Competency to stand trial: a conceptual model for its proper assessment

The assessment of competency to stand trial is frequently fraught with conceptual confusion resulting from a failure to properly apply the data of the clinical examination to the relevant legal criteria. A basic question scheme that encompasses (1) the defendant's psychiatric status, (2) the effects of that status on his functioning, and (3) his apparent ability to participate in legal proceedings, is introduced to clarify the evaluation of fitness to stand trial. The way in which combinations of answers to three "basic questions" generate a scheme that clarifies the difficulties encountered in most competency evaluations is shown. Eight paradigm cases are generated. Five of these (competence, incompetence, mentally ill but competent, malingering, and impaired but competent) are frequently straightforward. However, the three possibilities in which a defendant meets criteria entailed by two of the three questions are inherently subject to controversy. These situations (circumscribed psychosis related to the charges, malingering in the context of mental illness, and functional deficits in the context of minor mental illness) are discussed in detail and illustrated with case material.     

Immunity from criminal prosecution for parents who withhold medically necessary treatment from children on religious grounds

Because child endangerment laws and their judicial interpretation are different in each state, healthcare providers should familiarize themselves with the law in their particular jurisdiction. In situations in which parents refuse on religious grounds to consent to medical treatment for their children, health care providers should consult local counsel as to the legal options available.     

FAMILY COURT–UNIVERSITY PARTNERSHIP TO BENEFIT DIVORCING FAMILIES: THE EXPERIENCE OF MARICOPA COUNTY (ARIZONA) FAMILY COURT DEPARTMENT AND ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY'S PREVENTION RESEARCH CENTER*

Using evidence‐based methods to help divorcing families requires the combined best efforts of legal professionals, courts, judges and administrators, mental health oriented service providers, and university researchers. Collaborative program development, implementation, and evaluation involve a complicated process of negotiation between professionals, yet this process is hardly ever described. The current article describes the processes we underwent in forging an alliance of researchers from Arizona State University's Prevention Research Center with professionals from the Maricopa County (Arizona) Family Court, a collaboration that involved a true dialogue and cooperation from the earliest stages and continuing throughout the project. A Community‐Based Participatory Research model was the underlying basis for our partnership; its lynchpin device was a Joint Planning Committee.     

Interviewer: ‘Are women and girls ever responsible for the domestic violence they encounter?’ Student: ‘No,well, unless they did something really,really bad …’

Research shows the ‘gendered nature’ of domestic violence, with Women’s Aid (a UK-based charity) estimating that 1 in 4 women are affected (2014). This paper reports on a project – funded by Comic Relief, completed by Nottinghamshire Domestic Violence Forum (now known as Equation) and evaluated by Nottingham Trent University. The project adopts a Whole School Approach in seeking to prevent domestic violence. Students at three secondary schools attended between one and five blocks of work, and special events. There is evidence of positive developments – with young people showing understanding of domestic violence as well as the margins between healthy and unhealthy relationships. However, not all students could reply ‘never’ to the question of ‘are women and girls to blame for the domestic violence they experience?’, remarking that if the woman had done something ‘really, really bad’ then violence might be justified. We argue that young people’s uncertainties need to be situated within the gender-unequal socio-contexts of contemporary society, and further call for a WSA to domestic violence prevention to be a compulsory part of the UK national curriculum.     

Us strategy in the middle east and the 2004 presidential election 9/11: towards a redefinition of america's role in the world

September 11th dramatically changed the geopolitical landscape for the United States. Though President Bush was elected as a domestic policy president, the war against radical Islam has become the central theme of his presidency. In this war, adhering to the analyses of the neoconservatives, the President believes that the region's tyrannies are a breeding ground for Islamic extremism. Overthrowing Saddam Hussein's tyranny and replacing it with a more democratic regime is the start of a long process of liberalization of the Arab world that will have reverberations for years to come. Though Senator John Kerry has based his 2004 presidential campaign on criticizing President Bush's Iraq policy, if Kerry were elected president, his Iraq policies would actually differ little from those of Bush.     

Who Fights? The Determinants of Participation in Civil War

A range of seemingly rival theories attempt to explain why some individuals take extraordinary risks by choosing to participate in armed conflict. To date, however, competing accounts have typically not been grounded in systematic, empirical studies of the determinants of participation. In this article, we begin to fill this gap through an examination of the determinants of participation in insurgent and counterinsurgent factions in Sierra Leone's civil war. We find some support for all of the competing theories, suggesting that the rivalry between them is artificial and that theoretical work has insufficiently explored the interaction of various recruitment strategies. At the same time, the empirical results challenge standard interpretations of grievance-based accounts of participation, as poverty, a lack of access to education, and political alienation predict participation in both rebellion and counterrebellion. Factors that are traditionally seen as indicators of grievance or frustration may instead proxy a for more general susceptibility to engage in violent action or a greater vulnerability to political manipulation by elites.