Sex offender legislation in the United States: what do we know?

In the United States there has been increased public pressure to create legislation to monitor and confine sex offenders. However, to date, there has been very little empirical evidence suggesting that these laws are effective in preventing future recidivism. This article reviews the current trends in sex offender legislation, including mandatory sentencing, civil commitment, community notification, monitoring, and supervision and the impact these policies may have on sex offender recidivism and treatment.     

Does childhood sexual abuse set in motion a cycle of violence against women?: what we know and what we need to learn

This article reviews evidence for the deleterious effects of childhood sexual abuse on female development in both the acute and long-term phases. Taken in aggregate, there is evidence to suggest a persistent cycle of violence perpetrated against women that begins in childhood in the form of sexual abuse, reemerges later in adolescence and early adulthood in the form of physical assault or sexual revictimization, and ultimately places the next generation at considerable risk for victimization. The differential effect of the characteristics of sexual abuse and the wide variation in the onset and developmental course of symptoms are underscored. The need for adequate models elucidating mechanisms behind this continued cycle of violence is discussed.     

What do we know about rate-setting?

State regulation of hospital revenue is one approach to cost containment on which there is voluminous evaluative data from the "laboratory of the states"; yet these data are sufficiently complex and ambiguous that they are claimed by both proponents and opponents of rate-setting as support for their respective cases. This paper summarizes the evidence, concluding that mandatory rate-setting has generally constrained hospital costs where it has been implemented. However, were rate-setting established in additional states, it is not clear that comparable results would be realized. It is still less clear that rate-setting would constrain health care costs more than would increased competition and selective contracting.     

Domestic violence among immigrants from India: What we need to know — and what we should do

Little research has been reported on domestic violence among Indian immigrant families in the United States. While one national survey suggests that this is not a major problem, several smaller scale studies that focus specifically on South Asian immigrants suggest there is a substantial hidden problem warranting attention. In order to assist future research, this paper presents an integrated theoretical model to explain domestic violence in Indian immigrant communities. The model draws on feminist theory, family violence research, acculturation theory and victimological and crime opportunity theories. The model also provides a framework for thinking about possible intervention strategies. Those likely to provide more immediate benefits are discussed.     

No effects in independent prevention trials: can we reject the cynical view?

Recent studies suggest that the reported effect sizes of prevention and intervention trials in criminology are considerably larger when program developers are involved in a study than when trials are conducted by independent researchers. This paper examines the possibility that these differences may be due to systematic bias related to conflict of interest. A review of the evidence shows that the possibility of a substantial problem cannot be currently rejected. Based on a theoretical model about how conflict of interest may influence research findings, the paper proposes several strategies to examine empirically the extent of systematic bias related to conflict of interest. It also suggests that, in addition to improved standards for conducting and publishing future experimental studies, more research is needed on the extent of systematic bias in the existing body of literature.

When legal rights are not a reality: do individuals know their rights and how can we tell?

Public knowledge of rights has been the subject of a number of empirical enquiries over the last decade. In England and Wales, knowledge of rights and its relationship with an individual's capacity to ‘self-help’ and ‘self-represent’ when faced with a civil justice problem has become the subject of renewed attention following changes to legal aid which, from March 2013, will see the availability of legal advice and representation dramatically reduced. Previous studies focusing on public knowledge of rights in this (and other) jurisdictions have illustrated a lack of knowledge amongst the general population and more specifically, a widespread tendency of individuals to assume that the law aligns with their own moral, ethical or social attitudes. However, many of these studies have also suffered from methodological shortcomings. In attempting to address some of these shortcomings this study uses an open-ended format to ask individuals with one or one or more civil or social justice problems to describe their rights/legal position. We find that whilst an open-ended question approach to exploring knowledge of rights yields insight not acquired by other formats, its utility is constrained by difficulty reconciling articulation and actual knowledge of rights. We discuss the implications of these findings as they relate to the development of future research in the field of family and social welfare law, Public Legal Education (PLE) and access to justice post-March 2013.