{
  "canonicalUrl": "https://xn--mwe.com/contradictions/cognitive-integrity-vs-emergency-maintenance/",
  "claimStatus": "BOUNDED PROJECT PROPOSAL",
  "correctionStatus": "CURRENT K05 RELEASE",
  "id": "CON-K02-006",
  "lastReviewed": "2026-08-16",
  "machineRecordUrl": "https://xn--mwe.com/data/contradictions/cognitive-integrity-vs-emergency-maintenance.json",
  "name": "Cognitive integrity versus emergency maintenance",
  "propositionA": "Material cognition-relevant state should not be altered without authority, consent and due process.",
  "propositionB": "A narrow emergency can require immediate intervention to prevent catastrophic harm or irreversible compromise.",
  "relationship": "An absolute rule in either direction can defeat the other legitimate interest.",
  "releaseId": "K12-2026-08-16",
  "researchCutoff": "2026-08-16",
  "resolution": "Require narrow triggers, minimum necessary change, preserved evidence, prompt independent review, challenge and remedy.",
  "resolutionStatus": "BOUNDED PROJECT PROPOSAL",
  "slug": "cognitive-integrity-vs-emergency-maintenance",
  "sourceIds": [],
  "sourceRevalidatedAt": "2026-08-15T23:00:00Z",
  "topic": "consent-cognitive-integrity",
  "type": "Contradiction"
}