Previous Issue
Volume 14, April
 
 

Laws, Volume 14, Issue 3 (June 2025) – 2 articles

  • Issues are regarded as officially published after their release is announced to the table of contents alert mailing list.
  • You may sign up for e-mail alerts to receive table of contents of newly released issues.
  • PDF is the official format for papers published in both, html and pdf forms. To view the papers in pdf format, click on the "PDF Full-text" link, and use the free Adobe Reader to open them.
Order results
Result details
Section
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
11 pages, 197 KiB  
Article
Navigating Uncertain Terrain: Risk of Abuse or Misuse of Psychiatric Epistemic Power in the Face of Uncertainty Without Ethical Reflexivity and Regulation
by Abdullah Yıldız and Berna Arda
Laws 2025, 14(3), 30; https://doi.org/10.3390/laws14030030 - 28 Apr 2025
Viewed by 60
Abstract
In this study, we examine the complex interplay between psychiatric epistemic power and its institutional applications through the phenomenon of “diagnosis removal” in Turkey. Within the constraints of limited mental health legislation, psychiatric diagnostic categories serve both as markers of risk and as [...] Read more.
In this study, we examine the complex interplay between psychiatric epistemic power and its institutional applications through the phenomenon of “diagnosis removal” in Turkey. Within the constraints of limited mental health legislation, psychiatric diagnostic categories serve both as markers of risk and as administrative constructs that can be erased when convenient, presenting paradoxical challenges for healthcare providers and patients alike. Through a systematic analysis of case studies and theoretical frameworks, we explore how bureaucratic authorities can misuse psychiatric diagnoses in employment contexts. The study reveals a significant paradox where psychiatric expertise is simultaneously invoked and challenged, potentially undermining both therapeutic relationships and legal rights. This situation arises from a regulatory vacuum in mental health legislation, further exacerbated by a harm-based approach to mental health issues rather than a rights-based one. Key findings demonstrate how the institutional handling of psychiatric diagnoses creates a treatment disincentive effect, where individuals avoid seeking mental health care due to employment concerns. The analysis also reveals how concept creep and harm-based morality contribute to the misappropriation of psychiatric knowledge in administrative contexts. These findings highlight the urgent need for comprehensive mental health legislation that balances individual rights with public health concerns while protecting the integrity of psychiatric practice from institutional misuse, particularly in employment contexts. Full article
38 pages, 1247 KiB  
Article
AI Moderation and Legal Frameworks in Child-Centric Social Media: A Case Study of Roblox
by Mohamed Chawki
Laws 2025, 14(3), 29; https://doi.org/10.3390/laws14030029 - 25 Apr 2025
Viewed by 535
Abstract
This study focuses on Roblox as a case study to explore the legal and technical challenges of content moderation on child-focused social media platforms. As a leading Metaverse platform with millions of young users, Roblox provides immersive and interactive virtual experiences but also [...] Read more.
This study focuses on Roblox as a case study to explore the legal and technical challenges of content moderation on child-focused social media platforms. As a leading Metaverse platform with millions of young users, Roblox provides immersive and interactive virtual experiences but also introduces significant risks, including exposure to inappropriate content, cyberbullying, and predatory behavior. The research examines the shortcomings of current automated and human moderation systems, highlighting the difficulties of managing real-time user interactions and the sheer volume of user-generated content. It investigates cases of moderation failures on Roblox, exposing gaps in existing safeguards and raising concerns about user safety. The study also explores the balance between leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) for efficient content moderation and incorporating human oversight to ensure nuanced decision-making. Comparative analysis of moderation practices on platforms like TikTok and YouTube provides additional insights to inform improvements in Roblox’s approach. From a legal standpoint, the study critically assesses regulatory frameworks such as the GDPR, the EU Digital Services Act, and the UK’s Online Safety Act, analyzing their relevance to virtual platforms like Roblox. It emphasizes the pressing need for comprehensive international cooperation to address jurisdictional challenges and establish robust legal standards for the Metaverse. The study concludes with recommendations for improved moderation strategies, including hybrid AI-human models, stricter content verification processes, and tools to empower users. It also calls for legal reforms to redefine virtual harm and enhance regulatory mechanisms. This research aims to advance safe and respectful interactions in digital environments, stressing the shared responsibility of platforms, policymakers, and users in tackling these emerging challenges. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Previous Issue
Back to TopTop