Aboriginal prisoners and cognitive impairment: the impact of dual disadvantage on Social and Emotional Wellbeing.

BACKGROUND: Negligible information is available regarding the Social and Emotional Wellbeing (SEWB) needs of Aboriginal Australian individuals in custody with cognitive impairment. This is problematic given that Aboriginal people with cognitive impairment often experience dual disadvantage in the context of the justice system. This study sought to ascertain the relationship between cognitive impairment and mental health/cultural needs (SEWB) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in custody. METHOD: A sample of 122 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were administered a culturally themed semi-structured questionnaire in custodial settings in Victoria, Australia. The questionnaire included measures of cognitive impairment, SEWB and forensic needs. Analyses were performed to determine differences in the presence of SEWB and unmet custodial needs by level of cognitive impairment. RESULTS: Findings revealed a diminished level of wellbeing for cognitively impaired participants across several factors. Cognitive impairment was associated with poorer coping mechanisms, additional experiences of racism, difficulties handling emotions, discomfort around non-Aboriginal people and reduced access to meaningful activities in custody. All participants regardless of their level of impairment recognised the importance of cultural engagement; however, cognitively impaired participants had greater difficulty accessing/practicing cultural activities. CONCLUSIONS: Culturally responsive disability assistance should be available at all phases of the justice system for Indigenous people with cognitive impairment to ensure that equitable care is accessible and needs are addressed.

Euthanasia: an introduction.

It has been argued that euthanasia is one of the most pressing social concerns of our times. A review of current scientific and legal materials, however, indicates that this issue is a complex and contentious one that crosses numerous perspectives and theoretical orientations. In order to provide background for the other articles in this collection, we present a brief history of attitudes toward euthanasia. In addition, various terms that are associated with the concept of euthanasia are defined. Finally, this paper provides a framework for the articles that follow by suggesting that three central issues must be addressed in order to resolve the controversies surrounding euthanasia. These are (1) the establishment of standardized criteria of euthanasia eligibility, (2) the investigation of public attitudes regarding acceptable means for engaging in euthanasia, and (3) the evaluation of the roles of professionals who are directly involved in euthanasia decisions. We hope that the following articles will provide insight into these issues.

Euthanasia on trial: examining public attitudes toward non-physician-assisted death.

This study investigated the influence of various contextual effects on the decisions of subjects evaluating a case of nonphysician-assisted suicide. Subjects viewed a videotaped deposition of an individual emotionally or nonemotionally describing how he assisted in the death of his terminally ill wife by disconnecting her respirator or shooting her in the head. The deposition was followed by jury instructions that outlined the duties of the subject and, in some cases, was followed by a nullification instruction that informed the subjects of their right to ignore the law in this case if they felt it would culminate in an unfair verdict. After viewing the videotape, subjects were asked to rate the guilt of the individual as well as their confidence in this rating. Results indicate that the means of death and the type of instruction significantly affect guilt ratings. The implications of these findings are discussed.