Symptom Checklist‐90‐Revised Scores in Adult Children Exposed to Alienating Behaviors: An Italian Sample

This study addresses a particular form of child psychological maltreatment, exposing a child to alienating behaviors in the context of a high degree of conflict between the parents. The objective of this research was to identify retrospectively the alienating behaviors that occurred in an Italian sample of children and the reported associated psychosocial symptoms. Seven hundred and thirty‐nine adults in Chieti, Italy, completed an anonymous and confidential survey regarding their childhood exposure to parental alienating behaviors and measures of current symptomatology. About 75% of the sample reported some exposure to parental alienating behaviors; 15% of the sample endorsed the item, “tried to turn me against the other parent.” The results revealed strong and statistically significant associations between reported exposure to parental alienating behaviors and reports of current symptomatology.     

Establishing the Limits of TrueAllele® Casework: A Validation Study

The limits of the expert system, TrueAllele^® Casework (TA), were explored using challenging mock casework profiles that included 17 single‐source and 18 two‐, 15 three‐ and 7 four‐person DNA mixtures. The sensitivity (ability to detect a minor contributor) of the TA analysis process was examined by challenging the system with mixture DNA samples that exhibited allelic and locus dropout and other stochastic effects. The specificity (ability to exclude nondonors) was rigorously tested by interrogating TA derived genotypes with 100 nondonor profiles. The accuracy with which TA estimated mixture weights of contributors to the two‐person mixtures was examined. Finally, first‐degree relatives of donors were used to assess the ability of the system to exclude close relatives. TA demonstrated great accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. TA correctly assigned mixture weights and excluded nearly all first‐degree relatives. This study demonstrates the analysis power of the TrueAllele^® Casework system.     

Implementing Joined‐Up Government: Lessons from the Australian Social Inclusion Agenda

‘Joined‐up government’ (JUG) approaches have emerged in many industrialized countries as a means to tackle persistent ‘wicked’ public and social policy problems (Pollit 2003 ). Despite this, limited evidence exists concerning their implementation or effectiveness. ‘JUG’ was popularized by the Blair Government (UK) with its focus on addressing social exclusion. Following in these footsteps, in 2007 the Australian Government launched the Social Inclusion Agenda: a joined‐up approach to improving the wellbeing of all Australians and addressing disadvantage. This paper focuses on findings from a study that examined the SIA as a natural experiment in JUG. Drawing on the implementation experiences of federal policy makers, our findings lend weight to emerging research into JUG that suggests that compatibility and consistency between goals, instruments, and processes is critical to success. We argue that closer attention needs to be given to developing ‘supportive architecture’ around joined‐up initiatives to facilitate implementation.     

Critical Factors for Enhancing Municipal Public Hearings

Although public hearings are the most common form of citizen input, they often fail to achieve their objectives. This nationwide survey of city administrators identifies factors that contribute most to successful public hearings. The most successful hearings have (1) a greater number of prehearing educational methods, (2) more media types and greater media frequency in the formal presentation, (3) more control over speakers' presentation time, (4) greater use of open follow-up meetings, and (5) more use of newspaper and direct mail to communicate posthearing decisions to the public. The qualitative data reveal city managers' 10 critical factors that are essential to the success of public hearings: effectively notifying and educating the public before the hearing; carefully planning the meeting; giving a clear, media-rich presentation of the issues; properly facilitating the meeting; and conducting appropriate follow-up.     

Mediation Ethics: A Grounded Approach

Using insights drawn from mediation practice, social justice scholarship, and debates on ethical thinking in other professional fields, the authors argue that prevailing ethical codes for mediators in the United States stunt the development of ethical thinking in the field. Current codes and even their critiques take a "top-down" approach that proceeds from the perspective of the mediator and gives primacy to abstract principles rather than to the particulars and contexts of disputes. This approach ignores a much richer practice on the ground, depends on an artificial division of procedural and substantive justice, and constricts the scope of ethical questions raised, inhibiting effective systemic solutions. The authors argue for ethics grounded in the context of particular substantive areas, which do not focus on the mediator alone and which remain open to a wider set of social justice considerations.