Search results

Purpose – This chapter considers the consequences on liberty in relationship to the development of the international problem-solving court movement.

Design/methodology/approach – The research, which relies principally on ethnographic fieldwork in six different common law countries (England, Ireland, Scotland, Australia, Canada, and the United States), explores the development of local problem-solving courts in each jurisdiction. These include drug courts, community courts, domestic violence courts, and mental health courts. The ethnographic fieldwork was supplemented with data from various other sources, including government reports, parliamentary debates, evaluations of individual court programs, publications issued by various advocacy groups, media accounts, public statements and articles by problem-solving court judges, and analyses of specialty courts in law reviews and other academic journals.

Findings – The research reveal that the five countries outside of the United States demonstrate greater concern with protecting the dignity of the court, due process, and individual rights – or what the Australians refer to as open and natural justice.

Originality/value – It is the first large-scale comparative study of problem-solving courts in the common law countries where the movement is most advanced.

The question I am seeking answers to is whether or not we have the ability to re-make ourselves into another person. The research subject is me. More to the point, can I, a white woman of Northern European descent, truly become a member of the Japanese society that I grew to love? My methodological approach to this question is a mixed evocative and analytical autoethnography. Within these pages is a complex tale of illness, racism, and sexual discrimination and how they intersect to create a self. From this creation come the questions of un-creation and re-creation; can I deconstruct my self and identity so as to reconstruct who I want to be? Will my reconstruction be supported by my chosen society? Can I truly belong somewhere, anywhere?

Community policing has been around for at least two decades now and it is safe to say that it has become, in large part, more about managing disruptive subjects and virtuous citizens than preventing crime or disorder (Crank, 1994; DeLeon-Granados, 1999; Yngvesson, 1993). While the rhetoric of community may be succeeding where the policing policy is failing, the experience has certainly contributed to the growth of homologous efforts that include community prosecution and community correction. We see a criminal justice system pro-actively seeking to blur the boundaries between its institutions and the communities they work within and, all too often, without. In recent years, there has been a rapid growth in justice approaches that turn their attention toward the community. There are literally hundreds of examples of this trend, from offender-victim reconciliation projects in Vermont and Minneapolis to ‘beat probation’ in Madison, Wisconsin; from neighborhood-based prosecution centers in Portland, Oregon, and New York City, to community probation in Massachusetts. Of course, the most well-known version of community justice is community policing, but localized projects involving all components of the justice system have been widely promoted (Clear & Karp, 1998, p. 3).Like community policing and community prosecution, community correction programs generally focus on partnering with service providers and community groups in order to more finely calibrate their service delivery. For community corrections the recent focus has been on delivering re-entry programs and expanding the availability of intermediate sanctioning options. The sheriff (above) focuses on re-entry, to link jails and communities in two ways: extending the correctional continuum into power-poor communities and increasing political support for expanding the criminal justice system in more affluent communities. Even as fiscal stress translates into budget cuts in education, housing, drug treatment, and other services, the reach of the criminal justice system expands outside the fences as new community-based partnerships and inside the fences as an increasingly program-rich environment. These partnerships are, not surprisingly as we shall see, dominated by criminal justice professionals and dependent on coercive control techniques. Further, their budgets are growing with funds in previous eras earmarked for providing many of the same services in a social welfare, rather, than social control, service delivery context. While these budgetary trends map a macro political trend from an old democratic New Deal toward a new republican new deal network of patronage relationships (see Lyons, forthcoming 2004), this paper examines the micro politics of community corrections developing within an increasingly punitive American political-culture.

Courts play a critical role in facilitating access to alcohol, drug, and mental health services for juvenile offenders. This research examines the court's decision to refer offenders to A&D services and whether offender ethnicity affects this rehabilitative response. Results suggest ethnicity has no effect on treatment recommendations independent of its relationship to other variables. Rather, ethnicity modifies the effect offense type has on the treatment referral decision. Specifically, Blacks arrested for A&D offenses are significantly less likely than their White counterparts to be referred to care. Distinctions in drug laws seem to limit access to A&D services for Blacks.

Using data from the U.S. National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, this chapter investigates the impact of individual drug use on robbery, burglary, theft, and damaging property for juveniles. Using a variety of fixed-effects models that exploit variations over time and between siblings and twins, the results indicate that drug use has a significant impact on the propensity to commit crime. We find that the median impact of cocaine use on the propensity to commit various types of crimes is 11 percentage points. The impact of using inhalants or other drugs is an increase in the propensity to commit crime by 7 percentage points, respectively.

Purpose – In this chapter, I set out to unexcise the messiness of maternalisms and disparities in women's health care by addressing narratives about reproductive trauma. I ask, what might it mean to analyze the interaction between the medical industrial complex and women who experience reproductive trauma as a social practice, one that is constitutive of gender socialization and the medicalization of women's bodies in the American nation-state? I accomplish responding to the question by addressing a vastly underresearched and underaddressed pregnancy complication Hyperemesis Gravidarum (HG).

Methodology/Approach – First, I thread posts from supportive online reproductive trauma forums to weave thematic narratives about and the impacts of HG. Next, I review biomedical literature in order to probe potential etiology. Third, I share my debilitating experiences with HG – reproductive traumas – to interrogate dominant androcentric biomedical discourse of pregnancy culture, maternalisms, maternal ideology, and epistemic violence.

Findings – Our knowledge about HG continues to be murky and unresolved, leaving many pregnant people – namely women – untreated.

Research limitations/implications – I call on the absence of contemporary protective sociocultural structures that provide support and care – gendered health-care disparities – for women during pregnancy, labor and delivery, and postpartum in order to advocate reproductive trauma is a viable and normal expression in the context of misogynist social scripts.

Originality/Value of the Chapter – My hope is to raise the volume on narratives of pregnancy trauma and reproductive experience using HG as a case study and my intention is to argue gender is a salient factor in health-care disparities.

Between 1946 and 1962 the United States detonated 109 nuclear weapons in an area of the Pacific Ocean called the Pacific Proving Grounds, mainly at the Enewetak and Bikini Atolls in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. The British nuclear testing program spanned eleven years (1952-1963) and involved detonation of 21 weapons in addition to a number of smaller-scale experiments (the “minor” trials) in South Australia. In both cases lands that were inhabited by an original people were extensively contaminated by the testing and, following its cessation, these people desired the return of their lands in a condition that would support resumption of traditional lifestyles. Cleanup and reoccupation of the contaminated lands in these two arenas raised similar questions of cultural identity and communication and the importance of cultural as well as technical understanding in establishing conditions for safe resettlement. The approaches taken to resolving these questions in the two situations have been very different—featuring extensive stakeholder involvement in a technocratic decision making process in the Maralinga case and a series of attempted negotiations and claims under the terms of trust agreements with the U.S. government in the Marshall Islands case. Similar questions regarding what constitutes a safe final condition and the means by which safety will be maintained remain in each case however. The Australian case has reached the more definitive outcome of the two. A jointly drafted comprehensive environmental management plan, if fully implemented and sustained over the time periods necessary, could facilitate a semblance of the outstation lifestyle that the aboriginal Maralingan people desire. But what has been agreed to may still prove very difficult to live with given the levels of residual contamination and the many ways that traditional cultural practices put people in intimate contact with the land.

One way of defining the character of clinicians is to examine their moment-to-moment actions during the course of clinical care. These small actions, cumulatively, describe the clinician as a practitioner and moral agent. In this chapter, using clinical examples, I explore the possibility that professional competence and virtue are based, in part, on clinicians’ ability to engage in a “mindful” practice in which they can be attentive to their own actions, curious enough to examine them and present and flexible enough to change them.

Findings from a prior study confirm schools are relying more extensively on law enforcement to police student behavior (Torres & Stefkovich, 2009). The same study suggests further that decisions to report student offenses to law enforcement may be motivated in part by school poverty and school minority student concentration. These findings are concerning in light of the NAACP's suggestion that disciplinary action may be overly harsh in schools serving large populations of children of color. Minimal research however has examined the effect of policy interventions (e.g., prevention training) and community involvement (e.g., engagement) in minimizing the likelihood student offenses are criminalized. Using the NCES School Survey on Crime and Safety (2000), policy involvement in student discipline is explored by schools’ action in mitigating/resolving problems through prevention, alternative resolution, and external involvement. Implications for ethical leadership and responsibility are explored.