Lawyers on the move: the consequences of mobility for legal careers

While the legal profession was traditionally conceived of as geographically bounded, recent decades have witnessed a surge in the movement of lawyers across geographic boundaries. This mobility has transformed the paths through which legal careers are built and sustained. Relying on Bourdieu's concept of capital, this paper focuses on the effects of geographic mobility within the legal profession in order to explore how moving can alter the forms and value of capital—human, social, or symbolic—necessary for professional advancement. Drawing on two unique datasets, we find that geographic mobility can be a source for the emergence of new inequalities within the profession, so that lawyers moving from one jurisdiction to another do not receive full value for their credentials. We also find that geographic mobility can exacerbate existing inequalities in the profession, and finally, our analyses suggest that understanding the effects of capital assets equally requires attention to the functional form of capital within professional fields.     

Maynard Keynes and the 'Bamboozlement' of Woodrow Wilson: What Really Happened at Paris? (Wilson, Lloyd George, pensions and pre-armistice agreement)

Woodrow Wilson's acceptance of Lloyd George's demand for the inclusion of military pensions among the reparations payable to the Allies under the Treaty of Versailles was stigmatized by J.M. Keynes in The Economic Consequences of the Peace as the most notorious of the President's alleged breaches of faith with Germany. Keynes's damning verdict remains virtually unquestioned. This paper reconsiders the case for pensions, suggests that the question was less clear-cut than Keynes insisted, and queries his influential account of Wilson's supposed gullibility and culpability. The paper then considers Lloyd George's intentions in the Pre-armistice agreement, from which the Allied right to reparations and pensions were derived.     

Self-Regulation as Policy Process: The Multiple and Criss-Crossing Stages of Private Rule-Making

While there are many studies of self-regulation, they have not yet systematically analyzed the very process by which rules are developed and implemented. This article treats self-regulation as a process with sufficient autonomy and functional coherence to display identifiable stages, each of which deserves independent attention in turn. It draws from the literature on the stages of public policy processes and uses this as a template to identify and analyze the unique properties of private rule-making, while acknowledging the criticisms that have been made of excessive determinism and simplicity in some applications of the general idea of stages. The article shows that our understanding of self-regulation is significantly advanced by examining it as a process with stages but it emphasizes that the different stages of the self-regulatory policy process (agenda-setting, problem identification, decision, implementation and evaluation) are criss-crossed in numerous and interesting ways. It also shows that private rule-making often seeks to solve societal problems in domestic and international settings and is an important alternative to public regulation but self-regulation is rarely completely de-coupled from public authority. Instead, public authority is activated to solidify self-regulatory arrangements across the different stages of the policy process.     

Lord Cunliffe, Lloyd George, reparations and reputations at the Paris peace conference, 1919

This paper reexamines the role of Lord Cunliffe, traditionally cast (by Lloyd George, among others) as one of the villains of the Paris Peace Conference for his extremism on reparations. It argues that Lloyd George used Cunliffe as a stalking-horse to conceal his own intention of exacting maximum reparations in the face of American opposition. Lloyd George's refusal to agree a final sum, despite the pleas of almost all his senior colleagues, reflected both Cunliffe's advice and his own fears of underestimating Germany's capacity by setting too low a figure, which would be largely consumed by French claims.     

Blunders and Blame: How Armed Non-State Actors React to Their Mistakes

Armed non-state actors make mistakes. Why this phenomenon occurs, and how organizations respond to their blunders, has remained understudied. This article draws on interdisciplinary research to examine sources of errors, and offers a public sensitivity argument to explain why groups claim and even apologize for their blunders. The quantitative analysis finds that all armed groups, regardless of ideology and organizational structure, are willing to apologize when there are unintended high casualty rates. A detailed analysis of three Provisional Irish Republican Army incidents reveals that public opinion is sensitive to the nature of the victims, and shows how public condemnation can impact organizational behavior.     

Educational figures as models for empathetic communication at school： An exploratory examination of an integrative assessment model

This paper presents an exploratory examination of a methodology deliberated to quantify empathetic modeling in Israeli schools. Approximately half a dozen disciples and 3-5 teachers in each of 102 elementary and high-schools from various regions of Israel, affiliated with different educational sectors, participated in the study, which was conducted by 40 well trained interviewers. Using sophisticated algorithms, integrative scores were extracted in order to represent each school＇s pupils-teachers fit in viewing the empathetic approach by the school＇s leading educational figures. The results are conceived as indicative of the viability of the to-be-evaluated assessment method and the construct of school-empathy. Applied implications are suggested and continued research deliberated to test the hypothesis of an inverse causal connection between school-empathy, and school-violence is proposed.     

Project SafeCare: Improving Health, Safety, and Parenting Skills in Families Reported for, and At-Risk for Child Maltreatment

Project SafeCare was a 4-year, in-home, research and intervention program that provided parent training to families of children at-risk for maltreatment, and families of children who were victims of maltreatment. Parents were trained in treating children's illnesses and maximizing their own health-care skills (Health), positive and effective parent–child interaction skills (Parenting), and maintaining low hazard homes (Safety). The effectiveness of these training components was evaluated as the change in the parents' scores on roleplay situations for child health problems, hazards present in the home, and the frequency and quality of parent–child interactions during activities of daily living. Statistically significant improvements were seen in child health care, home safety, and parent–child interactions.