From Sancitity to Screening: Genetic Disabilities, Risk and Rhetorical Strategies in Wrongful Birth and Wrongful Conception Cases

This analysis scrutinises the rhetorical strategies used by judges in wrongful life and wrongful birth actions as evidence for the assertion that the judicial reading of public policy in such cases has undergone a significant shift which is likely to accelerate as genetic knowledge grows and health care resources shrink. The implications of the predicted move towards increased genetic testing of prospective parents are traversed in relation to feminist analyses of the impact of genetics on reproductive technology. These are viewed as forming a nexus with the current social constructions of disability and the contemporary cultural preoccupation with risk, in a context of the increasing commercial importance of genetic information. It is argued that women cannot make free and informed choices about genetic testing and pregnancy unless legal and social mechanisms which protect those choices are in place. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

‘Robust and Raring to Go?’– Judges' Perceptions of Child Witnesses

This article explores judicial perceptions of child witnesses. It considers the impact of recent legislation in England and Wales as well as in Scotland which classified all child witnesses as vulnerable and introduced a series of special measures to facilitate children's evidence. The article reports the findings of an empirical research study conducted with the judiciary in Scotland which suggests that judicial perceptions of child witnesses extend across a complex spectrum where a child may be viewed as vulnerable but is also likely to be seen as suggestible, reliable or resilient. The article advances two propositions. First, that the statutory conceptualization of children as invariably vulnerable has not displaced established beliefs concerning children's suggestibility and therefore has made little difference to perceptions of their ability to produce reliable testimony. Second, that focusing on children's potential for resilience rather than their vulnerability may prove a more productive conceptualization of children, one which could better support their capability as witnesses.     

Guantánamo Bay: Towards Legality?

This article outlines the US Supreme Court's approach to the habeas corpus entitlements of suspected terrorists detained in Guantánamo Bay and argues for the extension of constitutional habeas corpus rights to them. The article considers two ways in which the Supreme Court might carry out this task: first, 'the territorial approach' (based on domestic legal principles of 'unincorporated territories' and principles of leasehold), and secondly, 'the extraterritorial approach' (based on international purposive approaches to the reach of human rights treaties exemplified by the European Court of Human Rights' Article 1 jurisprudence). For reasons of effectiveness of protection, the Article expresses a clear preference for the latter. The House of Lords decision in R (Al-Skeini) v Secretary of State for Defence (2007) is proposed as a template for such a development. Finally the article refutes arguments rejecting such a development based on the 'trade-off thesis' and perceptions of judicial competence.     

Mainstreaming: A case for optimism and cynicism

This paper seeks to evaluate the concept of mainstreaming against a range of feminist critiques of laws and legal systems and to examine the case for the pursuit of feminist politics through mainstreaming strategies. It begins, in section two, by identifying theme sin existing mainstreaming literature, and then in section three considers the potential of mainstreaming to tackle the causes o fine quality. In particular it questions whether mainstreaming can address the patriarchal nature of laws and legal systems and the essentialising tendencies of law, and whether mainstreaming can effectively tackle market-driven inequality. A final section considers the conditions under which feminists might consider engagement with mainstreaming and the limits of such strategies.