The Coming of Parliamentary Television: The Lords and the Senate Compared

Subscribing to a Burkean view of representation, legislators have long tended to resist constant public scrutiny. In recent years, however, they have overcome this reluctance in a large number of countries and voted to allow the televising of their proceedings. But why they did so remains a mystery. Some media theorists argue that television exposure is a 'great democratizer'. It demystifies public authority figures and obliges them to become more accountable for their actions. The experience of the British House of Lords and the United States Senate suggests instead that television was invited in by rational political actors as a means of achieving their goals in a time of change. In this view, television is best seen not as a force in its own right, but as a medium of communication that can be strategically deployed by goal-oriented political élites responding to different political circumstances and institutional incentive structures.     

Distributive and Procedural Justice in Seven Nations

The paper examines the impact of distributive justice and procedural justice variables on judgments in seven countries (Bulgaria, France, Hungary, Poland, Russia, Spain, and the United States). Subjects were presented with each of two experimental vignettes: one in which the actor unsuccessfully appeals being fired from his job and one in which the actor unsuccessfully goes to an employment agency to seek a job; they were asked to rate the justness of the outcome and how fairly the actor had been treated. The vignettes manipulated deservingness and need of the actor (distributive justice factors) and impartiality and voice in the hearing (procedural justice factors). Four hypotheses were tested: first, a distributive justice hypothesis that deservingness would be more important than need in these settings; second, a procedural justice hypothesis that the importance of voice and impartiality vary depending on the nature of the encounter and the forum in which it is resolved; third, because of their recent socialist experience, Central and Eastern European respondents make greater use of need information and less use of deservingness information than Western respondents; and fourth, that distributive justice and procedural justice factors interact. The distributive justice hypothesis is supported in both vignettes. The procedural justice hypothesis receives some support. Impartiality is more important in the first vignette and voice is more important in the second vignette. The interaction hypothesis was not supported in the first vignette, but does receive some support in the second vignette. The cultural hypothesis is not supported in either vignette. The implications for distributive and procedural justice research are discussed.     

Work and Family Life among Migrant Factory Workers in China and Vietnam

ABSTRACT

Through on-site interviewing, a comparative study has been carried out about migrant factory workers in industrialised parts of China’s Guangdong province and in Vietnam’s Ho Chi Minh City. Even though China and Vietnam possess similar legacies of socialist transformation and have household registration regulations that restrict rural migrants’ access to urban social services and impede their settlement in cities, there exist marked differences in Guangdong and Ho Chi Minh City in migration patterns, factory work conditions and migrant worker family livelihoods. In particular, migrant families in Ho Chi Minh City largely stay intact and tend to settle there permanently, while married migrant workers in Guangdong normally need to split up their families and remain trapped in circular rural–urban migration. As shall be seen, the national and local governments play important roles in determining the inclusion or exclusion of migrants from urban life, the wages they are paid and their standard of living and, most important of all, their children’s access to education. Each of the two countries’ differences in implementing policies is examined and comparatively analysed.     

Assessment and aftercare for deliberate self-harm patients provided by a general hospital psychiatric service

We report on a sample of 135 deliberate self-harm (DSH) patients who were assessed by a general hospital DSH service, and on those who were offered aftercare by, or telephone open access to, the service. Patients' satisfaction with assessment and treatment, and their outcome were investigated at follow-up 12-20 months later. Four-fifths of patients reported the assessment following DSH to have been helpful and the assessor sympathetic. Thirty-three (24%) of the 135 patients assessed were offered treatment by the DSH service but 13 declined or failed to attend. Of the 20 who engaged in treatment, 17 (94%) were satisfied with their care. Open access to the DSH service by telephone was offered to 53 (39%) patients, nine (22%) of whom reported at follow-up that they had used this facility. A specialist DSH service can effectively assess and treat patients following DSH. It is important that the service is accessible and acceptable to patients.