Catus Brooks
The study of ethics in International Relations (IR) tends to be overly-concerned with issues of military security. By the majority of IR scholars, the study of militarism, “the social and international relations of the preparation for, and conduct of, organized political violence”, is prioritized above-all other topics in IR. Does this ranking lead to a deficiency of mental health studies in IR ethics? Though the “intersection of national security, foreign policy, and health has been explored in a number of arenas”, IR ethics literature, we argue, lacks a specific focus on mental health with relation to IR ethics, which necessitates innovation in the sub-field of IR ethics to include a mental health ethics framework. Note that our targeted audience is 21st century IR ethics scholars, as they will be the most familiar with IR ethics literature, literature that this essay engages with quite closely. Again, though by ethics we just mean a moral standard, We concern our self with ethics only insofar as they relate to IR and mental health. Further, to establish the neglect of mental health in IR, we will review mainstream IR literature, arguing that mental health is an essential element of IR ethics. For, ethics are substantially based on human character, which is formed substantially by a human’s mental health. Specifically, mental health relates to IR ethics, because human actions in the international arena are dictated, in large part, by the actors’ mental health. Further, we will go over the origins of IR and its evolution, showing the rationale behind mental health’s exclusion in IR.
PDFShare this article
Arts and Social Sciences Journal received 1413 citations as per Google Scholar report
