English – Page 318 – MIL Submissions Engine

July 29, 2025

‘I was very fearful of my parents’: new research shows how parents can use coercive control on their children

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Kate Fitz-Gibbon, Professor (Practice), Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University

In Australia, there is growing recognition that children and young people are not just witnesses to domestic, family and sexual violence, but victim-survivors in their own right.

While we are getting better at understanding how coercive control operates in adult relationships – particularly where men use it against women – much less attention has been given to how children experience this kind of abuse, especially when it comes from a parent or caregiver.

New research interviewing teenage victim-survivors reveals how parents can coercively control their children under the guise of parental discipline.

What is coercive control?

Coercive control is a pattern of abusive behaviours used to instil fear, dominate or isolate someone over time. It can include:

physical violence
sexual abuse
surveillance
threats
humiliation
limiting access to money
technology-facilitated abuse
animal abuse, among many other abusive tactics.

Focusing largely on adult victim-survivors, research has found experiences of coercive control can have cumulative and long-lasting negative impacts.

Studies of children show how coercive control can erode a child’s mental health, self-esteem and sense of safety.

Fear, guilt and manipulation

For young people, within the context of the family, coercive control may be perpetrated by parents, step-parents, caregivers, siblings and other family members. The tactics used may mirror those seen in adult contexts.

But there are different circumstances at play for children. They are typically dependent on their caregivers, still mentally developing, and often have limited access to external support.

My new report, Silence and Inaction, released by the South Australian Royal Commission into Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence, draws on interviews with 53 young people aged 13–18 who have experienced different forms of domestic, family and sexual violence in that state.

In this study, young victim-survivors spoke of rules imposed by abusive adults in their family to control their friendships, communication, bodily autonomy and emotional expression. These were often enforced through fear, guilt or manipulation. One child told me:

I kicked the wall when I was eight, and my parents came in and they stripped my entire room bare, just got rid of everything […] I was either in my room or was at school […] I got water brought to me, food brought to me three times a day […] they said, “You have abused this home. It was a loving place, and you’ve abused it so when people do things wrong, they go to prison”. I was very fearful of my parents.

Several young people described experiences that reflect the dynamics of coercive control, even if they did not use that language themselves. They spoke of environments where control, surveillance and isolation were constant, and where resistance or independence was met with punishment.

Experiences of gaslighting

Several young victim-survivors interviewed described being made to feel “crazy” or “overdramatic” when they challenged the behaviour they were experiencing. Others were punished for asserting boundaries or seeking help.

A number of young people described experiences of gaslighting – being told their memories or feelings were wrong or exaggerated.

This was particularly apparent among young people who had tried to speak up about the violence they were experiencing. One young victim-survivor told me:

I was very much gaslighting myself, and then also was being gaslit for years prior by my father and not made to feel that I could ever tell anyone.

Some young victim-survivors described beginning to question their own perceptions or feeling responsible for the harm they experienced. One young person said:

I always have a fear in my head that everything I’ve said and done [is] just a massive lie, which is why I documented a lot of things […] I have photos and videos of things that have happened […] it kind of keeps me a little bit sane.

For the young people interviewed, the dynamics of coercive control were further compounded by their legal and financial dependence on the person using violence.

Young people described having limited avenues to escape or resist the abuse, and having little access to alternative sources of care or trusted adults for support.

Discipline or control?

Many of the young people I interviewed said the abuse they experienced was explained away by parents as “discipline”.

Reasonable parenting involves setting boundaries and enforcing rules through clear communication and respect for a child’s emotional and physical safety. What the young people in the study described went well beyond that.

The young people interviewed described being physically punished – through beatings, slaps or threats – as a way of “correcting” behaviour or “teaching respect”.

For young people, this led to confusion and self-doubt about whether what they experienced “counted” as abuse.

This mislabelling of abuse as discipline was particularly difficult for young people to challenge when it was reinforced by religious, cultural or generational norms. In some cases, violence was deeply embedded in family tradition and viewed as an expected method of parenting.

Young people interviewed expressed a strong desire for this cycle to be broken, including through education for caregivers. One young victim said:

it’s not just kids who need to learn – adults need to unlearn the stuff they were taught too.

The need for change

Several young people believed some parents may be unaware of the impacts of these forms of punishment. They called for targeted awareness campaigns and community education. One young victim-survivor suggested:

they feel that is still part of discipline, whereas they are actually going extra miles […] I think parents too need to be educated on how they treat their children.

Several young people said their experiences of abuse were often minimised or dismissed as necessary or appropriate acts of discipline by extended family, caregivers or other adults in their community.

This highlights the need to better engage families and communities to change understandings of discipline, particularly through culturally responsive, trauma-informed approaches to education.

We must develop deeper understandings of coercive and controlling behaviours as they are experienced by children and young people in families.

Without such awareness, there is a risk that controlling behaviour will continue to be minimised as “strict parenting”, or young people’s disclosures will be dismissed.

These experiences highlight the problem of the normalisation of violence in some households and the need for greater prevention and early intervention efforts, both for young people and caregivers.

Kate has received funding for research on violence against women and children from a range of federal and state government and non-government sources, including Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS), South Australian Government, ACT Government, Australian Childhood Foundation, and 54 Reasons. This piece is written by Kate Fitz-Gibbon in her role at Sequre Consulting, and is wholly independent of Kate Fitz-Gibbon’s role as chair of Respect Victoria and membership on the Victorian Children’s Council.

– ref. ‘I was very fearful of my parents’: new research shows how parents can use coercive control on their children – https://theconversation.com/i-was-very-fearful-of-my-parents-new-research-shows-how-parents-can-use-coercive-control-on-their-children-261169

July 29, 2025

‘No filter can fix that face’: how online body shaming harms teenage girls

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Taliah Jade Prince, Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Youth Mental Health and Neuroimaging, University of the Sunshine Coast

You’re so ugly it hurts.

Maybe if you lost some weight, someone would actually like you.

No filter can fix that face.

These are the sorts of comments teenage girls see online daily, via social media, group chats, or anonymous messages. While some may dismiss this as teasing, these comments constitute appearance-related cyberbullying.

Our previous research shows appearance-related cyberbullying is one of the most common and harmful forms of online abuse of young people. It not only hurts feelings – it changes how teens, particularly girls, see themselves.

In a new study, we’ve looked at brain images of teenage girls viewing appearance-related cyberbullying. We’ve found even just being exposed to online body shaming directed at others can activate regions of the brain linked to emotional pain and social threat.

What is appearance-related cyberbullying?

Appearance-related cyberbullying is any online behaviour that targets the way someone looks. This includes comments about their face, clothes or body. It often happens in public forums, such as comment sections or social media posts, where other people can see it, join in or share it.

The most damaging type focuses on someone’s body, such as their weight, shape or size. These messages don’t need to be long or explicit to hurt. Sometimes a single word, hashtag or even emoji is enough.

While appearance-related bullying can affect anyone, previous studies have shown teenage girls are particularly vulnerable.

During adolescence, the brain is still developing – especially the parts that shape self-esteem and help us make sense of how others see us. This means teenagers can be more affected by what people say about them.

What’s more, girls often feel strong societal pressure to look a certain way. This combination makes body shaming especially harmful.

How common is it?

In a survey of 336 teenage girls we published last year, 98% had experienced some form of cyberbullying. For 62% of them, the abuse targeted their appearance.

Most of those girls said this bullying had lasting effects on their body image and mental health, with 96% saying it made them want to change how they looked. More than 80% felt they needed to consider cosmetic procedures.

Studies from around the world have shown appearance-related cyberbullying is a strong predictor of body dissatisfaction, which is one of the biggest risk factors for eating disorders in teenage girls.

What does it do to the brain?

To understand how body-shaming content affects girls on a deeper level, we designed a brain imaging study.

First, we created a set of social media posts based on typical comments teenage girls see online. Some posts were neutral, while others included body shaming comments.

A mock up social media post with a picture of a woman riding a bike, with comments underneath. — We created social media posts like this one for our study.
Author provided

More than 400 girls rated how realistic and emotionally powerful these posts were. This helped us validate the content so it could be used in current and future studies on how young people respond to body shaming online.

We then invited 26 girls aged 14 to 18, from the Longitudinal Adolescent Brain Study – a five-year research project at our university seeking to better understand how the teenage brain develops and how this relates to mental health – to take part in a brain scan study.

We used functional MRI, a technique that shows which areas of the brain are more active during certain experiences. Alongside the scans, participants completed questionnaires about their recent experiences of cyberbullying and their body image.

When girls viewed body-shaming posts, we found certain brain regions “lit up” more than others. These included areas involved in emotional pain, self-image, and social judgement. These are regions the brain uses to interpret how others see us, and how we deal with feelings such as shame or rejection.

Girls who had recently been cyberbullied showed more activity in memory and attention regions. This suggests they were reprocessing earlier, painful experiences. Girls with more positive body image, meanwhile, showed calmer, more regulated brain responses, suggesting healthy self-image might be protective.

A teenage girl lying on the ground using a laptop. — Appearance-related cyberbullying can have lasting effects on body image.
Samuel Borges Photography/Shutterstock

Girls are affected even when they’re not targeted

Notably, the girls in our study were viewing posts aimed at others – not being subjected to bullying directly. But even so, we saw changes in the way their brains reacted, and how they felt about their own bodies seemed to affect these reactions.

This tells us something important: body-shaming content doesn’t just hurt the person it targets. When appearance is constantly judged and criticised, it can change what girls think is normal or acceptable. It may also affect how their brains respond to social and emotional situations.

What needs to change?

Appearance-related cyberbullying is not just about teenage conflict. It’s a wider, societal issue. Social media platforms reward content that grabs attention, even when it causes harm.

All of this is happening during a sensitive period of brain development, where social feedback shapes how teenagers see themselves and others.

To reduce harm, we need to act on multiple levels:

start early: while some schools offer lessons on body image and online safety, these topics are not taught consistently. Many young people say they want more support in dealing with appearance-related pressure online
support parents and educators: adults need tools, resources and language to talk with young people about what they see online, without shame or blame
hold platforms accountable: social media companies should strengthen reporting systems, and better moderate content that may promote appearance-related abuse such as “before-and-after” posts or other viral trends that target how someone looks
celebrate all body types: schools, media and influencers can help by showing real people with different body types and focusing on strengths such as kindness, talent, or what bodies can do.

Adolescence is a time of major change in how teenagers think, manage emotions and build relationships. What teenagers experience during these years can shape how they see themselves and understand the world.

Online body shaming may seem like just words on a screen. But if we want the next generation to grow up confident and well, we need to take it seriously.

In Australia, if you are experiencing body image concerns, you can contact the Butterfly Foundation’s national helpline on 1800 33 4673 (or use their online chat).

Daniel Hermens receives funding from the Commonwealth government’s Prioritising Mental Health Initiative and the Queensland Mental Health Commission.

Taliah Jade Prince does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. ‘No filter can fix that face’: how online body shaming harms teenage girls – https://theconversation.com/no-filter-can-fix-that-face-how-online-body-shaming-harms-teenage-girls-261362

July 29, 2025

My child is always losing and forgetting things. How can I help – without making it worse?

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Celia Harris, Associate Professor in Cognitive Science, Western Sydney University

As school returns, parents and teachers might each be faced with the familiar chorus of “I can’t find my school jumper” and “I left my hat at home”. For parents of older kids, the stakes may be even higher: lost mobile phones or laptops left on the bus.

As parents, it can be tempting to take charge by packing schoolbags yourself, or texting older children a list of things to remember at the end of each day.

However, doing everything for your child robs them of an opportunity to learn.

What’s happening in their developing brain?

Our kids, in their busy lives, are constantly using and developing their memory skills – remembering where they put things, new conceptual knowledge, and routines required for the day-to-day.

Prospective memory – which involves remembering to do things in the future – is particularly challenging.

It’s prospective memory children draw on when they set a drink bottle down at play time and must remember to pick it up later, or get a note from their teacher and must remember to show their parent after school.

Success in prospective memory involves multiple cognitive processes going right.

Children must pay attention to what is needed in a given situation (“I can’t play outside if I don’t have a hat”), and then form and store a particular intention to act in the future (“I need to take my hat with me to school”).

Then, they must bring the intention back to mind at the crucial moment (taking the hat on the way out the door).

This “remembering to remember” requires memory to spontaneously occur at just the right time, without prompts or reminders.

These processes all require a higher-order cognitive skill known as “executive function”.

This is the ability to consciously control our attention and memory and to engage in challenging thinking tasks.

Processes that rely on executive function are hard, which is why lost drink bottles and forgotten hats are such frustratingly common experiences for parents.

Even for adults, the majority of day-to-day memory errors involve prospective memory.

Executive function develops later in childhood compared with some other skills, such as language and play.

The prefrontal cortex, which underpins executive function tasks, is not mature until early adulthood.

This means forgetfulness among children is common, and a natural part of development. Chances are you were like this too when you were a kid (you just might not remember it).

Could some kids struggle even more?

Yes.

Children (and adults) vary widely in their executive function skills.

While all children get better at executive function throughout childhood, this happens at different rates; some children may be more forgetful than others their own age.

One condition particularly related to forgetfulness is attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

Children with an ADHD-inattentive subtype may be more likely to lose things and be forgetful during everyday activities such as chores or errands.

Children with ADHD will still develop prospective memory skills over time, but may be more forgetful relative to other children their own age.

How can I help my kid?

Do build routines and stick to them. Research shows routines help children develop cognitive skills and self-regulation. Children are best able to remember a routine when it is “automatised” – practised often enough they know it without thinking.

Do promote “metacognition”: an awareness about one’s own cognitive processes. Research suggests children are over-optimistic about their likelihood of remembering successfully. Parents and teachers can help them to notice when remembering is hard and put in strategies that help.

Do model the behaviour you want to see. For example, you might set up your own lists and strategies to help you remember daily tasks. You could also have a family routine of “bags by the door” and checking them the night before. Don’t do it for them, do it together.

Do seek professional support if you’re worried. All children will forget sometimes, and some more than others. If your child is particularly absentminded or forgetful, it could be worth consulting a GP or school psychologist. Conditions such as ADHD must be observed in more than one setting (for example, home and school, or home and sport), and specific diagnostic criteria must be met. Diagnosis can be helpful in accessing supports.

A parents packs her child's bag. — Doing everything for your child robs them of an opportunity to learn.
Halfpoint/Shutterstock

What should I not do – and why?

Don’t rely on kids being able to spontaneously self-initiate memory – that’s the hardest part of prospective memory! Instead, use checklists and memory aids. For instance, if they are consistently leaving their drink bottle at school, you could put a tag on their bag that says “where is your drink bottle?” Using prompts isn’t cheating – it’s supporting success.

Don’t sweat the slip-ups – these are normal. One study with 3–5-year-old children found incentives in the form of food treats weren’t enough to improve performance. Punishing is also unlikely to help. Instead, use instances of forgetting as teachable moments – strategise about how to adjust next time.

Don’t leave things too late. Anxiety and stress can make forgetting more likely, because children can easily become overwhelmed. Pack bags the night before, practise new routines, and avoid rushing where possible.

Don’t judge. Prospective memory failures are sometimes perceived as character flaws, particularly when they affect other people (such as when forgetting to return a borrowed item).

Understanding how memory works, however, helps reveal that forgetfulness is an everyday part of development.

Celia Harris receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Longitude Prize on Dementia.

Penny Van Bergen receives funding from the ARC, Marsden, Google, and the James Kirby Foundation.

– ref. My child is always losing and forgetting things. How can I help – without making it worse? – https://theconversation.com/my-child-is-always-losing-and-forgetting-things-how-can-i-help-without-making-it-worse-261565

July 29, 2025

‘Are you joking, mate?’ AI doesn’t get sarcasm in non-American varieties of English

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Aditya Joshi, Senior Lecturer, School of Computer Science and Engineering, UNSW Sydney

In 2018, my Australian co-worker asked me, “Hey, how are you going?”. My response – “I am taking a bus” – was met with a smirk. I had recently moved to Australia. Despite studying English for more than 20 years, it took me a while to familiarise myself with the Australian variety of the language.

It turns out large language models powered by artificial intelligence (AI) such as ChatGPT experience a similar problem.

In new research, published in the Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics 2025, my colleagues and I introduce a new tool for evaluating the ability of different large language models to detect sentiment and sarcasm in three varieties of English: Australian English, Indian English and British English.

The results show there is still a long way to go until the promised benefits of AI are enjoyed by all, no matter the type or variety of language they speak.

Limited English

Large language models are often reported to achieve superlative performance on several standardised sets of tasks known as benchmarks.

The majority of benchmark tests are written in Standard American English. This implies that, while large language models are being aggressively sold by commercial providers, they have predominantly been tested – and trained – only on this one type of English.

This has major consequences.

For example, in a recent survey my colleagues and I found large language models are more likely to classify a text as hateful if it is written in the African-American variety of English. They also often “default” to Standard American English – even if the input is in other varieties of English, such as Irish English and Indian English.

To build on this research, we built BESSTIE.

What is BESSTIE?

BESSTIE is the first-of-its-kind benchmark for sentiment and sarcasm classification of three varieties of English: Australian English, Indian English and British English.

For our purposes, “sentiment” is the characteristic of the emotion: positive (the Aussie “not bad!”) or negative (“I hate the movie”). Sarcasm is defined as a form of verbal irony intended to express contempt or ridicule (“I love being ignored”).

To build BESSTIE, we collected two kinds of data: reviews of places on Google Maps and Reddit posts. We carefully curated the topics and employed language variety predictors – AI models specialised in detecting the language variety of a text. We selected texts that were predicted to be greater than 95% probability of a specific language variety.

The two steps (location filtering and language variety prediction) ensured the data represents the national variety, such as Australian English.

We then used BESSTIE to evaluate nine powerful, freely usable large language models, including RoBERTa, mBERT, Mistral, Gemma and Qwen.

Inflated claims

Overall, we found the large language models we tested worked better for Australian English and British English (which are native varieties of English) than the non-native variety of Indian English.

We also found large language models are better at detecting sentiment than they are at sarcasm.

Sarcasm is particularly challenging, not only as a linguistic phenomenon but also as a challenge for AI. For example, we found the models were able to detect sarcasm in Australian English only 62% of the time. This number was lower for Indian English and British English – about 57%.

These performances are lower than those claimed by the tech companies that develop large language models. For example, GLUE is a leaderboard that tracks how well AI models perform at sentiment classification on American English text.

The highest value is 97.5% for the model Turing ULR v6 and 96.7% for RoBERTa (from our suite of models) – both higher for American English than our observations for Australian, Indian and British English.

National context matters

As more and more people around the world use large language models, researchers and practitioners are waking up to the fact that these tools need to be evaluated for a specific national context.

For example, earlier this year the University of Western Australia along with Google launched a project to improve the efficacy of large language models for Aboriginal English.

Our benchmark will help evaluate future large language model techniques for their ability to detect sentiment and sarcasm. We’re also currently working on a project for large language models in emergency departments of hospitals to help patients with varying proficiencies of English.

The research, led by Dipankar Srirag, was funded by Google’s Research Scholar grant awarded in 2024 to Aditya Joshi and Diptesh Kanojia.

– ref. ‘Are you joking, mate?’ AI doesn’t get sarcasm in non-American varieties of English – https://theconversation.com/are-you-joking-mate-ai-doesnt-get-sarcasm-in-non-american-varieties-of-english-254986

July 28, 2025

Iranian Canadians watch the Israel-U.S. attacks on Iran from afar

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Fateme Ejaredar, PhD candidate in Sociology, University of Calgary

Iranian Canadians have been following the news in Iran carefully. Sadaf Vakilzadeh/Unsplash, CC BY

The recent war waged by Israel and the United States on Iran killed at least 935 people and wounded another 5,332. There’s currently a ceasefire, but the conflict shocked the world and has had unique impacts on Iranians in the diaspora.

Many Iranians in Canada were glued to their media feeds to stay close to Iran and their friends and families.

Based on preliminary interviews with 30 Iranian activists in Canada, many in the diaspora have experienced what they call “survivor’s guilt.”

The interviews are part of a PhD study conducted online or in person by one of the authors of this story, Fateme Ejaredar, and supervised by co-author Pallavi Banerjee. The information from these interviews helps to untangle the roots of political tensions and evolving solidarities in the Iranian diaspora in Canada. For this research, 30 interviews were conducted, with seven followups after the conflict began on June 13, 2025.

A large share of the Iranian diaspora in Canada is comprised of activists who disavow the Islamic Republic. According to The New York Times, the Iranian diaspora includes “exiled leftists, nationalists, secular democrats, former prisoners, journalists, human rights advocates and artists.” This population of diasporic Iranians has been supporting progressive change in Iran.

There are also those who oppose the Islamic Republic in support of the deposed shah, a movement currently swayed by Reza Pahlavi, the son of Iran’s last shah. They see the U.S. and Israel as liberators of the Iranian people. The current war resurfaced many of these tensions that continue to divide the diaspora.

The war has left Iranian activists in the diaspora contending with contradictions about both their standing as activists while mourning the assaults on their country, both from within and outside.

Living in between homeland and hostland

Canada has the second largest Iranian diaspora in the world. Iran’s tumultuous political climate has kept the diaspora on edge and divided since the 1979 revolution that deposed the shahs.

After the revolution, many left-wing and other opposition activists who resisted both the pre- and post-revolutionary regimes went into exile. Continued political repression and economic hardship later forced even more Iranians, including activists, to leave the country. Strife peaked again in 2022 during the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests which deeply impacted the diaspora.

Matin, a participant in her 30s from Alberta (all names of interviewees are pseudonyms), said:

“I’m sad that my home is being bombed. And you don’t have the energy to argue in this situation. For a soul that’s already tired, its wounds from 2022 aren’t healed yet, it can’t go into this again. It’s a dead end.”

Sociological research on migration and transnationalism has explained how those exiled from their homelands and living in diaspora reside in the “in-between lands.”

This is heightened when the homeland is in a state of political disarray, producing what sociologists have called “exogenous shocks” for the diaspora.

This is the unsettled feeling Iranians in the diaspora have been contending with for the last 45 years. They are constantly navigating life in between the homeland and hostland.

Fragmented nationalism

People’s fragmented sense of nationalism can shape responses to upheavals in the homeland.

Many we spoke with struggle with their own interpretations of Iranian nationalism that clash with their disdain for the Islamic Republic. Their disdain is rooted in their own lived experiences under the regime — ranging from the loss of basic rights and freedoms, to harsh repression including imprisonment and torture for some, or simply an unfulfilled desire of living in a peaceful and free society.

Vida, an interviewee in her 30s who lives in Saskatchewan, said even though she despised the politics of the Islamic Republic and in the past had celebrated the death of key officials like Qasem Soleimani, the recent war has invoked some conflicting feelings about the death of military leaders.

She took pride in solidarities forged among the diaspora due to the war and interpreted it as nationalism. Vida said:

“I never was a nationalist, and I hate nationalism. But there were moments these days that I felt proud. Seeing all the solidarity between people, seeing how they helped each other…”

Even as the activists feel protective of their country because of the war, they also experience a deep sense of loss and guilt they have always felt in exile.

Tensions in the diaspora

Iran’s relationship with the West has continued to be fraught.

The West, particularly the U.S., has leveraged Iran’s repression of women to economically disable Iran through sanctions, breaking down possibilities of diplomacy between Iran and the U.S. But feminist scholars have argued this stance has only further empowered the authoritarian and patriarchal political forces in Iran..

Iranian activists in the diaspora contend with both resisting the Islamic Republic’s role in oppression of Iranians in Iran and the American role in marginalizing Iranians in Iran.

The ‘Iran of our dreams’

The in-between spaces are precarious and unpredictable. But they also bring new possibilities and in this case, as many interviewees have indicated, acts of resistance from afar.

This can be further activated in moments of upheaval. And those living in the in-between spaces can often form new alliances and solidarities.

For many activist Iranians, the resistance in Palestine has been a source of inspiration since before the revolution of 1979. Many participants in this study mentioned in their interviews how they have long felt solidarity with Palestinians, but they say since June 13, they have an even deeper understanding of their situation.

Zara, in her 40s from Ontario, said she now understands more deeply how the world could be indifferent towards those critiquing the actions of Israel, saying she feels:

“… a sense of helplessness and desperation against all that illogical violent power.”

Despite the desolation expressed by our interviewees about the war, many activists also expressed faith in resistance for freedom and justice that allows them to envision a different future.

Jamshid, in his 60s in British Columbia, shared his future vision of Iran. It is:

“ … an Iran that lives in peace. There is social justice in it and no one is injured. It takes care of itself. It’s very kind, immensely kind… Maybe one day it will happen and we’re not here to see it.”

Pallavi Banerjee receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.

Fateme Ejaredar does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Iranian Canadians watch the Israel-U.S. attacks on Iran from afar – https://theconversation.com/iranian-canadians-watch-the-israel-u-s-attacks-on-iran-from-afar-259866

July 28, 2025

To protect coral reefs, we must also protect the people who depend on them

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Pedro C. González Espinosa, Postdoctoral Reserach Fellow, The School of Resource and Environmental Management, Simon Fraser University

Coral reefs are vital ecosystems that sustain millions of people, yet they face a growing crisis. Rising ocean temperatures are causing coral bleaching, a process where heat disrupts the relationship between corals and the microalgae living inside them. If the stress continues, the corals may die.

Since the 1980s, bleaching events have increased significantly, posing a major threat to reefs and the coastal communities that rely on them for food, income and protection.

white coral underwater — Prolonged coral bleaching events, caused by environmental stress, can cause coral reefs to die.
(Danielle.ihde/Wikimedia)

Scientists rely on data-monitoring tools to predict where and when bleaching is most likely to occur. These tools help inform conservation decisions made by the reef managers in charge of preserving the reefs, like temporarily pausing tourism or fishing to allow corals to recover.

But important questions are often overlooked in the process: Are these decisions fair? And who bears the cost of protecting coral reefs?

Managing reefs

Predicting bleaching events is crucial for managing reefs. The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Coral Reef Watch uses satellite data to issue real-time bleaching alerts. These alerts guide managers to act before reefs reach dangerous thresholds.

However, the science isn’t perfect. Our research shows that about one-third of bleaching alerts worldwide are false alarms or missed events. If fishing or tourism sites are closed based on a false alarm, it can cause unnecessary economic hardship to local communities. On the other hand, failing to act when bleaching happens risks long-term ecological damage.

Not all reefs are affected equally. The challenges are especially severe in developing countries, where coastal communities depend heavily on reefs for their livelihoods. Many coastal communities do not have the money, government support or backup options they need to protect reefs or cope with the damage.

As a result, coastal communities in developing countries bear the greatest ecological and economic risks. This highlights the need for a rethink of how reef-protection strategies are designed and implemented.

Equity matters

Reef management must be fair, not just to the reefs but also to the people who depend on them. This is where equity comes in. Equity means not only sharing the benefits of healthy reefs, but also ensuring that the costs, such as fishing bans or tourism closures, do not disproportionately fall on those least able to handle them.

There are three key principles that help bring equity to the heart of coral-reef management and the fair sharing of reef resources:

Recognizing equity: Different groups relate to the reef in different ways. For some, it is a source of food; for others, it has cultural or spiritual meaning. Understanding and respecting these different connections — whether scientific, economic or traditional — is essential.
Fair decision-making: Managing the reef should be a collective undertaking. It is important that those who depend on it, like fishing communities, tourism operators and Indigenous groups, have a real say in how the reef is used, and not just more powerful or rich interest groups, like commercial fishers.
Fair sharing of benefits and costs: The benefits of healthy reefs, like fish, tourism income or coastal protection, should be distributed fairly. Likewise, the costs, such as fishing bans or tourism restrictions, should not fall unfairly on those who can least afford it.

These ideas may sound like common sense, but they are often missing in practice. In developing countries, decisions made in the interest of reef conservation can unintentionally harm local communities.

Sustainable and local solutions

Without alternative sources of income or food, restricting fishing or access to reefs can worsen poverty, exacerbate gender inequity or push unsustainable practices to other areas.

In the Solomon Islands, for example, coral reefs are crucial for both food and economic well-being.

In some communities, the food and materials people harvest from reefs, like fish, shells and corals, are worth more than what they earn from other sources. But heavy reliance on reef resources, especially for cash income, has led to over-extraction in some areas, putting both the reefs and local livelihoods at risk.

A community-led planning project in the small island nation of Tuvalu has fostered support for low-impact tourism that balances conservation with livelihoods. Villages identified key sites to protect and developed visitor guidelines to support tourism in a socially responsible and environmentally sustainable manner, balancing reef conservation with local livelihoods.

These examples show that conservation solutions must be co-designed, flexible and tailored to each context. Decisions to close areas or create protected zones should consult with and include local communities.

Reuters reports on the world’s largest coral, discovered in the Solomon Islands.

Toward a just future

Strategies to protect coral reefs need to evolve to include impacted communities. This means reshaping decision-making processes, who is involved and how risks and benefits are shared. It also means addressing global imbalances in conservation leadership.

Many reef initiatives are still led by institutions from wealthy nations, even though the reefs most at risk are in developing countries. In many cases, local communities are invited to participate, but participation alone may not guarantee equity. True equity is about shifting power in leadership and making space for local communities and institutions, providing them with real authority to manage their own resources.

Integrating equity into every stage of coral-bleaching management — including warning systems, impact assessments, stress reduction and policy decisions — not only boosts conservation outcomes, but also ensures that efforts to save the reefs do not come at the expense of the people most dependent on them.

Pedro C. González Espinosa receives funding from the Nippon Foundation Ocean Nexus, School of Resource and Environmental Management (REM), Simon Fraser University (SFU).

– ref. To protect coral reefs, we must also protect the people who depend on them – https://theconversation.com/to-protect-coral-reefs-we-must-also-protect-the-people-who-depend-on-them-252546

July 28, 2025

All women — not just mothers — could benefit from more workplace flexibility

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Anja Krstic, Assistant Professor of Human Resource Management, York University, Canada

Despite progress toward gender equity, many women continue to take on the majority of unpaid labour within their households, including housework and child care.

On average, women spend twice as much time as men per week on housework (12.6 hours compared to 5.7) and child care (12 hours compared to 6.7).

Unpaid labour also includes cognitive labour — the mental work of anticipating household needs, identifying and weighing options to fulfil them and monitoring whether those needs have been met.

Cognitive labour underpins many physical household and child-care tasks. For example, cooking or shopping for the household requires planning meals around preferences, anticipating various needs, finding alternatives if needed and keeping track of satisfaction with meals and products.

Cognitive labour is often called the “third shift” because it’s largely mental and invisible in nature. This work is often done in the background and is dispersed throughout the day, and women in heterosexual couples tend to shoulder most of it.

As experts in organizational behaviour, we recently conducted a study that found this form of invisible labour also significantly impacts women’s workplace experiences and career outcomes, which ultimately undermines gender equity.

The hidden cost of cognitive labour

For our study, we surveyed 263 employed women and men in heterosexual relationships with employed partners across the United States and Canada. Over seven weeks from April to May 2020, participants reported weekly on the division of cognitive, household, paid and child care labour between them and their partner. They also shared their level of emotional exhaustion, turnover intentions and career resilience.

It’s worth noting that our sample was predominantly white, highly educated and included only those in heterosexual relationships, which may limit how widely these findings apply.

Our results reveal that women take on more cognitive labour than men, even when accounting for the distribution of household and paid labour. This imbalance was linked to greater emotional exhaustion, which, in turn, was associated with a higher likelihood of wanting to leave one’s job and a reduced ability to cope with workplace changes.

In addition, nearly half the participants had at least one child under the age of 18 living with them. This is notable because school and daycare closures during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic significantly increased child care demands, which women took the brunt of.

We found mothers shouldered a disproportionate amount of child care compared to fathers. Child care — not cognitive labour — was the key predictor of emotional exhaustion, which again resulted in a reduced capacity to cope with their work environment.

In other words, women experienced higher amounts of emotional exhaustion and undermined work outcomes, but the driver varied. For women without children, it was an unequal division of cognitive labour. For mothers, it was unequal child-care responsibilities.

Unpaid labour doesn’t just affect mothers

Much of the research and discourse on unpaid labour tends to conflate it with child care. Yet our findings highlight that unpaid labour affects the careers of both women with and without children.

Work-life balance research and policies often focus on mothers, overlooking the fact that women without children also disproportionately experience burdens at home that can impact their careers.

Our work also contributes to a growing body of research on the work experiences of women without children, who are often rendered invisible in literature. Past research has found that mothers are more likely than their child-free peers to be granted access to flexible work arrangements. Such differences were not found for men with and without children.

This lack of focus reinforces traditional gender stereotypes of women that equate womanhood with motherhood. Our work takes initial steps to address this gap by shedding light on the experiences and challenges that women without children face in managing work and home duties.

How organizations can support all women

Our findings show that women are overburdened by their domestic responsibilities, which can harm their career outcomes and undermine gender equity. But this is not just a personal issue, but an organizational one as well. Organizations have an important role to play in supporting and retaining women in the workplace. Here are several ways they can help.

1. Offer flexible work arrangements.

Organizations can promote a more equitable division of labour within households by offering work arrangements like flexible hours and remote work. Research has shown that such arrangements encourage men to increase their participation in housework and child care.

2. Design flexible work arrangements for all employees, not just parents.

Flexible work arrangements should not be designed with only parents in mind. Women without children also benefit from flexible work arrangements, as they can lessen the strain and resulting career outcomes of cognitive labour. Offering these arrangements to men without children may also encourage them to take on a greater proportion of cognitive labour in their household.

3. Recognize that flexible work arrangements may inadvertently and unfairly benefit men.

Given that women in general take on a greater share of unpaid labour than men, they are more likely to use flexible work arrangements. In contrast, men may use the same flexibility to focus on career advancement. Research has shown that men are more likely to to use parental leave to take on more work, develop human capital or build new skills. Organizations should ensure flexible work policies are used as intended and do not inadvertently advantage men.

4. Normalize the use of flexible work arrangements.

It is not enough for organizations to only offer flexible work arrangements; they must also normalize and encourage their use. Women tend to use them more often because some men fear being viewed negatively for using them. Managers should lessen such fears by communicating that these arrangements won’t lead to penalties, and they should act as role models by using such arrangements themselves.

To better support the challenges that women are facing and promote gender equity, structural changes both within the home and at work are necessary, and organizations play an important role in advancing these changes.

Christianne Varty, researcher and business strategist, co-authored this article.

Anja Krstic’s research has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

Ivona Hideg’s research has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

Janice Yue-Yan Lam’s research has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), along with Ontario Graduate Scholarships.

Winny Shen’s research has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

– ref. All women — not just mothers — could benefit from more workplace flexibility – https://theconversation.com/all-women-not-just-mothers-could-benefit-from-more-workplace-flexibility-260889

July 28, 2025

BrewDog’s ‘Equity for Punks’ fuelled its rapid rise – but may have contributed to its struggles

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ross Brown, Professor in Entrepreneurship and Small Business Finance, University of St Andrews

Craft brewer and pub chain BrewDog recently closed some of its pubs in a push to cut operating costs. Given it is partly owned by private equity firm TSG Consumer Partners, the loss-making firm is likely to face further organisational upheaval. After all, private equity firms generally specialise in cutting costs and selling assets.

This downsizing is indicative of the widespread demise of the on-trade beer market (that is, venues that sell beer for consumption on site). The sector is seeing six pubs close down in the UK each week.

It is also testament to the importance of a good finance mix and how this affects a firm’s evolution. Throughout BrewDog’s turbulent history the firm has rarely been out of the headlines, beginning when it launched its in-house equity crowdfunding model.

Labelled Equity for Punks, the scheme enabled non-professional investors to obtain small amounts of equity (that is, shares in BrewDog) in return for relatively small levels of investment (approximately £500). The firm says on its website that the scheme offered beer enthusiasts the chance to “own a slice of the brewery” and offered them “pretty awesome perks” including discounted beer.

From its launch in 2009 until the scheme closed in 2021, Equity for Punks raised £75 million and attracted more than 200,000 small-scale investors. This funding model had major upsides for the firm – generating tremendous growth and expansion over the past 15 years. This vast investment enabled BrewDog to open more than 100 bars and restaurants around the world, employing 3,000 staff.

But how does this funding model work – and who benefits?

First, it enables companies such as BrewDog to access substantial levels of funding from non-professional investors to grow the firm quickly. Second, it cements strong brand loyalty in its investor base. In return for relatively small levels of funding, individual investors obtained promotional benefits – access to new products and company events such as annual shareholder meetings.

Equity crowdfunding models like this are often pursued by growth-orientated, consumer-focused firms that want to expand very quickly. By contrast, most small firms favour more modest levels of growth that are more sustainable in the longer term.

The vast majority of small firms rely on debt finance from banks. But a minority of high-tech firms seek investment from professional investors – business angels (wealthy individuals using their own money) or venture capital (or VC – usually provided by an investment firm). For high-tech firms that want to scale up rapidly, sizeable chunks of VC (£10 million-£40 million) is often the most likely funding route.

The Equity for Punks crowdfunding initiative effectively enabled BrewDog to act like a firm-specific, in-house stock market for small-scale investors. But while some of these investors may have been happy just to support a business they believed in, many will have had little knowledge or experience of equity investment and the risks associated with it.

In essence, this generated easy access to finance for BrewDog, with few strings attached. While venture capitalists and angel investors take an active role in the firms they fund, the equity crowdfunding model offers little active participation for these small-scale investors.

Cautionary tale

As such, the benefits for these investors are less evident. Due to the structure of the subsequent fundraising campaigns, the terms and conditions for investors became less favourable and diluted their original equity stakes in the firm.

Although these small-scale investors still own almost one-third of BrewDog, due to the private nature of the firm the shares cannot easily be traded and they derive very little benefit from their investments. This is especially true while the firm is not making profits.

Unless the firm is acquired, creating demand for the shares, there is little opportunity for the equity punks to realise the value of their original investments in BrewDog. In contrast, under the traditional model of equity investment, VCs and angels would push for strategic measures such as a trade sale of the firm to generate a return on their investment.

The experience of BrewDog is a cautionary one for small-scale equity investors. While hugely beneficial for the recipients of the investment, individual investors might lack knowledge about the true value of their investments.

exterior shot of flagship brewdog bar in aberdeen — This BrewDog has had its day. Billed as the flagship bar, in Gallowgate, Aberdeen, it has now closed its doors.
Diana Rebenciuc/Shutterstock

It is not just BrewDog that has provided small-scale equity investors with little return. In the UK, the main equity crowdfunding platforms have raised substantial capital for young businesses which has produced little return for investors.

Platforms like Crowdcube continue to expand rapidly and raise considerable sums for growth-orientated firms such as BrewDog. However, the benefits for investors are often illusory due to a lack of trade sales known as “exits”, which allow investors to sell their stake.

These platforms are of course legitimate means of raising funds and are regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.

Some academic research suggests, however, that a lack of due diligence on the part of the platforms can lead to firms with limited track records gaining substantial sums of investment. This can open up the potential for fraudulent behaviour, which economists call the risk of moral hazard.

Investors are not a homogeneous group and have vastly different levels of knowledge surrounding the risks associated with equity investments.

The BrewDog story has become a ubiquitous and commonly used case study by business school academics. Rapid access to vast sums of capital allowed the firm to grow at breakneck speed but with little in the way of stakeholder guidance, supervision and stewardship from investors.

If BrewDog had undertaken more sustainable growth using conventional sources of finance, it’s possible that the firm would be in better shape than it is now. While growth is a policy mantra, the “rollercoaster” nature of rapid growth can entail considerable woes for the entrepreneurs and firms involved.

In a nutshell, small-scale investors were left exposed, with little in the way of concrete returns. For many of them, their beer dreams will have fallen flat. But nonetheless, the growth of equity crowdfunding in recent years has been huge. As such, there’s a case to be made for greater investor protection in this arena.

BrewDog and Crowdcube were approached about the claims made in this article but declined to comment.

Professor Ross Brown receives funding from the ESRC under grant number ES/W010259/1 for the project ” Understanding how constraints on access to finance and under-investment impact on productivity growth in smaller firms”.

– ref. BrewDog’s ‘Equity for Punks’ fuelled its rapid rise – but may have contributed to its struggles – https://theconversation.com/brewdogs-equity-for-punks-fuelled-its-rapid-rise-but-may-have-contributed-to-its-struggles-261909

July 28, 2025

How the UK could reform the European convention on human rights

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Joelle Grogan, Senior Visiting Research Fellow, UCD Sutherland School of Law, University College Dublin

Whether the UK should leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) has been a debate in UK politics for years. Conservatives have long accused the convention of interfering with government policy on migration and criminal justice, and have debated repealing the Human Rights Act 1998 (which enshrines the convention in UK law).

Stories of foreign criminal deportations stopped over a child’s taste for chicken nuggets, or having a pet cat, have fuelled the debate. These stories (although debunked) give the impression that human rights law undermines border control on the most trivial grounds.

Suella Braverman, who as Conservative home secretary was one of the most vocal advocates for leaving, has laid out a 56-page plan to do so. Current Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has commissioned a review into whether the UK should leave the ECHR and other international legal agreements.

But there are alternatives to leaving entirely. Labour justice secretary Shabana Mahmood has signalled plans for reform with a focus on foreign criminal deportations. On a visit to Strasbourg in June, Mahmood suggested that there is a perception that “the law too often protects those who break the rules, rather than those who follow them”.

Other signatories to the convention are concerned too – though none have called to leave it. In May 2025, nine countries led by Italy published an open letter calling on the European Court of Human Rights to “restore the right balance” between migration and the ECHR. They want states to have “more freedom” to tackle irregular migration and expel foreign national criminals.

How does the ECHR work?

It’s important to note that the ECHR has no right to asylum, nor a right to enter or remain in a country of which you are not a national. Deporting someone back to their country or to a safe third country does not violate the ECHR.

However, in exceptional cases, a person can challenge their removal on human rights grounds under the convention in UK courts or – very rarely – in Strasbourg. These are the cases that the UK is concerned about.

There are, generally speaking, two routes to this. A person may challenge their removal under Article 3 of the convention (prohibition of torture and other severe ill-treatment) if, for example, there is a serious risk that they may be tortured in the country to which they would be sent.

Or they can do so under Article 8 (the right to respect for private and family life). For example, if they have children who are entirely dependent on them and unable to leave with them.

Article 3 is an absolute right: nothing can justify the use of torture or allowing a person to be tortured. Article 8 is a qualified – not absolute – right. It can be limited where this is lawful, proportionate and necessary to protect the wider public interest. Deporting a foreign national who has committed a criminal offence could be such a case.

If a person believes their rights have been violated through being deported, they can make an application to the European Court of Human Rights, but only if they have exhausted every domestic route in their national courts. This is not an appeal, and the court cannot overturn a domestic judgment or invalidate national law. However, a negative judgment legally obliges the member state to stop the violation and ensure it does not happen again.

Judgments by the European Court of Human Rights against the UK are rare. Since 1980, there have been only four cases where the court ruled that the UK violated the right to family life in a deportation case.

Within the UK, while information on how many foreign national criminal deportations have been stopped on human rights grounds is scarce, the most recent available data suggests that only 2.5% of Article 8 appeals against deportation (or 645 cases over six years) were successful in UK courts. Some of these could have subsequently been overturned, but that information is not publicly available.

How could it be reformed?

As governments throughout Europe look for ways to manage migration, some states are looking at reforming the ECHR on a Europe-wide level.

The text of the convention can be amended with the unanimous consent of all 46 members of the Council of Europe. This would likely take years to negotiate and come into force.

Alternatively, member states can issue a joint declaration to try to influence how the court interprets the convention. This might, for example, call for greater deference to national decisions related to migration and the right to family life.

While it’s certain that many states have concerns regarding migration, they might not necessarily have the same view on what to do about it. Denmark led an effort on ECHR reform in 2018. But its initial draft declaration, which emphasised the primacy of states and the secondary role of the court, was roundly criticised by other member states, and ultimately a much watered-down version was passed.

Reform within the UK

Current immigration rules set by parliament establish the conditions for when Article 8 can be applied.

These rules allow courts to consider how long the foreign offender facing deportation has lived lawfully in the UK, along with how socially and culturally integrated they are, and whether there would be “very significant obstacles” for them to integrate into another country. The rules also allow an Article 8 exception where deportation would be “unduly harsh” for any dependent children.

For serious crimes, foreign offenders “must show very compelling circumstances over and above” these conditions.

The Ministry of Justice has indicated that legislation will be introduced domestically to clarify Article 8 rules and to “strengthen the public interest test” so that fewer cases are treated as “exceptional”.

The government could legislate to require the courts to heavily weight the risk of reoffending, and the threat posed to public safety by the crimes committed, in their decision. These are already implicit when courts balance the rights of the individual with the public interest, and so likely to influence cases only at the margins, but could serve the delicate politics at play without breaching international obligations.

Alternatively, parliament could legislate – as advocated by the Conservatives – to exclude all deportation decisions from the scope of the Human Rights Act. This would abandon the principle that human rights are for everyone, and in many cases, it would allow people to be sent back to conflict zones or unstable countries. Doing so would be tantamount to a departure not just from the ECHR, but from the UK’s commitment to human rights and the rule of law, risking serious political and legal consequences both domestically and to the UK’s international standing. Even then, as former home secretary James Cleverly points out, it would not be a “silver bullet” to removing the obstacles to deportations.

There are no reforms to the ECHR that would “fix” the challenges of irregular migration, the causes of which are largely unrelated to human rights guarantees.

What can be fixed, however, is the lack of accurate information about the extent to which the convention limits migration policy – particularly foreign criminal deportations. For this, review of the application of Article 8 is welcome. Without clarification of where the ECHR fits within the wider pattern of immigration, we’re left with tall tales about cats and chicken nuggets swaying migration policy.

Joelle Grogan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How the UK could reform the European convention on human rights – https://theconversation.com/how-the-uk-could-reform-the-european-convention-on-human-rights-259466

July 28, 2025

No clear answers on antidepressants in pregnancy

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Urban Wiesing, Professor of Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Tübingen

The US Food and Drug Administration recently convened a panel of experts to examine a sensitive and increasingly urgent question: should antidepressants be prescribed to women suffering from depression during pregnancy?

To the surprise of many in the American medical community, the panel included not only US-based experts but also three international voices known for their critical views on psychiatric medication. Their inclusion sparked immediate controversy and foreshadowed the disagreements to come.

At the heart of the debate is a long-standing assumption in American medical practice: while antidepressants may carry some risk to the unborn child, the dangers of leaving maternal depression untreated are usually greater. Yet this mainstream position was strongly challenged. A majority of the panel appeared unconvinced that the benefits of antidepressant use in pregnancy clearly outweigh the potential risks.

As the discussion unfolded, fundamental questions remained unresolved. What exactly are the risks to the unborn child? The panel offered different answers.

How substantial are the benefits to a pregnant woman? Some experts questioned whether antidepressants deliver meaningful help in these circumstances at all. And without clarity on these points, how can the the risk-benefit ratio be reliably assessed?

It’s a familiar scenario in science: experts looking at the same data but drawing different conclusions – not only about the facts, but how to interpret them. In this case, the division seemed to reflect deeper cultural and philosophical differences in how various countries approach mental health care during pregnancy.

The outcome of the panel’s deliberations reflected that divide, with no consensus reached.

To some extent, the conflict was embedded in the very design of the panel. When those with sharply opposing views are brought together without agreement on the evidence base, gridlock is a likely result. Still, the impasse underlines the need for more independent, high-quality research on the effects of antidepressants during pregnancy – research that can inform not only regulators but also doctors and patients.

Complicating matters further is the political climate. The current US health secretary – Robert F. Kennedy Jr. – has, critics argue, an uneasy relationship with scientific consensus, which makes trust in the process all the more fragile.

FDA expert panel discussion on antidepressants and pregnancy.

A warning label is not a substitute for a conversation

Still, the panel produced one tangible suggestion: a proposal from around half of its members to place a so-called “black box” warning on antidepressant packaging, alerting pregnant women to potential risks to the unborn child. Such warnings are typically reserved for the most serious medical concerns. But is this really the right approach?

A comparison often made is to cigarette packaging. But this analogy quickly breaks down. Cigarettes are freely bought; antidepressants are prescribed following a medical consultation. To issue a blunt warning on a medicine that has already been deemed appropriate by a doctor risks undermining the doctor–patient relationship.

If stronger warnings are needed, the real problem may lie in the consultation process itself, not in the packaging.

Pregnancy presents a unique ethical dilemma. The unborn child cannot give consent, and damage sustained in the womb can result in lifelong consequences. At the same time, untreated depression in a pregnant woman carries serious risks of its own – for both mother and child. This is a classic medical conflict, with no easy solution.

And while US law gives pregnant women the right to make such decisions – albeit with variation across states – it doesn’t solve the underlying uncertainty. That must be navigated through informed, respectful dialogue between doctor and patient, not by resorting to fear-inducing labels.

Ultimately, every case is personal. Every decision must take into account the individual’s mental health, support system, risk tolerance and values. What’s needed is thoughtful communication, prudent prescribing and careful balancing of benefit and harm. In short: good medicine.

What’s not needed is to heap more guilt on women already grappling with depression. If scientists and policymakers cannot agree, pregnant women should not bear the burden of that confusion. They deserve support, not stigma.

Urban Wiesing does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. No clear answers on antidepressants in pregnancy – https://theconversation.com/no-clear-answers-on-antidepressants-in-pregnancy-261724