Criminal Court-Ordered Psychiatric Evaluations:Does Gender Play a Role?

This study examines potential gender differences among defendants referred by criminal courts for psychiatric evaluations by analyzing demographic, clinical, and criminal history variables and evaluation findings. This study offers a large sample size of 718 females, as well as 3,627 males. Bivariate logistic regression and heterogeneity analyses were utilized to assess potential differences. Females were older; diagnosed more with mood, anxiety, and borderline personality disorders; less likely to have prior felony convictions; and more likely to be in the community than jail at the time of the evaluation. In addition, when controlling for other factors, females were more likely to be evaluated as having a mental disease or defect, to need hospitalization pending trial, and to be incompetent to stand trial.     

The Victimization of LGBTQ Students at School: A Meta-Analysis

ABSTRACT

Although research suggests that LGBTQ youth are at risk for victimization at school, it remains unclear just how much more likely they are to be victimized relative to heterosexual or cisgender youth, or the conditions under which their risks for victimization are highest. Accordingly, we conducted a meta-analysis on the relationship between LGBTQ identification and school victimization. Multilevel analysis of 276 effect size estimates, from 55 studies, revealed a moderate overall mean effect size (r = .155). Moderator analyses indicated the relationship was stronger for transgender youth, homophobic victimization, and students in the Western United States; and weaker for questioning youth. We conclude with recommendations for policy and future research, and suggest that theories of victimization be broadened to better explain the risks that LGBTQ students face.     

Making the State Responsible: Intersex Embodiment,Medical Jurisdiction,and State Responsibility

Through consideration of new developments in the United Kingdom's intersex policy, this article traces the ways in which responsibility is produced, naturalized, and avoided by individuals, institutions, and the state. Jurisdiction is identified as a barrier to the attribution of responsibility that must be overcome to achieve progress in relation to the needs of intersex people. By bringing together jurisdictional analysis and vulnerability theory, this article demonstrates how the state has traditionally abrogated responsibility by compartmentalizing specific practices as governed by medical authority. It highlights that such accounts mask the role of the state in the creation of jurisdiction and the ways in which governance is conducted. Challenging these boundaries allows vulnerability theorists to move the state towards greater levels of responsibility. By combining these theoretical tools, the article enhances the practical utility of vulnerability theory and advances an important agenda for intersex people.     

Patterns of Authority and Governance in Rural China: who's in charge? Why?

A ‘dual-power structure’ governs the Chinese countryside. Branch committees of the Chinese Communist Party, traditionally the centers of power in the villages, increasingly share their authority with elected villagers' committees. Seeking to illuminate the factors contributing to the division of authority between these ‘two committees’, we view Party branch secretaries and the chairs of villagers' committees as the agents of two distinct principals. Party branch secretaries tend to derive their authority from township authorities, while villagers' committee chairs derive theirs from their village electorates. We predict that the division of authority between the two committees varies with (a) the relative levels of activism exhibited by the principals; and (b) the perceived legitimacy of the agents, as determined by their method of s/election. Through analysis of a unique dataset, we test four hypotheses derived from this framework. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of the ‘exercise of power’ in rural China and shed light on the dynamics of China's political evolution.     

Pivot but Hedge: A Strategy for Pivoting to Asia While Hedging in the Middle East

The U.S. government's new emphasis on the Asia-Pacific represents a bold strategic choice that could animate U.S. national security policy for years to come. Yet the United States must balance its rightful new focus on the Asia-Pacific with the volatility that still exists in other areas of the world. The United States should pivot to the Asia-Pacific—but to protect its vital interests, it should also hedge against threats elsewhere, particularly in the greater Middle East. To implement a “Pivot but Hedge” strategy, the U.S. government should do three things. First, it should exercise caution when cutting the defense budget. Second, it should give the military services greater leadership roles in specific regions: naval and air forces should lead in the Asia-Pacific, while ground forces should lead in the greater Middle East. Third, it should maintain expansible, capable, and well-trained ground forces as a hedge against global uncertainty.     

The Enforcement of the Treaty of Versailles, 1919–1923

This paper uses the episode of the Kapp putsch in March 1920 to isolate and analyze a number of high policy themes that dominated the period from the signature of the Treaty of Versailles through to the Franco-Belgian invasion of the Ruhr. These included: the questions of what mechanisms existed to enforce the treaty; the sanctions available to the victorious governments to enforce their will; the position and problems of the German government; the relationship and suspicions existing between Britain and France and the differing aims, ambitions, and approaches of the major participants.