Friday 10th April 2026
Blog Page 513

Give us back our bodies: COVID-19 and access to abortion services in Northern Ireland

Leah Mitchell
-
0
Give us back our bodies: COVID-19 and access to abortion services in Northern Ireland

TW: Abortion, denial of reproductive rights

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant people in England, Wales, and Scotland are being permitted to self-manage abortions at home using approved abortion pills; an eminently sensible step to ensure their safety. Meanwhile, those in Northern Ireland are being denied equal right to the same basic healthcare provision. The regulations allowing abortions to be carried out by registered medical professionals in Northern Ireland were due to take effect on 31st March, but as of yet the promised abortion services are still to be introduced. At the same time, travel restrictions make the journey to England for an abortion, which so many people from the island of Ireland have been forced to make before, near impossible. Many pregnant people in Northern Ireland are therefore trapped in an appalling situation, their mental and physical health compromised not only by a terrifying pandemic but also by an unwanted pregnancy. There is a real danger that people in such desperate circumstances may attempt unregulated and unsafe abortions, putting themselves at great and needless risk.

The situation regarding abortion provision in Northern Ireland was grossly unfair long before COVID-19. At the end of 2015, the ban on abortion in Northern Ireland was found by the High Court in Belfast to be in breach of the European Convention of Human Rights. Despite abortion having been legalised in the rest of the UK through the 1967 Abortion Act, this huge step forwards in reproductive rights left behind Northern Ireland, where abortions remained illegal except where they were necessary for “preserving the life of the mother”, as stipulated in section 25 of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1965. Abortion was finally decriminalised in Northern Ireland in October 2019 by repealing sections 58 and 59 and the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. Somewhat depressingly, this occurred not because of the devolved legislature of Northern Ireland deciding to take bodily autonomy seriously, but as a result of the UK government’s intervention into the suspension of the Northern Ireland Assembly after it collapsed in January 2017.

In April, after the government’s lockdown measures came into force, a Central Access Point was established by the charity Informing Choices NI to enable early medical abortion services in Northern Ireland. This allows those with pregnancies up to a gestation period of 9 weeks and 6 days to attend a local clinic to take the first abortion pill, and then take the second abortion pill at home. This is of course a welcome step; but it is not enough. Some people in vulnerable circumstances, whether that be because, for example, they have an autoimmune condition that means they cannot leave the house at all during the pandemic, or because they are trapped in a domestically abusive situation at home, may not be able to travel to a clinic to take the first pill.

Given that it is permitted for the second pill to be taken at home, the requirement to physically travel to a clinic to take the first pill under such difficult circumstances seems strange and unhelpful to say the least – especially when, as with many other medical services at the moment, discussion of the abortion procedure with a medical professional could be replaced with a phone consultation. Calls for the use of telemedicine have been rejected by the health minister for Northern Ireland, Robin Swann, and the Northern Ireland secretary, Brandon Lewis. These two men have, incredibly, insisted that travelling to England on an eight-hour journey by ferry for an abortion remains a viable option, despite the UK government’s very emphatic advice to stay at home.

Furthermore, the question remains: why is it being left to a charity to enable people in Northern Ireland to access services which constitute their basic reproductive rights? It is illustrative of a dereliction of duty by the authorities in Northern Ireland, which have been persistently reluctant to legalise abortion and introduce the necessary services. The pandemic, then, seems to make for a convenient loophole to allow further delay. How can Northern Irish politicians claim to be “pro-life” while putting people’s (of course, predominantly women’s) lives at risk, forcing them to travel during a pandemic or else carry an unwanted and in some cases medically dangerous pregnancy?

They do not value life, they value control. And it is far beyond time that women stopped being treated as political and ideological pawns. Give us back our bodies.

How to fix the Oxford Union – from an ex-insider

Ayman DSouza
-
0
How to fix the Oxford Union – from an ex-insider

In Oxford, no two phrases seem more entangled than “scandal” and “the Oxford Union”. The controversies are seemingly endless. From the words and actions of individual Committee members, to the speakers, to electoral schemes and plots, a barrage of disgrace regularly features on student (and sometimes national) journalism. I was on the Union’s committee, something I’ve been embarrassed and ashamed of at times; but with a year of reflections (and recovery), it’s clear that being problematic doesn’t need to be endemic to the Oxford Union (just look at its Cambridge counterpart). 

Rather, problems exist because of 1) clear structural issues, 2) a lack of sustained willingness by enough people on the Union’s many Committees to make real change, and 3) limited but ever-present opposition from members AND paid adult members of staff, who fight efforts to instigate change through manipulations of the Society’s 259 page-long rules document. With the first-ever second-round election for President, this might be a real opportunity for long term differences to be made and for those with the power to make changes to sit up and listen.

It would be easy to rattle off endless criticisms; instead, I want to suggest actionable changes which upcoming Officers and Committee Members could make to begin scourging the Union of its deep-rooted toxicity. 

A note on how elections work: the most traditional path through the Union is Secretary’s Committee, to Standing Committee (TSC), to Officership (Librarian, Treasurer, Secretary), to Presidency. People tend to run on slates with the same people every term, with surprisingly little “swapping” of sides. Officers-elect (Lib-elect and Treas-elect) manage the slates of the candidates running for president the following term, to allow them to “inherit” candidates. This reinforces a two-camp system. Librarians and Treasurers often fall out immediately after election, unless one of them isn’t running. People occasionally switch from the “elected” side of committee “appointed” side (chosen by the President for jobs such as press, sponsorship etc) or vice versa, but that’s rare.

Secretary’s Committee – where it all starts 

When you run for the Union, a mindset of good and bad starts from the first day you are “coffee-d” to run for Secretary’s Committee. The role of this committee is essentially doing the unpleasant groundwork: during election, you are made to hack just about every person you know in Oxford (and any alumnae if you’re lucky), and during term-time you move chairs for events. Not only are “seccies” used as electoral cannon-fodder, they are often very uninformed of their slate’s plans and movements, and become quickly tarnished with the “dirty” image the Union often has. 

Having run for, been, and worked with seccies, I can promise this Committee is useless.  Replacing it with 11 extra “Logistics and Invitations” officers would allow those keen to get involved an election free view of the Union, and converting these to Appointed Positions (I’ll come on to how appointments should be made later) would massively curtail the reach of hacking. It would also mean those getting involved actually want to; they aren’t involved as a favour to a friend, or because they promised too early and now feel unable to back down. Further, those on committee can make friends without being split into a mindset of them vs us (formed by the slate you ran on) from day 1.

Elections – a self-perpetuating culture of toxicity, rooted in electoral structure

Elections also need extensive reformation. Officer and TSC elections need to be on different weeks, electoral alliances (slates) should be banned, and private “hack” messages should be banned. By holding elections for “lower” positions earlier, TSC candidates wouldn’t have to pledge themselves so blindly to Officers, and rather than elections being determined by who found the best candidates for their slate, or met the most people at Bridge and P&P, they would favour genuine suitability and experience. With manifestos more important than endless hacking, committee members would be encouraged to work harder and thus produce a more exciting termcard, with diversity of ideas, speakers, and events.

In general, elections being held slightly earlier in term would allow the new Committee to begin working on invites much earlier. It would also limit the number of “vac days” members have to do. These are a number of days you must work over the holidays. Rather than being performance-based, they are time-based, and it is very hard to achieve a “remote” vac day from home. They are awarded at the discretion of the President, though sometimes other Officers have input. They are inherently an access issue too; it is expensive to remain in Oxford beyond term time, and though some small subsidies exist, these are extremely limited. 

Elections were also held online for the first time this term, and this is clearly a better system. It doesn’t randomly advantage colleges near the Union, and members of far-flung Colleges or those who may have a contact heavy day can still have a say. This also was the first term without nomination fees; previously, a candidate on a full membership who had run for seccies, then TSC, then Officership, then President, would have paid £120 in nomination fees alone. 

By producing PDFs rather than glossy paper manifestos, a huge amount of money can be saved on everyone’s part (and the environment suffers less!). An online count also prevents the ridiculous night-long slog to count all the votes, which are easily prone to cheating via vote destruction.

Introspection – without stopping to think, how can you know what to change?

The Union never really stops to reflect on itself and how to improve. A marked effort beyond solving the problems of electioneering is also needed, which could involve exhibitions and events on the Union’s fraught history, or more engaging member consultations. Currently, the Presidency requires rustication to fulfill all the work needed; this is unfair and quite ridiculous, and a rethink by Officers past and present as to how this could be solved would be a major fix. Further, long-term strategy committees with guidance on making the Union actively anti-racist and anti-discrimination would be immensely positive

A complete rethink of the rules would also be apt: “discrimation” appears only four times, to mandate an event, and to be listed as unacceptable; but the mechanism for reporting or addressing this isn’t easy to find, if it is at at all present. In contrast, the word “election” appears 617 times.

Long-term goals – if you have no long term intention to be better, how can you improve?

The Union has a lack of long-term vision. If you aren’t at the top of the Committee, making changes is difficult as you lack both influence and the knowledge of how to introduce change. If you are at the top of the Committee and not running, you have one term left so cannot engage long-term plans; if you are running, you’re more concerned with meeting people to hack and planning elections than long-term vision. Simple steps like creating advisory panels of ex-TSC and Officers would allow improvement, with members sitting for a year or more. Of course this would need to be carefully designed to prevent electoral muddling; perhaps ineligibility to run for the year ahead would ensure this panel had no nefarious intentions. 

Whilst the above suggestions would certainly bring immensely positive change to the Union, they are neither exhaustive nor conclusive. Individual Committee members are often receptive to ideas, but the Union as a body is not. The Officers of the upcoming terms should not brush off these suggestions as futile; instead, they must listen, learn, and implement tangible changes. If they do, they will afford the Society they claim to care about so deeply to catch a new breath of life, free of the poisons of recent years.

Oriel College Governing Body supports Rhodes removal

Cherwell News
-
0
Oriel College Governing Body supports Rhodes removal

The Governing Body of Oriel College will launch an Independent Commission of Inquiry into the statue of Cecil Rhodes placed above the gates of college. They state that they “wish to remove the statue of Cecil Rhodes and the King Edward Street Plaque”, and that this would be their recommendation to the Commission.

In addition to deciding on the statue’s fate, the Commission would “deal with the issue of the Rhodes legacy and how to improve access and attendance of BAME undergraduate, graduate students and faculty, together with a review of how the college’s 21st Century commitment to diversity can sit more easily with its past”. Carole Souter CBE, the Master of St Cross College, will chair the Commission.

This decision comes after the Rhodes Must Fall movement was reignited in light of Black Lives Matter and broader discussions about racism and colonialism. Over the past weeks, two protests have been held in front of Oriel college, drawing crowds of hundreds.

The Oriel JCR and MCR passed motions calling for the removal of the statue, and over 180,000 people have signed a petition on Change.org calling for the statue’s removal. The Oxford City Council also has condemned the statue.

Rhodes Must Fall responded to the statement, calling it a “potentially epoch-defining moment for our institution.” They thank “all of those who have, over the years, contributed to the development of this decolonial and democratic social movement.”

They state further, however, that “we have been down this route before, where Oriel College has committed to taking a certain action, but has not followed through: notably, in 2015, when the College committed to engaging in a six-month-long democratic listening exercise. Therefore, while we remain hopeful, our optimism is cautious. While the Governing Body of Oriel College have ‘expressed their wish’ to take down the statue, we continue to demand their commitment.

“Until such time as the Rhodes statue ceases to adorn the facade of Oriel College on Oxford’s High Street, we will continue to galvanise the goodwill and energy seen across the University, particularly among an astonishingly wide variety of academics.”

The Oriel JCR President told Cherwell: “I couldn’t be happier to see the Governing Body state publicly their wish to remove the Cecil Rhodes statue and open an enquiry. This result is testament to the years of hard work and time invested by the Rhodes Must Fall movement. I am incredibly proud that our students and graduates participated in this movement so wholeheartedly and that we were able to make our voices heard in this debate. This is only the beginning and I look forward to our continued engagement with this discourse and in this journey towards the removal of the statue.”

Susan Brown, the Leader of the Oxford City Council has also welcomed the news. Previously the City Council had reached out to Oriel, asking them to submit a planning application to take down the statue. Now, Brown states, “I welcome the news that Oriel College have come to the view that they would like the statue and plaque of Cecil Rhodes to be removed.” She also congratulated the Rhodes Must Fall campaign and the Black Lives Matter movement “who have reinvigorated this debate about our history and how it should be recognised”.

The Oxford University Chancellor Lord Patton had criticised the RMF movement. Oriel itself had previously issued a statement saying: “We will continue to examine our practices and strive to improve them to ensure that Oriel is open to students and staff of all backgrounds, and we are determined to build a more equal and inclusive community and society.”

The Universities Minister also stated earlier today that she rejected calls to remove the controversial statue, as it would be “short sighted” to try to “rewrite our history”.

The full statement from Oriel College reads: “The Governing Body of Oriel College has today (Wednesday 17th June) voted to launch an independent Commission of Inquiry into the key issues surrounding the Rhodes statue. 

“They also expressed their wish to remove the statue of Cecil Rhodes and the King Edward Street Plaque. This is what they intend to convey to the Independent Commission of Inquiry. 

“Both of these decisions were reached after a thoughtful period of debate and reflection and with the full awareness of the impact these decisions are likely to have in Britain and around the world. 

“The Commission will deal with the issue of the Rhodes legacy and how to improve access and attendance of BAME undergraduate, graduate students and faculty, together with a review of how the college’s 21st Century commitment to diversity can sit more easily with its past. 

“At today’s meeting, the Governing Body also approved the appointment of an independent Chair for the Commission of Inquiry, Carole Souter CBE, the current Master of St Cross College and former Chief Executive of the National Lottery Heritage Fund, who in turn will approach a number of individuals drawn from the worlds of academia, education policy, law, politics and journalism. The commission is intending to draw upon the greatest possible breadth and depth of experience, opinion and background. 

“The Inquiry will, in turn, invite submissions from a broad range of stakeholders from Oxford itself and the country as a whole; the students, representatives of Rhodes Must Fall and Oxford City council, as well as alumni of Oxford and Oriel and citizens of the city. Written and oral evidence will be requested. It is intended that some oral evidence sessions will be held in public, with similar rules of engagement to that of a parliamentary select committee. 

“By setting up this commission, Oriel governing body is demonstrating that it is willing to be guided by all its stakeholders. The Governing Body believes that this decision will allow a serious, appropriate and productive resolution of a complex series of issues. Ms Souter has insisted on a thorough process – but conducted at pace – and set to report to the Governing Body by the end of the year.”

Image credit to Wikimedia Commons.

The Muse in Film: Winona Ryder and Tim Burton

Annabel Rogers
-
0
The Muse in Film: Winona Ryder and Tim Burton

When Winona Ryder first met Tim Burton, they talked like old friends about movies and music for over half an hour before realising that it was him she’d come to audition for. She lived in the Bay Area at the time; her parents had driven her six hours to LA because she was so desperate for the role. She recalls the occasion fondly. “I had no idea at that age that a director could be, like, someone I could sort of hang out with,” she says. They were both wearing black, had black hair (Ryder had dyed hers for one of her first film roles and didn’t look back – except for another Burton movie, Edward Scissorhands – until the noughties) and Ryder saw him as a kindred spirit. Burton, for his part, saw her as the perfect Lydia Deetz.

It was the start of not only a lifelong friendship but also two stratospheric careers. Beetlejuice is possibly Burton’s most enduring classic, while Ryder herself ascribes the fact that she has a career at all to him and this movie. Decades later, lines like “my whole life is a darkroom” and “I myself am strange and unusual” still resonate, and the film has attained cult status. It established Ryder’s image as a witchy, alternative it-girl, the Winona to the world’s Gwyneths. The queen of the 90s cult film, she went on to star in classics like Heathers (1988), Reality Bites, (1994) and Girl, Interrupted (1999) – and two more Burton films, Edward Scissorhands (1990) and Frankenweenie (2012). Coincidentally, both films are inspired by Burton’s own life. Less coincidentally, they are two of his warmest, most heartfelt projects.

There is something that makes Burton films Burton films, it’s true. An extravagant fantasy style, Danny Elfman, the strange and unusual, Johnny Depp. Helena Bonham Carter, in later years, who became his muse in a literal sense when they dated from 2001 to 2014. Depp credits Burton with rescuing him from the inanity of his prior heartthrob status; Burton altered the trajectory of his career, just as with Ryder. Burton is well known for collecting actors as muses. Both Bonham Carter and Depp are more prolific than Ryder in Burton’s filmography: Bonham Carter has starred in seven of his movies, Depp eight. However, is there a certain point after which quality surrenders to quantity?

It is generally accepted that Tim Burton movies used to be better. His latest Alice in Wonderland movie was received with critical derision, as was his live-action remake of Dumbo. He’s treading and retreading old ground, with the plot of 2012’s Dark Shadows eerily reminiscent of 1990’s Edward Scissorhands, even down to casting the same star, Johnny Depp, in pale makeup and an unappealing black wig. But where Edward Scissorhands is heartfelt, tender, and one of Burton’s most artistically cohesive works, Dark Shadows is just a bit… meh. 

There are many factors that play into this, of course. His movies celebrated the odd, the unusual, that which society rejects. But frankly, that isn’t the case anymore. The Burton whose tendency to the weird and scary got him politely fired from Disney in 1984 is the same Burton who in 2019 created a saccharine reworking of Dumbo, one of Disney’s classics. In the Alice movies his signature style parodies itself; they are overblown and overworked. Burton is no longer weird – but mainstream. (Cue a shudder from every hipster/goth/e-girl in the area). His quirky edge has gone full-on acid trip in some cases, and watered-down fizzy drink in others. 

No doubt this is due to pressure to produce original work that still has the Burton flavour. But this is difficult when he’s recycling actors like Bags For Life and using the same composer for every score. Enduring partnerships can be endearing, but not if they’re eternal. We’ve seen Johnny Depp in every iteration of the creepy/sad/stalker loner in an eccentric wig there is; now he just looks like Johnny Depp.

Overusing your muse can suck the heart out of your work. Using an actor like Winona Ryder, with whom he’s only worked twice before, for a passion project is an artistic choice. It does indeed lend that extra element of nostalgia, especially since Ryder had been keeping a relatively low profile since the 90s and so her image was still that of a retro icon, as opposed to the continued casting of mainstream actors, which seems more a habit than anything else. Beetlejuice, Edward Scissorhands, and Frankenweenie are passion projects, close to Burton’s heart; Alice in Wonderland: Into the Looking Glass (2016) feels like a step too far into milking it. 

Being attached to certain actors is no bad thing. It helps them, in terms of defining their image with projects they’re actually interested in, and it helps the creator, if nothing else with ease of casting. But recycling talent over and over again can be damaging. Burton’s latest movies lack freshness. It’s no coincidence that he has come under fire for lack of diversity in his films; he is so attached to both an image and a set cast that he struggles to move beyond it and cast anyone new. Is putting a Black actor in a movie really that difficult? It would be a step towards innovation, to say nothing of urgently needed representation. 

But Burton, it seems, is stuck in the past. The partnership of director and muse can be a valuable one, especially in the cause of nostalgia. But it can become a toxic addiction.

Oxford chaplains protest Trump’s Bible photo

Mark Robins
-
0
Oxford chaplains protest Trump’s Bible photo

Oxford college chaplains have taken to Twitter to recreate the photo of Donald Trump holding the Bible outside St John’s Episcopal Church. The pictures show them holding signs saying: “In case there’s any doubt: This book says Black Lives Matter.”

The US President arranged the photo amidst Black Lives Matter protests in Washington DC and has faced criticism from religious leaders for using the Bible for political purposes.

Hertford chaplain Mia Smith was the first to do so and other chaplains have since followed her lead.

Smith told Cherwell: “When I saw the sickening photo of Trump instrumentalising the Bible and the Church in a political manner, I felt an overwhelming desire to speak healing and truth into the mess. 

“It’s hard to know what to say in the face of such injustice but grabbed my Bible, printed off the message I wished a President would say: ‘If there’s any doubt: this book says Black Lives Matter’ and drove to College for my socially distanced protest photo.”

Smith credits Rev. Charles Howard of the University of Pennsylvania as her inspiration, in particular his words: “I’m tired… I live with black trauma while trying to heal it and fight against the forces that cause it.”

She also notes the importance of the chaplaincy to college life: “Chaplains are uniquely placed to work in both the pastoral and the prophetic spheres. The pastoral welfare side is really important for those who are grieving, angry, and losing hope. Many of our BME students are hurting and unsettled by recent events, and offering safe spaces to share, to cry, and to express anger is vital.

“The prophetic role of Chaplains is to call out injustice, racism, fear, hate and indifference. Speaking the truth to power can be a costly part of our role, but the office of Chaplain requires it.”

St Hilda’s Chaplain let go after 30 years, making way for Multi-Faith Director

Violeta Perea Rubio
-
0
St Hilda’s Chaplain let go after 30 years, making way for Multi-Faith Director

St Hilda’s governing body has decided against renewing Canon Revd. Brian Mountford’s post as Chaplain of St Hilda’s after 30 years of service to the college. He will cease to be Chaplain on 30th June 2020 and a new position of Chaplain and Director of Multifaith Space will be advertised. This follows the college’s decision to replace an Anglican Chapel with a multi-faith room earlier this year. 

This has raised concerns among some students with regards to the college’s handling of the situation, which some deem has been “discriminatory” and inadequate. This change was not made public to the JCR as it was a Governing Body decision, which has led to some criticism against the college’s transparency and clarity in matters regarding the new multi-faith space.

The lack of a formal termination to his chaplaincy comes as a result of Revd Mountford’s non-contractual position at the college. The Chaplain had a fixed-term appointment. Fixed-term contracts have “no expectation of renewal or conversion,” according to the UN. Nevertheless, he had been working with St Hilda’s College for 30 years. 

The college told Cherwell that “his legacy provides an excellent basis for our future work as we move into a new phase.” 

During the lockdown, Brian Mountford has been providing weekly virtual Reflective Prayer Services. In the service for Week 6, he emphasised: “Nobody wants religion thrust down their throats. I have been careful to do my best to be inclusive in these reflections.”

St Hilda’s follows colleges like Green Templeton College, Linacre College, and St Catherine’s College that do not have a Chapel. However, these colleges do not have a multi-faith space instead, making St Hilda’s the first college to offer this.

A statement by a spokesperson for St Hilda’s college explained: “In January 2020 following a wide consultation with the undergraduate, graduate, and SCR members of the college, St Hilda’s reconceived the College’s provision for religious practice by proposing to establish a multi-faith space. The multi-faith space is intended to be accessible to those of all faiths and none as a place for worship, assembly, and prayer, and for quiet contemplation and reflection.

“As part of this faith provision the College will employ for the first time a Chaplain who will also be the Director of the Multifaith Space, supporting the College to develop this vision and implement a plan for the successful operation of the shared space for all.”

Regarding the Chaplain, St Hilda’s stated: “The College is immensely grateful to the Revd Canon Brian Mountford for his 30 years of service and dedication to the College as Chaplain. Canon Mountford was appointed a Supernumerary Fellow of the College whilst being the College Chaplain and the Vicar of the University Church. Canon Mountford retired from his employment at the University Church in the summer of 2016, but kindly agreed to continue as a Supernumerary Fellow and the College Chaplain, providing crucial support for our students and fostering a culture of debate on the significant questions concerning faith, belief, and the contemporary world through his regular ‘Chaplain’s Chat’ series.”

One student at St Hilda’s College told Cherwell: “It is very sad that after 30 years, the college has decided to cease Brian’s role as chaplain. Brian has been wonderfully ‘interfaith’ in his support for people of all faiths and none. The diverse range of speakers he has hosted in his ‘Chaplain’s Chats’ showcase this. He will be missed by very many students.”

Image credit to Steve Cadman/ Flickr.

Gender gap persists in lockdown, Oxford study finds

Trudy Ross
-
0
Gender gap persists in lockdown, Oxford study finds

Oxford University’s Department of Sociology has released a report showing that gender inequality in the UK has remained throughout lockdown.

The report, published on 9th June, reveals that most front-line health care workers are women: 80% of health and social care workers in the UK are women. This means women are more exposed to COVID-19. 

Despite this, women are still carrying out the majority of childcare and housework roles within the home. While men have increased the amount of housework they do, the gap between genders remains unchanged as women are also putting more work in at home. On average, women do 5 hours more housework than men per week. 

Women have also been facing worse health and well-being than men during the pandemic. Depression is more common in women, especially single mothers, who are one of the least likely social groups to own their own house or car. Single parents have seen the largest increase in non-working rates during the pandemic. 

In the report, Professor Man-Yee Kan and her team stated: “In a crisis, it is paramount to ensure the safety and livelihood of all. Women, and particularly single mothers, are already severely affected in the economic downturn as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak. Policymakers must consider the gendered impacts and their repercussions when implementing measures to tackle the epidemic.”

The report outlines three key measures: “To prevent the long-term decline in women’s economic power, spikes in poverty among single-parent households in particular, and the resulting child poverty.” 

These include securing child-care options, prioritising single parent families, and a focus on improving the well-being of women.

The study compares employment, income, time-use and well-being figures reported by the same individuals, aged between 20 and 49, both before and during the lockdown period.

Image credit to Jeshoots/ Unsplash.

International lawyers sign Oxford Statement protecting healthcare from cyber-attacks

Sophia Cerullo
-
0
International lawyers sign Oxford Statement protecting healthcare from cyber-attacks

More than 120 lawyers have signed the Oxford Statement on the International Law Protections Against Cyber Operations Targeting the Health Care Sector. The Oxford Statement is a declaration that the world is not incapable of combating assaults on healthcare computer systems, which are increasingly vulnerable to cyber harm as a result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. 

The Oxford Statement reads: “We, the undersigned public international lawyers, have watched with growing concern reports of cyber incidents targeting medical facilities around the world, many of which are directly involved in responding to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We are concerned that the impact of such incidents is exacerbated by the existing vulnerability of the health-care sector to cyber harm. Even in ordinary times, this sector is particularly vulnerable to cyber threats due to its growing digital dependency and attack surface.

“We consider it essential that medical facilities around the world function without disruption as they struggle to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. Any interference with the provision of health care, including by cyber means, risks further loss of life as thousands continue to die every day.”

Initiated by Professor Dapo Akande, Co-Director of the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict, the Statement has been signed by legal experts from over 20 countries including Argentina, India, China, Germany, France, and the US.

Professor Akande explains: “[We] have come up with a set of principles, something that states can point to as a framework for battling cyber-attacks. We hope the Statement will be used as an example of what the rules are.”

The Oxford Statement has already been referred to in the UN Security Council as a good articulation of relevant international law principles.

Professor Akande says that cyber-attacks against healthcare facilities can be tackled using existing international law on human rights: “[We] don’t need new rules, we already have them.” He places a duty on providers and nations to protect their own citizens and those of other countries. Since cyber-attacks in one country will originate from, pass through, or use infrastructure located in other countries, those other countries are required, under international law, to ensure that harm is not caused to other states and their populations. 

Professor Akande describes that a two-pronged approach will be needed in order to create an international consensus on the issue. Countries must protect themselves and others by exercising due diligence, but they are also entitled to take action against unlawful activity against states using counter measures.

He said: “Right now, taking action against cyber-attacks against the health sector is low-hanging fruit, world leaders are wanting to sign up and back the campaign. It is easier if we act together.”

Image credit

Oxford Foundry awards grants and support to four COVID-19 solutions

Joe Hyland Deeson
-
0
Oxford Foundry awards grants and support to four COVID-19 solutions

The Oxford Foundry has awarded funding and expert assistance to four entrepreneurial businesses as part of its OXFO COVID-19 Rapid Solutions Builder programme.

In the Healthcare category, the award was given to My110, a company originally focusing on helping athletes to better understand their fitness levels, which has adapted its technology to provide effective and non-invasive saliva tests for COVID-19. 

In the Education category, the award was given to Devie, which uses Artificial Intelligence to power a coaching app for parents, providing accessible advice. This was seen as especially valuable following the closure of nurseries and pre-schools.

In the Inclusive Social Engagement and Mobility category, the award was given to Oblivious AI, which engages with how data is processed by governments and has adapted to advising several states in India on contact-tracing while maintaining privacy.

In the Operations, Logistics and Supply Chains category the award was given to Crowdless, an app originally built to help users avoid queues at supermarkets and shops but now useful in aiding solutions to socially-distanced consumer experiences. The app has been successfully supported by the Foundry since winning Best Postgraduate Idea in its 2019 All-Innovate competition.

The judges in the four categories included the co-founder of Twitter, the founder of Just Eat and the former CEO of Burberry, among others.

As well as triumphing over a hundred entries to the Oxford Foundry’s scheme, My110 and Crowdless were both also successful in securing Innovate UK funding from the British government, which saw 8600 applications.

The Foundry, established by the Saïd Business School in 2017 to provide infrastructural aid and funding to innovative Oxford student and alumni start-ups, will provide each of the companies with £10,000 in funding as well as a two-month programme of support and ongoing expert assistance and advice.

Ana Bakshi, Director of the Foundry, said: “Universities are homes of innovation that provide critical sources of income, impact, and job creation for government and the economy. With the onset of the pandemic it was vital that we mobilised our networks and leveraged our community as quickly as possible, this included repurposing nearly 100% of the team’s time to the COVID-19 action plan.

“The ventures we support are having an impact in hospitals, care homes, schools and other sectors. Cutting edge innovation will be at the forefront of economic and societal recovery and resilience, so we must build and invest in solutions that respond to the secondary and tertiary challenges of the pandemic as quickly and sustainably as possible.”

Image of My110 founders

Oxford scientists urge government not to ease lockdown

Lucy Tansley
-
0
Oxford scientists urge government not to ease lockdown

Oxford University academics are among over 100 scientists who have signed an open letter to the government, asking them to avoid easing lockdown prematurely. 

The letter, written by St Hilda’s Professor Aris Katzourakis, Professor of Evolution and Genomics and Co-President of Oxford UCU, has 18 Oxford scientists among its 100 signatures. This includes Christ Church’s Professor Kayla King and Merton’s Professor Thomas Richards. It was initially circulated via Twitter and has since been published by Times Higher Education. 

The scientists work in a diverse range of fields including genomics, microbiology, and biochemistry, and form part of a wider plea from scientists across the country warning the government of the dangers of underestimating the long-term effects of coronavirus. 

The letter notes that the UK is second only to the US in number of deaths globally and have “a higher death rate per million than the US itself”. It writes that “we are still in a situation where there is substantial community transmission”, and that government plans to substantially ease social distancing measures will “bring us back to a situation where the outbreak is once again out of control.”

It continues: “As a group of UK-based scientists, we urge the government to reconsider, and to follow the science, postponing the relaxation of lockdown. The level of community transmission is still far too high for lockdown to be released, and should not be attempted before we have a substantial and sustained further drop in community transmission.”

Professor Katzourakis noted on Twitter that he hoped that the government would “follow the science and not end the lockdown prematurely”. His letter said that the UK needs “effective test, track and trace capacity to be implemented, transparent reporting of new case diagnoses in community and primary care settings on a daily basis, and the implementation of routine screening for high-risk key worker professions.”

The letter has not yet received a response from government health officials.

Image credit to Max Pixel.

1...512513514...2,577Page 513 of 2,577

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by Jamie Ashley