<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ecstasy and Jacqui Smith</title>
	<atom:link href="http://frontierpsychiatrist.co.uk/esctasy-and-jacqui-smith/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://frontierpsychiatrist.co.uk/esctasy-and-jacqui-smith/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:41:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Socrates</title>
		<link>http://frontierpsychiatrist.co.uk/esctasy-and-jacqui-smith/comment-page-1/#comment-5454</link>
		<dc:creator>Socrates</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 19:09:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontierpsychiatrist.co.uk/?p=413#comment-5454</guid>
		<description>I think Smith&#039;s decisions are based on moral cowardice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Smith&#8217;s decisions are based on moral cowardice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul</title>
		<link>http://frontierpsychiatrist.co.uk/esctasy-and-jacqui-smith/comment-page-1/#comment-5376</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2009 21:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontierpsychiatrist.co.uk/?p=413#comment-5376</guid>
		<description>I totally agree with you here. Quite clearly Smith&#039;s position is based on normative middle-class considerations of what is acceptable and &#039;worthwhile&#039; behaviour in society, no doubt influencing her biased reading of the facts about drugs.  

It&#039;s utterly irrational and completely anti-intellectual of Smith to take this stance towards Nutt. This third refusal* to consider the scientific facts and verdict from an Expert Committee on mental health matters demonstrates yet again the tabloid level of sophistication this government seems to operate at. 

*The first I know of was in regard to recommendations for capacity0based mental health legislation - Prof Genevra Richardson&#039;s 1999 committee - and the second was in relation to cannabis. I expect there are probably more.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I totally agree with you here. Quite clearly Smith&#8217;s position is based on normative middle-class considerations of what is acceptable and &#8216;worthwhile&#8217; behaviour in society, no doubt influencing her biased reading of the facts about drugs.  </p>
<p>It&#8217;s utterly irrational and completely anti-intellectual of Smith to take this stance towards Nutt. This third refusal* to consider the scientific facts and verdict from an Expert Committee on mental health matters demonstrates yet again the tabloid level of sophistication this government seems to operate at. </p>
<p>*The first I know of was in regard to recommendations for capacity0based mental health legislation &#8211; Prof Genevra Richardson&#8217;s 1999 committee &#8211; and the second was in relation to cannabis. I expect there are probably more.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

