Posthumous pardon of Alan Turing

It has been a while since I published an article. For that I apologise. I have been unwell. But as we enter 2014 I hope to once again give the world the benefit of my observations, for whatever they are worth!

I am struck by the diversity of views about the posthumous pardon of Alan Turing. Some have said it is wrong because it does nothing for others who suffered the same injustice under the same laws against homosexuality. No, that does not make the pardon of Alan Turing wrong. It highlights the injustice not just to Alan Turing but to all convicted under the same obnoxious laws. It is right that Turing should be pardoned. It is wrong that all others so convicted have not been pardoned.

The pardon has been given to Turing because he was an exceptional man. It should have been said that it was given because the law was wrong and unfairly persecuted those who we now recognise should not have been criminalised because of their sexuality. The simple thing to do now is to apologise and pardon all those so convicted.

Comments

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery. Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

The Thin End account of COVID Lockdown

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'. The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

The Thin End

Search This Blog