a place in politics?

Should home/alternative treatments be focused on if this is what the ruling party practices? Why or why not?

What do you understand by the nature of dishonesty?

Questions to consider

Week Three:

Questions to consider

Criminals and Healthcare: Should They Receive the Same Treatment? (Part Three of Five)

In the last blogacle about criminals in healthcare, I spoke about how emotional needs aren’t usually met in the prison system while physical needs are met to an extent. To discuss this topic, we need to discern if emotional and mental health are human rights in the same way physical healthcare is. While it’s true that healthcare is seen as a human right in most countries, the level of care received by these individuals vary according to municipal funding and health prospectives across the board. Distribution channels and costs also play a factor in this regard, and these distribution factors can also be seen as a means for criminals to use their influence with their surrounding community, these criminals who may enter the prison system at a later date. You might ask “What is the connection here?” and in the beginning it may not seem that clear.

Criminality (usually) doesn’t start with hard crimes like murder and rape. Many crimes and criminals stay petty criminals their whole lives while focusing on the odd scam here and there (plus petty crimes like theft and pick pocketing). What brings people to crime is usually a lack of basic resources like adequate food to sustain their family which leads to theft and a feeling of accomplishment when they are successful. Physical areas of distribution are subjected to petty crime like food theft and pickpocketing in market areas (where food delivery trucks need to travel) and if these areas become crime hotspots, the food deliveries to prisons could be jeapordised, which decreases health safety in the prisons. Nutritional safety is possibly one of the most important healthy safety concerns in within the prison system.

Why is nutritional safety a priority in prisons? Food is essential for our general well-being from a safety perspective and to ensure that we can fight disease like the flu without harmful and nutrient-void ingredients, giving our cells the best possible chance to fight off infection and heal wounds. In prison, this food serves as a two-way street: On the one side, food is used to sustain inmates' physical and mental reserves to perform their best during their inmate jobs (in prisons that have this option) like cleaning, laundry duties, cooking, and general clerical work (if allowed) and so on. A room full of injured and lethargic inmates won’t create a healthy work environment, and on the other side of this street, food and proper nutrition (since those aren’t always mutually exclusive) serve as a safety net. Malnutrition, low blood sugar, and food insecurities create a melting pot for aggression and hostility if these circumstances aren’t resolved.

In spaces like prison where tensions and egos are already high, an increase in the possibility of inmates turning on their lunch buddy because they need a snack (are we all that different, after all?) could turn into a medical emergency faster than guards can turn the other way. Nutritional safety is a must for humans from all walks of life and to deny inmates of meals and snacks because they broke the law (regardless of what law they broke) can be seen as an infringement on their right to life, where life starts and ends with food.

The alternative is malnutrition and starvation, and most prisons prefer not to starve their inmates, regardless of their crime. With food and nutrition sorted, there are additional issues inmates could face, each of these issues exacerbated by poor nutrition and a lack of understanding of dietary needs. There is a wide variety of inmate health within the prisons: Some inmates are in good physical health while some are in poor health, but the reasons can vary widely.

The range of physical health issues inmates may face include the following:

Amputation-related disabilities
Cerebral palsy
Diabetes
Neuropathy
Spinal cord injuries
Substance abuse issues (alcohol and drugs)* While this may seem like an emotional or mental disability, withdrawal symptoms have a largely physical component where muscles, organs, and nerves, are affected. This created a physical disability within a previously understood emotional or mental disability.

among many others too numerous to list here.

Alternatively, the range of mental and emotional health issues inmates may face include the following:

Anxiety-related disorders
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD)
Bipolar disorder
Clinical depression
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
Schizophrenia

among many others too numerous to list here.

In prison, these disorders and/or disabilities don’t disappear because it’s less convenient for the person entering the prison system. At times, many inmates are undiagnosed at the time of their incarceration, which could delay treatment and increase their risk factor for physical harm to themselves and others while increasing their suicide risk because their environment has changed to a point that they don’t recognise.

The reality is that the person who murdered someone you knew is still a human being in the eyes of the law, even if the victim’s family and friends would rather see them starve to death or be mistreated in the infirmary.

I will post the Questions to Consider and the reference list in the final part.

Do you think emotional needs are as important as physical needs?

Do you think the distribution channel is as important as the products being distriubuted?

Do you think any level of criminality is acceptable? What crimes are acceptable and why?

What do you understand by 'nutritional safety'?

Do you believe a criminal should have the best possible medical chance even if they didn't give their victim the best possible chance to be crime free?

Do you think aggression and hostility are understandable in prison? Why do you think that?

Do you think a medical emergency for someone who has killed someone is less important than a medical emergency for someone who hasn't taken a life? Why do you think that?

Do you think dietary needs should be adhered to in prison even if they might not be life-threatening?

Do you think inmates with physical disabilities should be catered to in the prison system or should they work around the obstacles because they broke the law?

Do you think inmates with mental and emotional health issues should have access to mental health services at all times? Why or why not?

Do you think a newly diagnosed inmate should be treated differently from those who were diagnosed before they got to prison? Why or why not?

Do you think a 'human being in the eyes of the law' is different from a human being in the eyes of their peers? Why do you think this?

Questions to consider

Week Four:

Questions to consider

Once off: A Story for Propaganda

“Where is your home?”

This is a question for all of you who pay attention to the messages around you. In the land of the sheer concrete jungle, at the heart of modern propaganda, the location of your home is the most important factor when it comes to propaganda. How else would you read or hear the messages tailored for you?

The start of propaganda as discussed in this blogacle may not have been set in Ancient Rome but this is where my story starts. Being able to respond to posters and paraphernalia for the sake if your army and country was the difference between an effective conqueror or a failed campaign. The difference is that in Ancient Rome, oral propaganda was widely used for the sake of preserving resources and as a means to instill a sense on morale in their troops before battle. They had the monetary means and distribution centers to spread these pamphlets, but combat-specific propaganda was spread through an oral tradition only.

“Step right up! Step right up for your latest speech, brought to you by your commanding officer”

Weary from the night before, so many bodies, so many captives who fought back, the troop lined up for their daily pep-talk.

“So far, this campaign has been a success. Never before has the enemy cowered with such fright before our might.”

The crowds cheer. Weary or not, they know a successful speech when they hear one.

“We are the greatest army in the world and we couldn’t have done it without you.”

Titus knew where this was going. These speeches were usually a response to the bad reputation the legion go from all the pillaged towns and pillaged people. Can we truly have too many slaves? Marcus was an arse. Slavery was bad for business back home: With cheap or free labour, who needed to hire any locals? This meant the wives of the soldiers would lose their independence while their soldiers’ were fighting a war they didn’t know enough about to ask the right questions.

This is the information not spewed by the leaders: Pillage these lands so our common people can remain in their cast.

“Titus, are you listening? This is important.”

“Yes, sir. My apologies, sir,” I must have spaced out. “Won’t happen again, sir.”

“See that it doesn’t. You need this information for a successful campaign.”

This is the same campaign we’ve run since the beginning, I doubt it’s going to change. How does Gains know anything about our opponents? Does he have a spy on the other side?

Oh the speech is over. Thank the gods.

“I have a question, sir.”

If the battlefield was made from glass, the rest of the platoon would have heard on drop.

“A question? Why would you have a question?”

“It’s just, well, how do you know what our enemy looks like?”

Titus knew he was in trouble but he couldn’t take it anymore. “You told us that we are needed to fight the others, but how do you know that they are the others? They could be us in different uniforms.”

He hasn’t looked at me like that since I wore the wrong color helmet when I started. I must be in more trouble than I realised.

“It’s all about coordination. I know how you move and fight so it becomes obvious who the others are once I take the time to observe you. Besides, the clothes say it all. If the government put these uniforms on your bodies, the only way the others could have the same clothes is if there were a spy among us and they are feeding the others information about what we wear to battle. A spy who could ask stupid questions. Are you a spy, Titus? Do you even know where you are?”

Questions to Consider:

Are all people equally susceptible to propaganda messaging?
Can technology be used to filter out harmful propaganda messages?
In the field of propaganda, what facilitates communication between two regions?
Is all information unique when it comes to propagandandistic measures?
Is propaganda influenced by culture? If so, how?
Is the engagement of propaganda a one sided en devour? Why or why not?
Should technology be able to filter out harmful propaganda messages?
Why does propaganda have a bad reputation?

Important philosophers:

None

References:

Berridge, G. (2015). Diplomacy Theory and Practice. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.

Why does home matter regarding propaganda?

In this context, is

home and location

the same thing?

Does everyone need to respond to propaganda? Why or why not?

Do you think this has the same effect as traditional propaganda? Why or why not?

In the context of propaganda, what would a visual pep-talk be?

If all examples of a bad reputation need to be addressed, should these responses be the same as the responses from the first question like this? Why or why not?

Do all common people understand the same propagandistic message? Why or why not?

Do you think propaganda paraphernalia can be used as communication devices between spies? How would this work?

In war and conflict, do uniforms matter if either side believes they are wearing the right one, for the right cause?

How do you think propaganda coordination is handled by the army?

Is there such a thing as a stupid question when it comes to knowldge and information?