Asylum - a word of Greek origin that means ‘what cannot be seized’ - refers to what is inviolable, and as such it invokes a higher power that offers protection. The reluctant or forced movement of people as refugees away from the Kingdom or State of their nationality or residence to another has been an ages old problem. The practice of asylum can be spotted in ancient history. The Kadesh Peace Treaty - concluded in the 13th century BC - between Ramses II and Hatusil III, king of the Hitittas, constitutes the first international treaty that we have evidence of and it contains protection clauses. In nine provisions, the treaty establishes that the exchange of population between the two sovereigns will only take place on condition that neither …show more content…
The official faith of the Roman Empire became Christianity and stretched across the Europe, the acceptance of the power of the Church resulted in the process of territorialisation of asylum. The importance of asylum in the Church developed and it tracked its golden age from the twelfth century. With the decline of the Roman Empire and the rise of Christian Europe, territorial asylum again evolved into the practice of intercession by the clergy of the church. Over time, ecclesiastical laws on asylum were codified however with the rise of nation state and the claim of national authorities of the exclusive right to administer justice their influence began to recede. The basis of asylum shifted from the religious sanctity of the place to the sovereignty of the city or state. In the 17th century, as international opinion converged on the need to suppress criminality, the concept of asylum again developed and the concept of extradition grew in …show more content…
This led to the conflict as to what compromised a political offence. And to counter it international instruments gave definition what does not constitute as a political offence. The Right to Asylum was first incorporated under article 120 of the French Constitution of 24th June 1793. The article reads as: “the French people give asylum to foreigners who, in the name of liberty, are banished from their homelands, and refuse it to tyrants.” Although positive developments took place however the right to asylum lost its status as a human right and became a state right to either accept or reject the application of a person seeking
In their call to “bring back the asylum,” Sisti and his colleagues speak of the original, 19th-century meaning of the term asylum: a place that is a safe sanctuary, that provides long-term care for the mentally ill. “It is time to build them again,” they write.
Historically, Canada has held a world renowned reputation as nation with a magnanimous ideological approach to providing asylum to those individuals subjected to marginalization and persecution in their homeland – regardless of their nation of origin (Ismaili, 2011, p.89 & 92). Indeed, providing sanctuary to refugees who would otherwise experience significant hardships ranging from blatant discrimination and racism to torture and genocide, has very much become an institutionalized aspect of Canadian society. However, recent changes to Canada’s immigration policy delineated in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and Bill C-31 may have perhaps put this ideology in peril (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, 2001).
The 1930s was a tough time for all of the mentally ill people. They were not treated the way that they do now. The mentally ill were called names like satans child, or they were not expected or very frowned upon in many religions. So because of all of the people who were mentally ill they started to create asylums. With these asylums they could hold almost all of the mentally ill people during that time. All of the asylums were overcrowded and sometimes there would be around 1 million patients. WIth all of the people in these asylums the staff and doctors became very understaffed so the patients living within the asylums were not treated how they should have been. Then doctors had found ways that they thought could cure these mentally ill people, whether it would be cruel to them or not. The treatments ran from major brain surgery to taking baths for multiple days.
Dr. Thomas Kirkbride was born in 1809 in Pennsylvania. He went to the University of Pennsylvania Medical School originally intending to become a surgeon. However, in 1840 after his training and internship at Friends Asylum, he was offered to become the superintendent of the newly established Pennsylvania Hospital of the Insane. "His ambition, intellect, and strong sense of purpose enabled him to use that position to become one of the most prominent authorities on mental health care in the latter half of the nineteenth century." He soon became the founding member of the Association of Medical Superintendents of American Institutions for the Insane, and later was elected the president of the American Psychiatric Association. From his involvement in these organizations and from his writings, he promoted a standardized method of hospital construction and mental health treatment for the insane which is commonly known as "The Kirkbride Plan." He wrote many articles and reviews for medical journals and also published three books. His third book, On the Construction, Organization, and General Arrangements of Hospitals for the Insane (1854), was a very technical and thorough collection of his theories on the topic. Dr. Thomas Kirkbride's theories on the architecture, activities, and medical treatment for the mentally ill were the precedents that formed how the mentally ill were treated in the United States society.
The practice of medicine in medieval times played a very important role in society. The communities and civilizations would not have survived without the treatments that were offered. In order to have kept the population going, medicine was required. The population might have been much smaller, or even tanked without the hope of these medicines in certain cases. If the Black Death had not occurred, most of the advancements in medicine would not have taken place. While this was a devastating event in history and a misery for all of the people affected, it led the way to many new improvements in medicine. Medical recipes were developed which used the resources they had available to create relief for some of the illnesses that affected people at that time and which we still have today. The medical issues that could not be cured with the herbs and resources they had available required surgery. Compared to modern surgeries, medieval surgeries were very different. Surgery was only performed if it was the last resort and there was no other option. They had to use poisonous resources, which could be extremely dangerous. Today, we take for granted the opportunities we have with surgery, and if we need it there is sometimes no thinking twice, as in the case of someone who gets plastic surgery to change the appearance of a part of the body. Although these practices may seem like they have no affect on where we have advanced to today, they in fact do. Without the practice of medieval medical recipes and surgical practices, the medical world would not be where it is today.
In the 1840’s, the United States started to build public insane asylums instead of placing the insane in almshouses or jail. Before this, asylums were maintained mostly by religious factions whose main goal was to purify the patient (Hartford 1). By the 1870’s, the conditions of these public insane asylums were very unhealthy due to a lack of funding. The actions of Elizabeth J. Cochrane (pen name Nellie Bly), during her book “Ten Days in a Mad-House,” significantly heightened the conditions of these mental asylums during the late 1800s.
The stigma and negative associations that go with mental illness have been around as long as mental illness itself has been recognized. As society has advanced, little changes have been made to the deep-rooted ideas that go along with psychological disorders. It is clearly seen throughout history that people with mental illness are discriminated against, cast out of society, and deemed “damaged”. They are unable to escape the stigma that goes along with their illness, and are often left to defend themselves in a world that is not accepting of differences in people. Society needs to realize what it is doing, and how it is affecting these people who are affected with mental illness. If we continue to not help them, and to foster their illness, it will only get worse.
A lot of thoughts and observations come to mind while watching The New Asylums. This is a documentary about life in prison for people who have mental diseases, so some of the thoughts and observations are actually quite sad. Many of the prisoners shown in the documentary look sad and defeated, and they have a right to, because having a mental disease even in the real world is very hard. In prison, they are allowed to refuse their medication, although at least there are people who will try to help them. Still, it looks miserable, even more miserable than prison looks for people who aren't suffering from a disease like schizophrenia. Mental illness is often used as the punch line of a joke, but like most other punch lines, it isn't that funny because it offends and demeans a whole subgroup of people. Subgroups are actually what stick out the most and make up the previously mentioned thoughts and observations. While watching all of this sadness on the screen, it's hard not to notice that there are some trends. The documentary was filmed in an all-male prison, so trends in gender aren't shown by the movie, but even the casual observer will notice that most of the inmates who are interviewed or showcased are people of color. This could indicate one of two things: there is a higher number of people of color who are affected by mental disorders or there is a higher number of people of color who are persecuted and tried by the law, ending up in prisons such as the one in the movie. Studying criminology is important because those questions matter, not just to the ruling group of the legal system, but to the individuals affected by disease and persecution, to their families, and to their communities. Investigating an obvious trend helps ans...
No matter where they were, mad houses, or insane asylums, have the same basic features and functions. The views of asylum life changed drastically over the course of the nineteenth century.
What comes to mind when you hear the words “insane asylum”? Do such terms as lunatic, crazy, scary, or even haunted come to mind? More than likely these are the terminology that most of us would use to describe our perception of insane asylums. However, those in history that had a heart’s desire to treat the mentally ill compassionately and humanely had a different viewpoint. Insane asylums were known for their horrendous treatment of the mentally ill, but the ultimate purpose in the reformation of insane asylums in the nineteenth century was to improve the treatment for the mentally ill by providing a humane and caring environment for them to reside.
For many decades the mentally ill or insane have been hated, shunned, and discriminated against by the world. They have been thrown into cruel facilities, said to help cure their mental illnesses, where they were tortured, treated unfairly, and given belittling names such as retards, insane, demons, and psychos. However, reformers such as Dorothea Dix thought differently of these people and sought to help them instead. She saw the inhumanity in these facilities known as insane asylums or mental institutions, and showed the world the evil that wandered inside these asylums. Although movements have been made to improve conditions in insane asylums, and were said to help and treat the mentally ill, these brutally abusive places were full of disease and disorder, and were more like concentration camps similar to those in Europe during WWII than hospitals.
On August 26, 1789, the assembly issued the “Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen.” Through judicial matters, this document was written in order to secure due process and to create self-government among the French citizens. This document offered to the world and especially to the French citizens a summary of the morals and values of the Revolution, while in turn justifying the destruction of a government; especially in this case the French government, based upon autocracy of the ruler and advantage. The formation of a new government based upon the indisputable rights of the individuals of France through liberty and political uniformity.
Those who do not fear persecution are not considered in this definition, for instance, people escaping from natural disasters, because they do not have a fear of persecution. In addition, even though the individuals do face persecution, they are not considered as refugees if they are not ‘on the basis of’ of one of the protected grounds. Even those who face persecution on the basis of a protected ground, they cannot be declared as refugees because they are not outside their country of citizenship. The most controversial notion is that those who have been driven from their homes but who have not crossed international borders, so-called ‘Internally Displaced Persons’ (IDPs), are not in the definition of refugee, even though they have all the characteristics of a refugee except that they have not crossed an international border. The UNHCR has played their part in helping such persons in the last thirty or so years, but has still not considered them as refugees which makes them hard to have full benefits of what refugees should get. Hence, Lister aims to portray that these restrictions have a rational
Three events that took place in the fourteenth century and caused it to be described as “calamitous” are The Hundred Years War, The Black Death, and The Little Ice Age. Calamitous is defined as disastrous or catastrophic. These events are what caused the fourteenth century to be described as a bad time period, without the events, I believe, that the fourteenth century would not have been a disaster.
When lines of identity inevitably blend, relative jurisprudence must be exercised. Lines make excluding circles and methods of excluding people from asylum; our international community divides into unwelcome and welcome nations. As discourse, cultural identity means translating beliefs and feelings from one culture to another. In the process of translation, a screen of cultural values filters understanding of the values and experience of the “other.” The simple word “refugee” evokes images and stories particular to a collectively defined identity, invoking “an image of the radicalized other” (Daniel 272).