South Dakota Wrongly Puts Thousands in Nursing Homes, Government Says

By Matt Apuzzomay
The New York Times
Originally posted May 2, 2016

When patients in South Dakota seek help for serious but manageable disabilities such as severe diabetes, blindness or mental illness, the answer is often the same: With few alternatives available, they end up in nursing homes or long-term care facilities, whether they need such care or not.

In a scathing rebuke of the state’s health care system, the Justice Department said on Monday that thousands of patients were being held unnecessarily in sterile, highly restrictive group homes. That is discrimination, it said, making South Dakota the latest target of a federal effort to protect the civil rights of people with disabilities and mental illnesses, outlined in a Supreme Court decision 17 years ago.

The Obama administration has opened more than 50 such investigations and reached settlements with eight states. One investigation, into Florida’s treatment of children with disabilities, ended in a lawsuit over policies that placed those children in nursing homes. With its report Monday, the Justice Department signaled that it might also sue South Dakota.

The article is here.

Cook County Sheriff Dart: Jailing poor, mentally ill is unjust

Madhu Krishnamurthy
Daily Herald
Originally posted April 6, 2016

The numbers of mentally ill people housed in the nation's prisons and jails are staggering, Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart says, and many of them shouldn't be there.

Dart, speaking Wednesday at Elgin Community College, has led a campaign to reduce what he calls the unjust incarceration of the poor and mentally ill. He's been recognized by health advocacy organizations for trying to change the criminal justice system, which perpetuates a revolving door at jails. His presentation was part of the college's Humanities Center Speakers series.

The article is here.

First Artificially Intelligent Lawyer Hired

The American Lawyer
First published on May 11, 2016

Here is an excerpt:

Ross, “the world’s first artificially intelligent attorney” built on IBM’s cognitive computer Watson, was designed to read and understand language, postulate hypotheses when asked questions, research, and then generate responses (along with references and citations) to back up its conclusions. Ross also learns from experience, gaining speed and knowledge the more you interact with it.

“You ask your questions in plain English, as you would a colleague, and ROSS then reads through the entire body of law and returns a cited answer and topical readings from legislation, case law and secondary sources to get you up-to-speed quickly,” the website says. “In addition, ROSS monitors the law around the clock to notify you of new court decisions that can affect your case.”

The article is here.

Here is a video ad for Watson.  For me, it is both amazing and scary.

In ethics debate, what to disclose at issue

By David Saleh Rauf
The Houston Chronicle
Originally posted May 28, 2016

Here is an excerpt:

More than 30,350 certificates have been filed with the ethics commission, a process Capriglione says is "like watching transparency happen every single day."

However, implementing the far-reaching law has proven complicated. Regulators have been inundated with questions since the law touches on contracts approved by state agencies, cities, counties, school districts or any special districts like a water authority.

Industry groups, which unsuccessfully waged a late attempt to have Abbott veto the law, said they have been unsure of what to disclose.

The article is here.

Corruption? Here? Bill would require ethics training for N.J. elected officials

By S. P. Sullivan
NJ.com
Originally posted May 9, 2016

In an effort to stem public corruption scandals, the state Senate on Monday unanimously passed a bill that would require all New Jersey elected officials undergo ethics training as soon as they're elected.

The bill (S84) mandates elected officials take the training within six months of their first term. Officials who skip out on the ethics education would face a $5,000 fine.

Sponsors of the legislation point to investigations by the state Comptroller's Office, which over the years has detailed many examples of public corruption, as evidence that the training is needed.

The article is here.

The job of ‘ethics committees’ should be ethically informed code consistency review

Søren Holm
J Med Ethics doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-103343

Moore and Donnelly argue in the paper ‘The job of “ethics committees”’ that research ethics committees should be renamed and that their job should be specified as “review of proposals for consistency with the duly established and applicable code” only.  They raise a large number of issues, but in this comment I briefly want to suggest that two of their arguments are fundamentally flawed.

The first flawed argument is the argument related to the separation of powers. Moore and Donnelly proceed from the premise that it is pro tanto better to have an institutional arrangement that separates code-making powers and decisional powers, and then proceed to argue that this separation is not feasible for what they call ‘ethics consistency review’ because “no matter who established any prespecified review standards, the review decision maker must be empowered at review to revise those standards when this would make for an ethical improvement.

The response article is here.

The job of ‘ethics committees’

Andrew Moore and Andrew Donnelly
J Med Ethics doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-102688

Abstract

What should authorities establish as the job of ethics committees and review boards? Two answers are: (1) review of proposals for consistency with the duly established and applicable code and (2) review of proposals for ethical acceptability. The present paper argues that these two jobs come apart in principle and in practice. On grounds of practicality, publicity and separation of powers, it argues that the relevant authorities do better to establish code-consistency review and not ethics-consistency review. It also rebuts bad code and independence arguments for the opposite view. It then argues that authorities at present variously specify both code-consistency and ethics-consistency jobs, but most are also unclear on this issue. The paper then argues that they should reform the job of review boards and ethics committees, by clearly establishing code-consistency review and disestablishing ethics-consistency review, and through related reform of the basic orientation, focus, name, and expertise profile of these bodies and their actions.

The article is here.

Scientific Studies, Hype, Limitations and Media

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver
Originally aired May 8, 2016

Cosmopolitan ethics

Muhammad Ali Musofer
Dawn
Originally posted May 6, 2016

Here is an excerpt:

Looking at the ethical challenges of a connected world, social scientists have been seeking such ethical principles that should be inclusive and help people of diverse backgrounds live in harmony and peace. Over time, different ethical perspectives, with different terms, have been proposed to deal with ethical issues of the contemporary world, and cosmopolitan ethics is one the most discussed ethical perspectives.

The concept of cosmopolitism can be traced in different societies in history; however, after the Second World War, the term ‘cosmopolitan ethics’ received increasing attention from scholars. Broadly speaking, cosmopolitan ethics is based on the principle that all human beings belong to a single community. Cosmopolitan ethics envisage a society where inclusive morality, shared economic interest and social relationship is used to encompass cultural differences. A cosmopolitan society regards the difference of identities and values as strengths. It encourages dialogue within and between cultures and societies to make this world a better place to live in.

The article is here.