This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
By Roojin Habibi, Timothy Fish Hodgson, and Alicia Ely Yamin Today, as the world transitions from living in the grips of a novel coronavirus to living with an entrenched, widespread infectious disease known as COVID-19, global appreciation for the human rights implications of publichealth crises are once again rapidly fading from view.
While receiving significant global traction and acceptance since their publication in 1985, the Siracusa Principles, the authors argue, proved to be simply “unequal to the task” of guiding States’ conduct in the context of COVID-19 because they are “unable to speak in any significant detail to the particular concerns of publichealth crises.”
Disaster studies has a relatively longstanding focus on pets in the context of emergency planning, evacuations, and shelter, in part ushered in by singular disasters such as the 2005 US Hurricane Katrina. Reforms are motivated by the recognition that people will protect their pets, even at the expense of their own security.
This includes health care. While “ESG” was first coined in 2005, the coronavirus pandemic, the issues solidifying in 2020 shown above in the first image, and climate change converged over the past year. Keep an eye on the “S” in ESG for health care, along with E and G.
When Lowe tried to seek treatment for her SUD in 2005, instead of getting medical care, she was forcibly taken away from her husband and son and put on an involuntary psychiatric hold. During her “hospital-incarceration,” she lost access to any prenatal care, and state officials did not monitor the fetus’s health.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 26,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content