This thesis critically examines the mainstream discourse on the human right to water and suggests that it is narrow, inadequate, and meaningless to all those who see in such a formulation neither a recognition of their suffering, nor a possibility of its mitigation. In addition to highlighting the limitations of the mainstream discourse, the thesis also sheds light on alternative ways of formulating a more meaningful right to water. The thesis first traces the origin and legal basis of the human right to water within international law. Thereafter, four broad themes that constitute the mainstream discourse on the right to water are identified based on an analysis of the 'soft law' and prominent scholarly literature on the topic. These are-(i) the right to water as an entitlement, (ii) the right to water as a consumer right, (iii) the relationship between the right to water and the right to development, and (iv) the right to water and governance. The abovementioned aspects of the mainstream discourse are revisited and problematized by using critiques of human rights drawn from critical legal pluralism, post-colonial studies, critical development theory, post-modernism and studies broadly referred to as the Third World Approaches to International Law. It is suggested that when viewed from alternative perspectives, the right to water, as conceptualised within the mainstream discourse, appears as being meaningless to people in 'most of the world'. The inability of the mainstream discourse to look beyond the dominant notions of 'rights', 'development' and 'governance' and the assumptions they are based upon, and further, the failure to incorporate other meanings reduces the emancipatory potential of the human right to water. Adopting an alternative approach, the thesis documents a grassroots movement in Plachimada in India which grew from the people's resistance to the excessive extraction of groundwater by a subsidiary of the Coca-Cola Company. The case study illustrates the inadequacy of the mainstream formulation of the right to water. It also reveals opportunities for understanding and defining the right 'from below' and creates hope for the recovery of its emancipatory potential.

Pediatric psychotropic prescription rates are rising, emphasizing the need for careful monitoring of drug safety in this population. Currently, no standardized assessments are used in clinical trials for adverse event (AE) elicitation focused on long-term drug treatment in pediatric patients. Despite a lack of standardized AE elicitation methods in psychiatric clinical trials, it is clear that psychiatric medications have developmentally dependent AEs that differ from those observed in adults. In this review, we discuss the use of general inquiry elicitation, drug-specific checklists, and systematic elicitation scales for AE reporting in pediatric psychopharmacology trials. The checklists evaluated include the Barkley Side Effect Rating Scales (SERS), the Pittsburg side effect rating scale, and the Systematic Monitoring of Adverse events Related to TreatmentS (SMARTS) checklist. The systematic assessment scales discussed include the Systematic Assessment for Treatment of Emergent Events (SAFTEE) and the Safety Monitoring Uniform Report Form (SMURF). We review the advantages and disadvantages of each method and discuss the need for optimal assessment of AEs. AE instruments that are created and utilized for pediatric psychiatric trials must begin to incorporate symptoms that are relevant to this population and account for the nature of the disorders to better characterize treatment-emergent AEs and monitor long-term safety.

Th is paper argues that a particular critical conceptualization based on a focus on Th ird World peoples, their resistance and their histories off ered by TWAIL holds immense potential for formulating alternative international legal theories, in general, and human rights theories in particular. However, it further argues that this potential remains unexplored and cannot be realized unless the search for alternative epistemologies also becomes an integral part of TWAIL.

As calls for reparations to indigenous peoples grow on every continent, issues around resource extraction and dispossession raise complex legal questions. What do these disputes mean to those affected? How do the narratives of indigenous people, legal professionals, and the media intersect? In this richly layered and nuanced account, Pooja Parmar focuses on indigeneity in the widely publicized controversy over a Coca-Cola bottling facility in Kerala, India. Juxtaposing popular, legal, and Adivasi narratives, Parmar examines how meanings are gained and lost through translation of complex claims into the languages of social movements and formal legal systems. Included are perspectives of the diverse range of actors involved, based on interviews with members of Adivasi communities, social activists, bureaucrats, politicians, lawyers, and judges. Presented in clear, accessible prose, Parmar's account of translation enriches debates in the fields of legal pluralism, indigeneity, and development.

Vanishing bile duct syndrome is a rare paraneoplastic syndrome occasionally seen in pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma. It is usually regarded as a fatal disorder. Here, we present a case of vanishing bile duct syndrome cholestasis related to Hodgkin lymphoma that resolved after chemotherapy and radiation.