0.1 Structure
Part 1: charts the rise of algorithmic and data-driven technology in the mental health context. It outlines issues which make mental health unique in legal and policy terms, particularly the significance of involuntary or coercive psychiatric interventions in any analysis of mental health and technology. The section makes a case for elevating the perspective of people with lived experience of profound psychological distress, mental health conditions, psychosocial disabilities, and so on, in all activity concerning mental health and technology
Part 2: looks at prominent themes of accountability. Eight key themes are discussed – fairness and non-discrimination, human control of technology, professional responsibility, privacy, accountability, safety and security, transparency and explainability, and promotion of public interest. International law, and particularly the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, is also discussed as a source of data governance.
Case studies throughout show the diversity of technological developments and draw attention to their real-life implications. Many case studies demonstrate instances of harm. This may seem overly negative to some readers. Yet, there is a lack of readily available resources that list real and potential harms caused by algorithmic and data-driven technologies in the mental health and disability context. In contrast, there is an abundance of public material promoting their benefit. This report seeks to rebalance public deliberation and promote a conversation about public good and harm, and what it would take to govern such technological initiatives responsibly. The case studies also seek to ground discussion in the actual agonies of existing technology rather than speculative worries about technology whose technical feasibility is often exaggerated in misleading and harmful ways (for example, Elon Musk’s claim that his ‘AI-brain chips will “solve” autism and schizophrenia’).8
This resource is meant for diverse audiences, including advocates and activists concerned with mental health and disability, service users and those who have experienced mental health interventions and their representative organisations, clinical researchers, technologists, service providers, policymakers, regulators, private sector actors, academics, and journalists