Rethinking Power and Law: Foucault’s <Emphasis Type="Italic">Society must be Defended</Emphasis>

Michel Foucault provides a radical challenge to the liberal approach to power and law, which is echoed by Jacques Derrida. Important differences exist between the analyses of Foucault and Derrida which should not be overlooked. This essay proceeds on the basis of an awareness of these differences, yet it at the same time attempts to bring these thinkers closer together, with reference specifically to the thinking of Freud. It is often said that Foucault does not offer an alternative to that which he criticises or that his analyses do not provide for a way in which to escape from the effects of power. By specifically focusing on Foucault’s reliance on the notion of ‘play’ in Society must be defended, it is submitted that an ‘escape’ is in fact provided for. The deconstructive reading of Foucault which is presented here attempts to ensure that Foucault does not remain trapped within metaphysics.     

Is it lawful to use Medicaid to pay for circumcision?

Since 1965, tens of millions of boys have been circumcised under the Medicaid program, most at birth, at a cost to the United States Federal Government, the States and taxpayers of billions of dollars. Although 18 States have ended coverage since 1982, the United States Government and 32 States continue to pay for non-therapeutic circumcision, even though no medical association in the world recommends it. Many cite American medical association policy that the procedure has potential medical benefits as well as disadvantages, and that the circumcision decision should be left to parents. This article shows that Medicaid coverage of circumcision is not a policy issue because it is prohibited by federal and State law. As American medical associations concede, non-therapeutic circumcision is unnecessary, elective, cosmetic surgery on healthy boys, usually performed for cultural, personal or religious reasons. The fundamental principle of Medicaid law is that Medicaid only covers necessary medical treatments after the diagnosis of a current medical condition. Physicians and hospitals face severe penalties for charging Medicaid for circumcisions. Medicaid officials and the Federal and State Governments are also required to end coverage. It is unlawful to circumcise and to allow the circumcision of healthy boys at the expense of the government and taxpayers.     

Alexandre 1er et le regime representatif

Summary

Alexander I and Representative Government

This analysis of the attitudes of Alexander I towards representative government is based on fifty years of work on Russian political history, and in particular on a study of the international organization of the post‐Napoleonic peace and, more recently, the reign of Alexander I.

In the light of recent events in Russia, this essay suggests some obvious comparisons between Alexander I and Gorbachev. Both wanted to liberalize the government of their empire without damaging the legitimacy of the new institutions to be created with respect to the existing regime. Both were thrown out of power, the former to put a stop to reforms, the latter to speed them up, at the risk of destroying the legitimacy of the central authority over the various parts of the empire.     

Recent developments in employee benefits law

The first part of this article highlights important judicial developments involving employee benefits and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), as amended, during the latter part of 2003 and the first part of 2004, including the most significant U.S. Supreme Court and federal circuit court decisions. The second part covers recent legislative and regulatory developments in employee benefits law. This article is not meant to be exhaustive, but discusses the more important developments during 2003-2004, with particular focus on issues of concern to the insurance industry.