Discrepancies in Death Certificates,Public Health Registries,and Judicial Determinations in Italy

The death certificate is mandated by civil law and serves as a medical‐scientific document useful for biostatistics and epidemiological research. For a variety of reasons, death certificates can be misclassified. We reviewed data from self‐inflicted deaths collected over an 8‐year period by the Forensic Institute of the University Sacro Cuore of Rome (Italy). Four hundred and thirty‐five of 2904 were classified as self‐inflicted deaths (15%). The comparison with death certificates processed by the local public health authority (ASL) and by the Italian National Census Bureau (Istat) and with the judicial investigation results available in the Italian Penal Court archive shows some discrepancies. One‐hundred and twenty‐four of 435 deaths were not considered to be self‐inflicted but due to a crime (29% overrecording suicide) with a higher reduction for women, suggesting that it is easier to confuse a murder for suicide in female cases. Any discrepancies between the mortality and crime data are discussed in details.     

Mobilizing justice in sociolegal research: a mixed methods meta-analysis

Crime, Law and Social Change - Justice as a concept has permeated sociolegal scholarship in the U.S. since the founding of Law and Society as a field in the mid 1960s. Much of this scholarship has...     

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Intimate Partner Violence Advocates and Agencies

Relatively few studies have considered the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on intimate partner violence (IPV) advocates or the agencies where they work. In this study, based on United States IPV advocates’ experiences working with survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic, we conducted interviews to explore: 1) personal challenges and resilience working as IPV advocates during the COVID-19 pandemic; 2) how agencies adapted to the pandemic to support IPV survivors and advocates; and 3) specific needs and challenges of culturally-specific agencies. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 53 IPV advocates from June to November 2020. Participants were included if they worked directly with survivors, identified as an IPV advocate, worked at a US-based agency, and spoke and understood English. We created a sampling matrix to ensure adequate representation from IPV advocates serving survivors from communities which have been marginalized. Interviews were conducted through a virtual platform by a trained member of the research team. We used an inductive thematic analysis approach, with weekly coding meetings to resolve discrepancies in coding. Five themes emerged from the data: 1) IPV advocates described how working as an IPV advocate during the COVID-19 pandemic impacted them personally; 2) agencies developed new methods of addressing IPV advocates’ needs; 3) agencies developed new solutions to address pandemic-related client needs; 4) transitioning advocacy work to virtual formats created challenges but also opportunities and; 5) pandemic limitations and impacts compounded pre-pandemic challenges for culturally specific agencies. IPV advocates are frontline workers who have played essential roles in adjusting services to meet survivor needs during the COVID-19 pandemic while simultaneously coping with pandemic impacts on themselves and their agencies. Developing inter-agency collaborations and promoting advocates’ safety and wellbeing during future public health crises will help support IPV survivors.

     

The Belarusian Orthodox Church in the Shadow of the State

The Orthodox Church in Belarus tries to speak out in support of the state and at the same time uphold its own values. It can be effective in upholding its own values only if it participates in public dialogue.     

Do different types of incubators produce different types of innovations?

Incubators are heterogeneous but there is a lack of understanding of the variety of innovation involved. We use four archetypes of incubator discussed in the literature (basic research, university, economic development and private incubator) and analyze their generation of different types of innovation (product, technological process and organizational innovation) during a 4 years period (2005–2008). In a sample of 80 incubators, we find that incubatees in some types of incubators are more prone to generate product and technological process innovations than those hosted in other types.