Cohabitation Contracts and the Democratization of Personal Relations

Feminist opposition to the use of cohabitationcontracts for the private regulation of personalrelations has been predicated on the classical readingof contract as commerce. On this reading,cohabitation contracts construct cohabitants'obligations as commercial and typically detrimental towomen because of their weaker bargaining power. Butthe premisses of classical contract theory are beingundermined by radical critiques which emphasize theimportance of relationality in the reading ofcontract. On such critiques, the obligationsconstructed by cohabitation contracts need no longerexclude considerations of the parties' differentfinancial status and social circumstances. Theconstruction of cohabitants' obligations canaccordingly foreground fairness and equality, both indrafting and in enforcing cohabitation contracts. Inthis way, the conceptualization of contract asrelationality encourages the use of cohabitationcontracts as progressive mechanisms for thedemocratization of personal relations.     

Citizenship Education: Anti-political Culture and Political Education in Britain

The British Government white paper 'Excellence in Schools' and the subsequent report of the Advisory Group on Citizenship Education for Citizenship recommend that schools educate pupils in citizenship and democracy. This recommendation is considered in the context of reasons why there has traditionally been no formal or well articulated political education in schools. Among these reasons a pervasive antipathy to politics and to government is identified as one of the most powerful. This antipathy is expressed from the left and the right wings of the political spectrum, and the 'critical' opposition to both, as well as from interests such as those defending professional and personal autonomy. These arguments imply that 'politics' is optional, not a set of practices and institutions with which individuals must be familiar. It is argued that this proposition cannot be valid.     

Complex scientific testimony: How do jurors make decisions?

Critics of the civil jury system question whether jurors can adequately evaluate complex expert testimony. Based on current models of research in persuasion, we hypothesized that when expert testimony is complex, factors other than content will influence persuasion. Participants, serving as mock jurors, watched a videotaped trial in which two scientists provided evidence on whether PCBs could have caused a plaintiff's illness. The complexity of the expert's testimony and the strength of the expert's credentials were varied in a 2×2 factorial design. After watching the videotape, mock jurors rendered a verdict and completed a number of attitude measures related to the trial. Overall, consistent with our prediction, we found that jurors were more persuaded by a highly expert witness than by a less expert witness, but only when the testimony was highly complex. When the testimony was less complex, jurors relied primarily on the content of that testimony, and witness credentials had little impact on the persuasiveness of the message.     

Professional attitudes regarding treatment and punishment of incest: Comparing police,child welfare,and community mental health

Brief case histories involving incest were presented to police officers, child welfare workers, and community mental health practitioners in a rural area in Canada. Intervention priorities involving “treatment versus punishment” were assessed across the three professional groups for each specific case vignette. Attitudes were assessed on three factors: perpetrator mentally ill rather than criminal, view regarding treatment of victims and mothers, and support for court mandated treatment. Police and community mental health practitioners had significantly different attitudes as to whether perpetrators of child sexual abuse should be viewed more as criminals or as mentally disturbed. Both mental health and child welfare staff differed significantly from police with a less punitive view towards victims and their mothers. All three profressional groups showed no difference in their modest endorsement of the use of mandated treatment by the courts. Gender was not found to influence response to case vignettes.