Search results

The purpose of this study was to provide proof of concept and evaluate the project for the development of a forensic service in safeguarding adults at risk of harm who may have suffered a non-accidental injury as a result of physical abuse or neglect.

This pilot project arising from a Safeguarding Adults Review was designed using an iterative process. Opinion from all partners of the Safeguarding Adults’ Boards in two adjacent areas as well as using expert forensic advice from the Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine was sought.

All professionals recognised the need for a forensic service because at present decision-making around potential non-accidental injuries (NAI) may not be evidence based. The main barriers were seen as lack of knowledge and education combined with the area of work not being recognised as being needed and hence not commissioned. No similar service existed in England to aid the project being developed either academically or practically, other than reflecting what happens in children’s safeguarding.

The knowledge and skills as well as the resources developed for this project will aid safeguarding professionals to make more informed decisions when working with adults at risk of harm who have sustained a potential NAI.

This project has high originality with no other area in England offering a similar service or in the process of developing a service at present.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of the life of the musician Brian Wilson from five different perspectives.

The authors used a mixed method of collaborative autoethnography, psychobiography and digital team ethnography to try and better understand the life and contributions of Brian Wilson.

Each of the five contributors provides different insights into the life and music of Brian Wilson.

While the focus of this paper is on a single individual, a case study, the long and distinguished life of Brian Wilson provides much material for discussion and theorising.

Each individual presenting to mental health services has a complex biography. The five different contributions articulated in this paper could perhaps be taken as similar to the range of professional opinions seen in mental health teams, with each focusing on unique but overlapping aspects of the person’s story.

This account shows the importance of taking a biological-psychological-social-spiritual and cultural perspective on mental illness.

This multi-layered analysis brings a range of perspectives to bear on the life and achievements of Brian Wilson, from developmental, musical, psychological and lived experience standpoints.

The purpose is to offer a critique of the process of decision-making by top university administrators and to analyze how their decisions imposed their preferences and expanded administrative control.

In the fall of 2021, the top administrators at Boston-based Northeastern University required that all members of the university community return to fully on-campus face-to-face work. That decision involved a return to what was labeled “normal operations” and followed a year-and-a-half of adjustments to the COVID-19 pandemic. Building on that case example, the analysis then ranges backward and forward in time. Other decisions – by Northeastern University leaders as well as leaders at other schools – are considered as well.

Leaders impose labels on complex contingencies as a way of constructing meaning. No label is objectively true or indisputable. In the hands of individuals who possess hierarchical power and authority, the application of a label such as “new normal” represents an exercise of power. Through an exploration and analysis of the underlying, unspoken, assumptions behind the application of the “new normal” label, the article suggests how the interests of university leaders were being advanced.

Because of its reliance on labeling, the paper focuses mainly on the words of administrators – at Northeastern University and elsewhere – that are called upon to explain/justify decisions. The multiplicity of interests forwarded by the “new normal” label are explored. No attempt is made – nor would it be possible – to understand what was in the hearts and minds of these administrators.

The article makes a case that any and all pronouncements of leaders should be understood as assertions of power and statements of interests. The practical impact is to suggest a critical analysis to be applied to all such pronouncements.

The approach taken in this article is situated within post-modernist analysis that critiques dominant narratives, disputes epistemological certainty and ontological objectivity and takes cognizance of coded messages contained in language.

Everyone has been through a traumatic period of time with the pandemic. The author has focused on a specific community – university administrators and tenure/tenure track faculty – as a window to help explain how decision-makers shaped their response. The author wants to emphasize the labels imposed by leaders and the assumptions behind the application of those labels.