Who Owns Your Body? A Patient''s Perspective on Washington University v. Catalona

Washington University v. Catalona revolves around ownership of tissue samples provided by patients for research purposes, raising significant ethical and legal questions concerning patient rights, current human research practices, and the treatment of samples as capital resources by the research institution.     

The origin and functioning of the family advocate system

This synoptic article focuses on the origin and functioning of the Office of the Family Advocate as the protector of the interests of minor children in divorce cases. Attention is paid to the general contemporary trend to specialise in judicial decision-making that developed out of an increasing need for expertise in the administration of justice. A number of arguments for and against judicial specialisation are addressed. The origin of the Office of the Family Advocate within the South African judicial system is discussed and a brief exposition of the history of divorce legislation in South Africa is given. This is followed by attention to the functioning of the Office of the Family Advocate with reference to the process followed in investigations of this office and points of criticism against the system are highlighted. The article closes with an indication of the need for research in this regard and possible focus points for future research are identified.     

Of War and Law

Netherlands International Law Review -     

Politics, culture, and political crime: Covariates of abortion clinic attacks in the United States

This study examined crime and violence against abortion clinics, testing elements of several theories that may help explain the variation of such attacks. The study theoretically and methodologically improved upon the prior research on abortion-related crime and violence. Theoretically, it investigated previously unexamined hypotheses from the social movement literature that may be relevant to this type of behavior. Methodologically, it used more careful measures for several variables, employed unique and heretofore ignored data bases, and examined hundreds of criminal acts across several types of crime (e.g., violence, vandalism, and harassment) directed at abortion clinics. Employing robust logistic regression and correcting for clustering of clinics by state, the study investigated the cross-sectional effects of state-level cultural and structural characteristics on anti-abortion crimes against clinics and staff. Results indicated that some crimes against clinics are more likely in areas where female empowerment is weaker, female victimization is more tolerated, and the anti-abortion movement has failed to reduce abortions.     

Negotiation, Power in Conciliation, and Review of Compensation Claims

Workers Compensation claims are not interpersonal disputes. Almost always they are disputes between individuals and corporations. Compensation insurers are "repeat players" in the system. Workers are often "one–shotters" who have little or infrequent contact with the system. Power inequality between the worker, employer, insurer, and those who are required to facilitate negotiations and resolve and settle disputes under compensation legislation are matters of considerable importance. This paper examines the effects of the implementation, in 1993, of informal dispute resolution processes in the Western Australian workers compensation system under the Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981(WA), which excluded lawyers from the process. It argues that preexisting power imbalances have been aggravated by these procedural changes, and in particular, by the exclusion of legal practitioners from the dispute resolution process. The issues raised herein have general application to most workers compensation systems.     

Federal Reimbursement for Mandates on State and Local Governments

One of the remedies sought by state and local officials for the growing burden of federal mandates is a mandate reimbursement law. A major purpose of mandate reimbursement is to deter Congress from imposing excessive costs on state and local governments by making it fully accountable for its actions. The paper begins by extending the economic theory of grants to mandates and reimbursed mandates. It goes on to assess the benefits and costs of mandate reimbursement, and to distinguish mandates that should be reimbursed, should a reimbursement program prove desirable, from those that should not. Then, using the economic theory of grants and mandates, the paper compares reimbursed mandates with two alternatives for accomplishing the same objective, compensating grants and procedural rules. It concludes that the latter are more promising than mandate reimbursement.