CROSS-SUBSIDY ANALYSIS WITH MORE THAN TWO SERVICES

Thirty years have passed since the publication of "Cross-Subsidization:Pricing in Public Enterprises." The article rigorously definedcross-subsidization and is now a standard citation of regulatorsand scholars addressing the pricing of regulated multiproductfirms. The incremental cost test and the stand-alone cost test,however, have often been misunderstood and misapplied. Thisarticle answers the most common questions that have arisen inthe application of these tests for cross-subsidization and correctsthe most common errors that have been committed in their application.     

EMPIRICAL AND ETHICAL PROBLEMS WITH CUSTODY RECOMMENDATIONS:

This article proposes a four-level model of clinical inferences to analyze the psychological evaluation process in custody matters. At each level the authors summarize the status of the relevant psychological literature and conclude that, as clinicians respond to the ultimate issues (e.g., who should be the custodial parent) the empirical foundation for such conclusions is tenuous or non-existent. A jurisprudence argument is also made that such opinions should be routinely excluded from the fact-finding process. Given the significant potential for specific custody recommendations to limit personal liberties and the trajectory of a child's life, the paucity of relevant research available in this area, and profound evidentiary issues, such recommendations should be viewed as ethically inappropriate. A model for what clinicians can ethically say to courts is proposed.     

COMMENTARY ON "EMPIRICAL AND ETHICAL PROBLEMS WITH CUSTODY RECOMMENDATIONS:"

Whether or not custody evaluators, testifying as expert witnesses, continue to make specific custody recommendations, custody decision making will continue to be based upon inadequate and untested evidence unless and until we reform the family court system in American courtrooms. Judges and lawyers must have specialized knowledge and training about such things as the developmental needs of children, the effects of divorce on children, domestic violence, and child safety issues; lawyers must develop litigation as well as mediation and negotiation skills; specialized family courts utilizing individual calendars and case management techniques must be established; and the complexities and intellectual challenges of family law cases needs to be recognized.     

COMMENTARY ON “EMPIRICAL AND ETHICAL PROBLEMS WITH CUSTODY RECOMMENDATIONS:” WHAT NOW?

Replying to the paper by Tippins and Wittmann, this commentary notes that the problems they identify have been recognized for many years, yet this has resulted in little change in the practice of child custody evaluations. Three underlying reasons are offered for the stalemate that frustrates the implementation of standards for an empirically based child custody evaluation practice: (a) the economics of child custody evaluation practice; (b) inconsistencies between proposals to restrict testimony in this area and the lack of similar restrictions in most other areas of forensic practice; and (c) inadequate motivation for researchers who might contribute an empirical base for child custody evaluations. Directions for breaking the stalemate are offered for each of these problems.     

THE LEGAL REGULATION ON BOARD SIZE IN CHINA: RETROSPECTION AND ANALYSIS

The issue of the board size includes sub-issues such as the number of directors and the structure of the board. Most management scholars believe that the number of directors, the proportion of different types of directors, and the power distribution between the board and managers, are important factors affecting the cost and performance of the board. The board size is also an interesting legal issue because it is subject to the company law. The existing Company Law of the People’s Republic of China sets upper and lower limits both on joint stock companies and limited companies. Such a strict legislative model is unique in the world. According to classical political theory, the recognition of free people is the most fundamental origin of the legitimacy of law. Therefore, the companies themselves are supposed to discover corporate governance pattern themselves. Is it necessary for legislators to set a limit on the number of directors? If so, should such limit be or permissive? What are the theoretical basis, the purpose, and the real effects of such a norm? This article attempts to answer the questions raised above.     

COMMENTARY ON TIPPINS AND WITTMANN'S "EMPIRICAL AND ETHICAL PROBLEMS WITH CUSTODY RECOMMENDATIONS:

Although in substantial agreement with Tippins and Wittmann's analysis, their call for a moratorium on the practice of custody evaluators making recommendations to the court does not solve the many problems that they have raised, and may have unintended consequences which place families at even greater risk. This commentary reflects our agreement with some of the authors' major points of contention, focuses on several points of disagreement, and suggests alternative remedies for the shortcomings and ethical problems described in child custody evaluations.     

EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF REFERRAL ISSUES AND “ULTIMATE ISSUE” RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PARENTS IN CHILD PROTECTION CASES*

Mental health professionals frequently respond to requests for clinical information on parents in child protection cases; however, little data exist on the issues precipitating requests or on the controversial practice of offering “ultimate issue” recommendations in forensic clinical reports. We investigated 243 requests for clinical information on parents and 204 clinician reports submitted for use in child abuse and neglect proceedings in a large, urban juvenile court system. We coded 56 objective and qualitative characteristics regarding referral questions, pending legal issues, and four levels of recommendations. We found that the most common referral questions related to service planning, parenting ability, and/or parents' mental health functioning, and the most common pending legal issues were selection or change of a permanency goal and visitation arrangements. Levels of recommendations varied with type of legal decision, in that clinicians always offered direct recommendations for narrow, statute‐based issues (e.g., termination of rights, adoption) and less so for other issues. Community‐based evaluators were more likely to offer direct recommendations than court‐based clinicians. Based on the findings, we offer practice recommendations and directions for further research in forensic parenting assessment.     

ACTIVIST CRIMINOLOGY: CRIMINOLOGISTS’ RESPONSIBILITY TO ADVOCATE FOR SOCIAL AND LEGAL JUSTICE

Similar to many criminologists, my interest in pursuing this career was driven by a desire to improve responses to injustices, on both small and large scales. I believe that among criminologists, this dedication to effect changes in social and legal justice disproportionately drives those of us historically kept out of the academy due to our race, gender, class, sexual identity, and/or other marginalizations. Fortunately, there is a growing diversity among criminologists and this has had a powerful impact on expanding the scope and depth of the field. At the same time, I am concerned that academic training and university climates frequently work against our commitment to advancing social and legal justice changes, what I refer to as “criminology activism.” This address is a call to action, stressing criminologists’ responsibility to advocate for social and legal justice on small and large scales. Numerous types of criminology activism are identified (e.g., in research, service, and teaching), including the requisite to continue diversifying the representation of criminologists.