This thesis is about developing a recovery ethos for psychiatric services in New Zealand. The argument of the thesis is that currently a procedural ethos is dominant in psychiatric services in New Zealand, based on eclectic ways of facilitating recovery. Recovery from mental illness, is based on the criteria of symptom reduction and functioning and can be further refined to have a client and professional perspective. Rather than using an eclectic approach to facilitating recovery the thesis argues for a pluralistic approach, where the virtues, the relationship with professionals, client narrative and the psychiatric community become central to decision making, rather than principle based procedures. The thesis is an argued, applied philosophical thesis in terms of methodology. The scope of the thesis is psychiatric services and the focus is broadly ethical decision making. There are three main divisions to the thesis. Part 1 is concerned with clarification of the main terms used in the thesis. This involves exploring the historical background to the concept of recovery, clarifying the concept of recovery itself and providing an argument for giving greater prominence to the term mental illness over the term mental disorder. Part 2 identifies the main problem of the thesis, namely the procedural ethos, and the problems it is causing clients suffering from mental illness in facilitating their recovery. Part 3 shows what is involved in developing a recovery ethos for psychiatric services in New Zealand.

This study presents a critical investigation into the teaching of computer ethics. A qualitative pluralistic approach (a mixture of qualitative approaches) was used to investigate case studies of teaching computer ethics to university-level students from Bahrain. The main issue was that ethics to Arabs and Muslims is a matter of religion than a matter of philosophy whereas the dominant perception in the academic literature which discussed computer ethics teaching is that computer ethics is a form of practical philosophy and hence separate from religion. In order to shed light on this, the study investigated computer ethic’s perceptions and teaching practices which were occurring in universities in Bahrain. The study found that the issue was not a matter of perception but rather a matter of confusion and a misconception. Computer ethics was being confused with morality, religion, basic computer skills to name just a few. And such confusion was causing computer ethics to gradually disappear from the curriculum and become substituted with concepts which were not necessarily capable of building students’ ethical thinking. The study recommends that computer ethics teachers and policy makers from Bahrain distinguish computer ethics from religion, morality and from any other concept and identify it as an independent field of study, also teachers need to involve their students in social and ethical analysis of various kinds so that students understand that ethics is not a set of rules on what is forbidden and allowed aimed at providing straightforward answers to a given problem but rather ethics is a ‘cognitive tool’; a mechanism through which different competing ethical theories and standards are used to reflect on a given problem.