Mental Hygiene | Encyclopedia.com

Mental Hygiene | Encyclopedia.com

The National Committee for Mental Hygiene was founded in New York in 1909 by a number of leading psychiatrists and Clifford W. Beers (1876–1943), who had been institutionalized in several mental hospitals after a nervous breakdown. He described his experiences and the deplorable conditions in mental hospitals in his autobiography A Mind That ound Itself (1913). The National Committee aimed to improve conditions in mental hospitals, stimulate research in psychiatry, improve the quality of psychiatric education, develop measures preventing mental illness, and popularize psychiatric and psychological perspectives. Although mental hygiene originated within psychiatry, mental hygiene ideas also inspired social workers, teachers, psychologists, sociologists, and members of other professions. Consequently the mental hygiene movement became interdisciplinary in nature.

No, We Do Not Need New Anti-Terrorism Laws to Combat Right-Wing Extremists | The Nation

No, We Do Not Need New Anti-Terrorism Laws to Combat Right-Wing Extremists | The Nation

To understand why, we must first contend with the reasons this issue exists in the first place. It may come as a surprise, especially considering that we’re approaching the 20th anniversary of 9/11, that there is no generic federal law punishing domestic terrorism. While the USA Patriot Act did redefine terrorism to include its domestic variety, it did not create a specific set of penalties for such acts. Instead, prosecutors can use many of the broad terrorism laws that are on the books to prosecute acts of domestic terror (the majority of which have been committed by far-right actors). The problem is, they simply don’t. As the Brennan Center’s Mike German writes, “The Justice epartment’s inattention to far-right violence is a matter of longstanding policy and practice, not a lack of authority.ȁ As a result, the term “domestic terrorismȁ has been rendered “practically inconsequentialȁ from a legal perspective according to the legal website JustSecurity.org.

The situation is vastly different when talking about foreign terrorism. As soon as the government establishes a person’s connection, no matter how tenuous, to one of the 69 US-designated foreign terrorist organizations, that person can be subjected to all kinds of dubious law enforcement practices, often leading to more severe criminal chargers, and triggering enhanced penalties upon conviction. Since most of the organizations on this list operate in Muslim-majority countries, the connection between Muslims and terrorism has become cemented in our legal thinking, to say nothing about our larger political and social imaginations. Even in cases when there is no direct connection to a foreign terrorist organization, American Muslims are still characterized as international terrorists by the Justice epartment.