Governments around the world are uniting in trying to defeat terrorist movements. A balanced and evidence-based approach is necessary.
This paper by our Trustee Prof Kam Bhui, probably a few years ahead of its time, might well go on to be the seminal piece that resets how policies are formulated, psychiatry is practised and evidence informs human behaviour- rather than opinions and myths.
from our Trustee Professor Kam Bhui & Professor Edgar Jones:
Doctors, lawyers and criminal justice agencies need methods to assess vulnerability to violent radicalization. In synergy, public health interventions aim to prevent the emergence of risk behaviours as well as prevent and treat new illness events. This paper describes a new method of assessing vulnerability to violent radicalization, and then investigates the role of previously reported causes, including poor self-reported health, anxiety and depression, adverse life events, poverty, and migration and socio-political factors. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0090718#pone.0090718-Kohut2
Might Depression, Psychosocial Adversity, and Limited Social Assets Explain Vulnerability to and Resistance against Violent Radicalisation?
Professor Kam Bhui and Professor Edgar Jones defining study reveals the common characteristics of those most vulnerable to recruitment by terrorists. This study tests whether depression, psychosocial adversity, and limited social assets offer protection or suggest vulnerability to the process of radicalisation. Continue reading Vulnerable to radicalization: depressed & disaffected
careif is involved in generating new evidence and health policies that promote and protect public health in a culturally diverse society. Extreme views can lead to actions that are harmful to individuals and society. These views can be expressed in rhetoric about religion, or lifestyles, or prohibitions about everyday choices, consumption patterns or gender relations. Continue reading Radicalisation and Public Health
Counter-terrorism approaches grounded in the criminal justice system have not prevented violent radicalisation. Indeed there is some evidence that these approaches may have encouraged membership of radical groups by not recognising Muslim communities as allies, citizens, victims of terrorism, and victims of discrimination, but only as suspect communities who were then further alienated. Informed by public health research and practice, a new approach is proposed to target populations vulnerable to recruitment, rather than rely only on research of well known terrorist groups and individual perpetrators of terrorist acts. Continue reading Is radicalisation a public health issue?