SOCIALIZING THE LEGAL PROFESSION: Can Redistributing Lawyers' Services Achieve Social Justice?

Redistributing laywers' services is a principal focus of efforts to reform contemporary legal systems. Such reforms generally attempt to modify the market distribution in oneof two ways: by subsidizing lawyers for the unrepresented, or by rendering lawyers unnecessary through deprofessionalization. This essay analyzes the contribution that redistribution could make to social (rather than formal) justice by extrapolating the consequences of the greatest conceivable redistribution: a socialization of the profession that would withdraw lawyers from those who presently purchase lawyers' services, while simultaneously subsidizing lawyers for the unrepresented. It then turns to the political prospects forsocialization. Concluding that socialization appears either feasible nor likely to attainsocial justice if it were possible, the essay reflects on the implications of continued pursuit of reformist goals.     

THE IMPACT OF FAMILY STRUCTURE AND QUALITY ON DELINQUENCY: A COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL FACTORS*

Despite the plethora of studies of broken homes, multivariate studies comparing the effects of the broken home and other theoretically relevant measures of the quality of family life are rare. This study examines the family structure versus family function issue by testing the comparative effects on self-reported delinquency of family structure and jive measures of family function. Five types of delinquency are considered. The data were obtained from a 1980 survey of 152 high school students in a small midwestern town. Item analysis and data reduction techniques were employed to construct six family quality indices and jive delinquency indices. Two types of family structure were examined: presence of both biological parents in the home v. other and single- v. two-parent homes. Multivariate analyses controlled for the effects of age and gender. Bivariate tests of the relationships between broken homes and delinquency were not significant, except for a moderate relationship between broken homes and status offenses. In addition, a bivariate relation between single-parent homes and delinquency was observed for status offenses only. Other forms of family dysfunction all were significantly related to overall delinquency and to status offenses. Moreover, several measures of family quality evidenced significant bivariate relationships to property offenses. violent offenses, and drug offenses. The importance of the broken home was further diminished when the direct effects of broken homes and home quality were examined in multivariate tests. Regression equations showed home quality and gender, rather than family structure, to be the more important determinants of delinquency. The family structure coefficient was significant in only 1 of 10 tests, a regression of broken home and home quality on status offenses. Efforts to expand the analysis to identify specific areas of family dysfunction were unenlightening.     

THE PRODUCTION OF CRIMINOLOGY

Criminology—in theory and practice—is a form of cultural production. We are creating a way of understanding and a way of living in the world. Our production, however. is mediated by our location in the class structure. Whether our expressions are critical and reflexive or merely reflections of capitalism is shaped by our ability to think dialectically and by our conscious involvement in the class struggle. We are in Ihe position-intellectually and socially-to think about and act upon the production of a socialist future.     

DOES VIOLENCE INVOLVING WOMEN AND INTIMATE PARTNERS HAVE A SPECIAL ETIOLOGY?*

We used data from a survey of inmates who have committed homicide or assault to examine whether men and women who have killed or assaulted their intimate partners are different from other violent offenders. A “gender perspective” implies that intimate partner violence and violence between the sexes have different etiologies than other types of violence, whereas a “violence perspective” implies that they have similar etiologies. Our evidence supports a violence perspective. In general, offenders who attack their partners are similar to other offenders in terms of their prior records, alcohol and drug use, and experiences of abuse. We observed some differences between men who attack women (including their female partners) and other male offenders, but the differences were opposite those predicted by a gender perspective. For example, men who attacked their partners were particularly likely to have been abused by their partners. In addition, men who attacked women were particularly likely to have experienced sexual abuse during childhood and to have been intoxicated at the time of the incident. These results suggest that some well-known predictors of violence are particularly strong predictors of male violence against women and female partners.     

A COUPLES ANALYSIS OF PARTNER ABUSE WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR ABUSE-PREVENTION POLICY*

Research Summary: We studied a representative sample of 360 young-adult couples from a birth cohort. We found abuse was a dyadic process; both partners’ personal characteristics increased abuse risk, and both sexes participated in abuse, particularly in clinical abusive couples having injury and/or official agency intervention. Treating only men may not reduce risk completely for most young couples. Policy Implications: If replicated, the findings would suggest policy encouraging development and evaluation of programs to reduce physical abuse by women. Prevention programs could aim to reduce abusive behavior by both sexes and promote victim safety among both sexes. Policies against treating women in abusive couples may act counter to prevention.