Examining the Influence of Family Environments on Youth Violence: A Comparison of Mexican,Puerto Rican,Cuban, Non-Latino Black,and Non-Latino White Adolescents

Existing research rarely considers important ethnic subgroup variations in violent behaviors among Latino youth. Thus, their risk for severe violent behaviors is not well understood in light of the immense ethnic and generational diversity of the Latino population in the United States. Grounded in social control theory and cultural analyses of familism, we examine differences in the risk for severe youth violence, as well its associations with family cohesion, parental engagement, adolescent autonomy, household composition, and immigrant generation among Mexican (n = 1,594), Puerto Rican (n = 586), Cuban (n = 488), and non-Latino Black (n = 4,053), and White (n = 9,921) adolescents with data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Results indicate a gradient of risk; White youth had the lowest risk for severe violence and Puerto Rican youth had the highest risk compared to all other racial/ethnic subgroups. Within-group analysis indicates that family factors are not universally protective or risk-inducing. While family cohesion decreased the risk of severe violence among all groups, parental engagement was associated with increased risk among Blacks and Whites, and adolescent autonomy was associated with increased risk among Puerto Ricans and Cubans. In addition, Cuban and White adolescents who lived in single parent households or who did not live with their parents, had higher risk for severe violent behaviors than their counterparts who lived in two parent households. Among Latinos, the association of immigrant generation was in opposite directions among Mexicans and Cubans. We conclude that family and immigration factors differentially influence risk for violence among Latino subgroups and highlight the significance of examining subgroup differences and developing intervention strategies that are tailored to the needs of each ethnic subgroup.     

Domestic Violence and the Gendered Law of Self-Defence in France: The Case of Jacqueline Sauvage

Legal responses to battered women who kill have long animated scholarly debate and law reform activity. In September 2012 after 47 years of alleged abuse, Frenchwoman Jacqueline Sauvage fatally shot her abusive husband three times in the back. The subsequent contested trial, conviction for murder, unsuccessful appeal and later presidential pardon of Sauvage thrust the French law of self-defence into the spotlight. The Sauvage case raises important questions surrounding the adequacy of the French criminal law in this area, the ongoing proliferation of gendered stereotypes in law and the need for reform. In the wake of the Sauvage case, this article provides a timely analysis of the gendered law of self-defence in France. Drawing from an in-depth analysis of the judgments imposed in the Sauvage case, this article examines the adequacy of French legal responses to battered women who kill and ignites an argument for further law reform.     

Women,ordination and the church

Margaret Ann Franklin (ed), The Force of the Feminine (Allen & Unwin) Sydney, 1986; Margaret Ann Franklin and Ruth Sturmey Jones (eds), Opening the Cage (Allen & Unwin) Sydney, 1987; Kate Nelson and Dominica Nelson (eds), Sweet Mothers, Sweet Maids (Penguin) Ringwood, 1986; Karen Armstrong, The Gospel According to Woman (Elm Tree) London, 1986; Kerreen Reiger, The Daughters of Eve and Mary: Women in the Modern World, Occasional Paper No. 6, IPOFAC, Mission of St James & St John, Melbourne, 1987.