THE “WINNER-LOSER SYNDROME’

The purpose of this paper is to outline some of the historical antecedents—in psychotherapy and family law—to the present state of child custody determination. Certain problems with the current approach to custody disputes, which some have called the “winner-loser syndrome,” are identified; and a newer approach, referred to as the “parenting plan” model, is discussed.     

Efficient,Fair, and Incomprehensible: How the State “Sells” Its Judiciary

Socio‐legal scholars often approach dispute resolution from the perspective of the disputants, emphasizing how the resources on each side shape the course of conflict. We suggest a different, “supply‐side,” perspective. Focusing on the state's efforts to establish centralized courts in place of local justice systems, we consider the strategies that a supplier of dispute resolving services uses to attract disputes for resolution. We argue that state actors often attempt to “sell” centralized courts to potential litigants by insisting that the state's services are more efficient and fair than local courts operating outside direct state control. Moreover, we argue that state actors also invest significant energy in claiming that the local courts are incomprehensible. Thus, in its efforts to introduce and advance centralized courts, the state argues not only that it offers the best version of what the citizenry wants, but also that it is impossible to conceive that people would want something other than what the state offers. We illustrate our argument and explain its significance by examining judicial reform in New York, where there has been a decades‐long effort to displace local justice systems.     

大调解与我国基层法院的功能——以湖南两个县的土地纠纷调查为例

乡土社会的纠纷解决一向以提倡基层调解为主,诉之法院,又以另一种形式的调解替代,因此,我国当下"大调解"的核心其实在于法院调解。但是,我国基层法院在现有的国家权力架构中,在无法保持独立性的实际压力下,面对正式法律与民间习惯的矛盾,无法完成他们被期待的功能。多重角色的压力使他们不得不强调调解,以调解的方式来回避刚性矛盾,以保持合法性。实际上,法院如果无法解决规则之治的问题,它就无法真正实现纠纷解决,而仅仅是纠纷解决道路上的一个驿站。     

依法治理视域下人民调解发展向度探析

面对我国社会转型期各种社会矛盾和民间纠纷高发频发多发的态势,需要在推进国家治理体系和治理能力现代化这一深化改革的总目标下,充分认识人民调解具有的社会治理属性,在依法治国要求下更加重视和加强人民调解工作,拓展职责内涵,强化法治思维,完善制度保障,更好地发挥其在国家治理体系中作为社会矛盾化解器的重要基础性作用。     

“Legality with a Vengeance”: Reclaiming Distribution for Sociolegal Studies

The law and society community has argued for decades for an expansive understanding of what counts as “law.” But a content analysis of articles published in the Law & Society Review from its 1966 founding to the present finds that since the 1970s, the law and society community has focused its attention on laws in which the state regulates behavior, and largely ignored laws in which the state distributes resources, goods, and services. Why did socio‐legal scholars avoid studying how laws determine access to such things as health, wealth, housing, education, and food? We find that socio‐legal scholarship has always used “law on the books” as a starting point for analyses (often to identify departures in “law in action”) without ever offering a programmatic vision for how law might ameliorate economic inequality. As a result, when social welfare laws on the books began disappearing, socio‐legal scholarship drifted away from studying law's role in creating, sustaining, and reinforcing economic inequality. We argue that socio‐legal scholarship offers a wide range of analytical tools that could make important contributions to our understanding of social welfare provision.     

“Critical Legal Histories Revisited”: A Response

The author responds to comments reappraising “Critical Legal Histories” (CLH) (1984). CLH critiqued “evolutionary functionalism,” the idea that law is a functional response to a typical modernizing process. CLH argued that “society” was partly constituted of legal elements and that law was too indeterminate to have reliably regular functional effects. CLH has been misinterpreted as calling for a return to internal histories of “mandarin” doctrine: all it said was that some doctrinal histories were valuable, without privileging them. This response clarifies that the relations of law to society and social change, and of high‐level official law to everyday local law are distinct issues. CLH is mostly moot today, since social‐legal historians have incorporated its insight that legal concepts are embedded in everyday social practice. But other fields have revived deterministic Whiggish accounts of progressive development and of law functional to it—to which CLH's critique still seems relevant.     

Rules,Institutions, Transformations. Considerations on the “Evolution of Law” Paradigm

The article's main objective is to test the merits of the evolutionary paradigm as it has been applied first to social phenomena and then more specifically to the legal domain. In a preliminary move, a set of the available concepts of law is worked out. A discussion of the idea of evolution and of its use in the social sciences follows. Functionalism and systems theory are scrutinized, with a close eye to the new doctrine of “autopoiesis.” Once an institutional and normative concept of law is agreed upon, attempts to introduce an “evolutionary” paradigm are deemed—the article contends—to be unfruitful. The article concludes that, if law needs a metaphysics, it should be one which allows for change, transformation and the emergence of the radically new. A social universe without gaps, all possible forms of which are determined from the beginning, will end up as the opposite of what we are used to considering as the practice of law.     

Families in Circle Process: Restorative Justice in Family Law

This article explores the use of “circle process”—a form of restorative justice—in family law and places this effort within a larger movement within the law toward law as a healing profession, or the “comprehensive law movement.” It explores the features and underpinnings of circle process and its relationship to original forms of dispute resolution such as those used in African‐style mediation and indigenous people's dispute resolution in North America. Values expressed by these forms of dispute resolution are argued to be particularly relevant in family law. Finally, it focuses on an innovative and exciting court‐sponsored program begun in Chicago in 2008, using circle process with families in conflict, in the Cook County Parentage and Child Support Court. This program's results suggest potential benefits and cautions of using circle process in family law.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Restorative justice, in particular, circle process, can be used to resolve family law cases.
• Circle process widens the group of participants in alternative dispute resolution of family law matters.
• Circle process brings more voices to the table, namely, extended family, friends, and supporters, thus enhancing the group's decisionmaking.
• Judges will want to be sure the families in question are appropriate for circle process before referring them to this method of resolving disputes.
• Circle processes can result in improved communication and relations among families in conflict.
• Circle process reflects the values of “original dispute resolution,” which often in turn reflects ubuntu, the idea that all humankind is interconnected.
• Circle process is part of a greater movement towards law as a healing profession/the comprehensive law movement, which includes therapeutic jurisprudence.

     

A trip to China

The role of a TV action-line “troubleshooter” for dispute resolution is illustrated with viewers' letters and topics selected for broadcast. Focusing mainly on consumer complaints (non-auto retail), disputes selected for broadcast were more likely to be resolved in favor of the claimant than were requests handled off the air by the troubleshooter staff. Follow-up materials, however, suggest that obtaining a response from the trouble-shooter as well as a claimee was regarded positively by claimants. TV formats integrate “self-help” justice within a framework of informal justice, and thereby serve as an additional feature of the practical contexts of mediation, which include circumstance, situation, and biography and history.     

Libertarian Paternalism,Externalities, and the “Spirit of Liberty”: How Thaler and Sunstein Are Nudging Us toward an “Overlapping Consensus”

In their 2008 book Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness, Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein use research from psychology and behavioral economics to argue that people suffer from systematic cognitive biases. They propose that policy makers mitigate these biases by framing people's choices in ways that help people act in their own self‐interest. Thaler and Sunstein call this approach “libertarian paternalism,” and they market it as “the Real Third Way.” In this essay, I argue that the book is a brilliant contribution to thinking about policy making but that “choice architecture” is not just a solution to the problem of cognitive biases. Rather, it is a means of approaching any kind of policy making. I further argue that policy makers must take externalities into account, even when using choice architecture. Finally, I argue that libertarian paternalism can best be seen as motivated by what Sunstein has celebrated in his work on constitutional theory: a humility about the possibility of policy‐maker error embodied in Learned Hand's famous aphorism about the “spirit of liberty” and an attempt to reduce social conflicts by searching for what John Rawls called an “overlapping consensus.”     

Machiavelli,Guicciardini and the “Governo Largo”

Niccolò Machiavelli's support for what he calls governo largo, or popular government, is usually contrasted with the diffidence towards it of Francesco Guicciardini, the Florentine aristocrat. The article argues that both these authors grounded their vision on Polybius' theory of “mixed government,” though adapting it in different directions. In examining this difference, the article reaches the conclusion that it concerns far less the degree of popular participation in political decision‐making and government than the value that Machiavelli and Guicciardini respectively ascribe to it in comparison with that of safety‐liberty (or legal certainty). In this respect, their theories may be viewed as anticipating the tensions between democracy and the rule of law, the co‐presence of which provides the essential foundation of the structure of present‐day constitutional democracies.     

Book Review: How Mediation Works: Theory,Research, and Practice by Stephen B. Goldberg,Jeanne M. Brett,Beatrice Blohorn‐Brenneur,With Nancy H. Rogers

This is a book review of How Mediation Works: Theory, Research, and Practice by Stephen B. Goldberg, Jeanne M. Brett, Beatrice Blohorn‐Brenneur, with Nancy H. Rogers. How Mediation Works is intended for a wide range of audiences: practicing mediators; aspiring mediators; those who may refer cases to mediation; participants in mediation, including parties and attorneys; managers who facilitate disputes; and those interested in mediation without a specific plan to engage in the practice (who the authors call “mediation learners”). The book is a well‐written, thoughtful, easy‐to‐read, organized, and concise overview of mediation practice. The book is divided into six chapters: (1) conflicts, disputes, and their resolution; (2) dispute resolution processes; (3) the roles of the mediator and the disputing parties at each step of the mediation process; (4) dealing with difficulties; (5) mediation and the law; and (6) suggestions for aspiring mediators. Though not an authority for family law mediation, the book provides many insightful observations and suggestions that would be instructive and helpful to any mediator or individual with an interest in mediation.     

“SEEING” MINORITIES AND PERCEPTIONS OF DISORDER: EXPLICATING THE MEDIATING AND MODERATING MECHANISMS OF SOCIAL COHESION

Research shows that residents report high levels of disorder in places with greater concentrations of minorities even after controlling for objective indicators of crime or disorder. Less understood, however, are the mechanisms that explain this relationship. Drawing on a survey of nearly 10,000 residents nested within 297 neighborhoods across two cities, we use a multiple indicators–multiple causes model to examine the cues that lead individuals to distort the presence of minorities in neighborhoods. We then employ multilevel models to test whether these distortions influence perceptions of disorder. Furthermore, we assess whether living in a socially cohesive neighborhood mediates and/or moderates the relationship between “seeing” minorities and perceiving disorder. We find that when residents overestimate the proportion of minorities living in their neighborhood, perceptions of disorder are heightened. Yet social cohesion moderates and partially mediates this relationship: Residents living in socially cohesive neighborhoods not only report less disorder than those living in less cohesive communities, but also they “see” fewer minorities when compared with residents living in less socially cohesive neighborhoods. These results suggest that social cohesion is an important mechanism for explaining how residents internalize the presence of minorities in their neighborhoods and how this then leads to perceived neighborhood disorder.     

Resolving Problems among Neighbors in Post‐Soviet Russia: Uncovering the Norms of the Pod”ezd

The article presents findings from a qualitative study of how Russians deal with neighbors who have leaked water onto them. In the Russian context, this is neither an uncommon nor a small problem. Building on US‐based studies of neighborhood relations, the article lays out three alternative strategies: avoidance, self‐help, and third‐party intervention. The Russian participants lived in close proximity to one another and had little opportunity for exit. The study documents a strong preference for self‐help, confirming the potency of the relational distance hypothesis for Russia. In contrast to their US counterparts, the Russian participants' lack of exit did not give rise to more intense and prolonged disputes. The findings suggest that there is a strong informal norm in favor of neighbors resolving disputes among themselves and that the residents who share common entryways (pod”ezdy) work out the parameters of acceptable behavior over time. These informal norms shape Russians' legal consciousness.     

我国环境冲突研究回顾及未来展望——基于CSSCI文献(1998-2020)的可视化分析

环境冲突是社会冲突的主要类型之一,环境冲突的有效治理是防范化解由环境问题引致的社会冲突的关键。本文借助Citespace软件,以1998-2020年间中文社会科学索引(CSSCI)数据库收录的135篇环境冲突相关文献为研究样本,综合采用文献计量和知识图谱分析两种方法对样本进行分析。研究发现,我国环境冲突文献发表数量各年份起伏较大,产生了高产学者和发文量较多的科研机构,关键词聚类分析确定了环境冲突的4个主题,邻避冲突是环境冲突领域研究的重点。未来应加强环境冲突研究领域研究者共同体、研究机构共同体建设以及多学科的融合,加强对大数据、区块链技术融入环境冲突治理等前沿问题的研究。     

PPP模式下政府的角色定位——兼论担保行政法学模式的兴起

PPP是政府和社会资本共担风险、合力达成公共任务的创新模式。在PPP模式下政府不再承担公共任务的履行责任,转而承担国家担保责任。政府承担国家担保责任,使得政府的角色从公法上的公共任务的“履行者”转变为“担保者”和“合作者”。政府角色和职能的重大转变导致传统行政法学模式转向担保行政法学模式。担保行政法学模式是以国家担保责...     

Lawyers for God and Neighbor: The Emergence of “Law as a Calling” as a Mobilizing Frame for Christian Lawyers

Drawing on movement framing, collective identity, and mobilization scholarship, this article examines the emergence and potential effects of framing “law as a calling” for the Christian Lawyering community. The article finds that the term should have strong resonance and salience in the broader Christian community. It also finds that because of its interpretive malleability, “law as a calling” has been discussed and actualized in three related, but distinct, ways. That is, “law as a calling” has been conceptualized as requiring Christian Lawyers to turn inward, turn outward by pursuing social justice, and turn outward as a culture warrior. The article argues that while the different interpretations of “law as a calling” address a range of needs required to mobilize potential and existing Christian L/lawyers, the different ideological factions of self‐identifying Christian Lawyers emphasize different understandings of “law as a calling.”     

On Two Distinct and Opposing Versions of Natural Law: “Exclusive” versus “Inclusive”

Abstract. This paper takes the dichotomy between “exclusive” and “inclusive” positivism and applies it by analogy to natural‐law theories. With John Finnis, and with Beyleved and Brownsword, we have examples of “exclusive natural‐law theory,” on which approach the law is valid only if its content satisfies a normative monological moral theory. The discourse theories of Alexy and Habermas are seen instead as “inclusive natural‐law theories,” in which the positive law is a constitutive moment in that it identifies moral rules and specifies their meaning. The article argues that inclusive theories of natural law are better suited to expressing an authentic “republican” attitude. *

相似文献