Legal pragmatism and the pre-birth continuum: an absence of unifying principle

The common law has historically been clear - the rights of the unborn do not exist prior to birth. A child becomes a legal person and able to enforce legal rights upon being born alive and having a separate existence from her or his mother. This article assesses whether new developments in biomedical technologies have left this legal principle inviolate and explores what the state of law is in relation to pre-birth. It argues that there is a pre-birth continuum where the law punctuates points in a lineal timeline fashion as to when a pre-birth "non-entity" becomes a legal entity. The article concludes that there is no singular rule of law with respect to being or becoming a human but rather a collection of discrete and increasingly divergent legal categories. This recognition of a pre-birth continuum or timeline as to the legal recognition of this "non-entity" has significant ramifications for the future development of law and impacts on legal thinking about what it means to be human.     

Luck, Genes, and Equality

This essay considers principles of distributive justice for access to reproductive biotechnologies which make it possible to enhance the traits of human offspring. The author provides prima facie reason to think that redistributive principles apply to genetic goods and proceed to evaluate the way in which four distributive patterns--egalitarianism, luck egalitarianism, prioritarianism, and suffcientarianism--would implement a just distribution of genetic goods. He argues that the currency of genetic redistribution consists in natural primary goods like health, vision, and rationality as these goods contribute to the biological component of basic capabilities, like being healthy, seeing properly, and being able to reason. The author develops a mixed sufficiency/priority approach to genetic enhancement, and defends this approach against objections.     

To Run or Not to Run for Office: Explaining Nascent Political Ambition

In this article, we develop the concept of nascent political ambition and offer the first empirical assessment of potential candidates' initial interest in seeking elective office. Our analysis is based on the Citizen Political Ambition Study—our national survey of nearly 3,800 individuals in the four professions that most frequently precede a career in politics. We find that a general sense of efficacy as a candidate, as well as a politicized upbringing, motivate well-situated potential candidates' inclinations to run for office. Alternatively, status as a member of a group historically excluded from politics depresses the likelihood of considering a candidacy. These findings shed light not only on the prospects for political representation and democratic legitimacy in the United States, but also the means by which to study candidate emergence and conceptualize political ambition.     

A Test of the Revised Auricular Surface Aging Method on a Modern European Population

The accurate age estimation of adults is an important step in the construction of the biological profile of skeletonized remains. The auricular surface of the ilium as it was developed in 1985 by Lovejoy et al., is one of the methods employed for age estimation. This study presents the results of a blind test of the revised auricular surface aging method developed by Buckberry and Chamberlain. A sample of 120 individuals from the Athens Collection was used to test this revised aging technique. Almost all features and composite score were positively correlated with known age‐at‐death. The calculation of bias demonstrated no obvious trend for either overestimation or underestimation of age when all individuals were pooled together. Inaccuracy showed that absolute errors of estimated ages against known ages are substantial. The data generated from this study suggest that the revised method can be reliable for age estimation on a modern European population.     

An experimental trial of adaptive programming in drug court: outcomes at 6, 12 and 18 months

Objectives

To test whether an adaptive program improves outcomes in drug court by adjusting the schedule of court hearings and clinical case-management sessions pursuant to a priori performance criteria.

Methods

Consenting participants in a misdemeanor drug court were randomly assigned to the adaptive program (n?=?62) or to a baseline-matching condition (n?=?63) in which they attended court hearings based on the results of a criminal risk assessment. Outcome measures were re-arrest rates at 18 months post-entry to the drug court, and urine drug test results and structured interview results at 6 and 12 months post-entry.

Results

Although previously published analyses revealed significantly fewer positive drug tests for participants in the adaptive condition during the first 18 weeks of drug court, current analyses indicate the effects converged during the ensuing year. Between-group differences in new arrest rates, urine drug test results and self-reported psychosocial problems were small and non-statistically significant at 6, 12, and 18 months post-entry. A non-significant trend (p?=?.10) suggests there may have been a small residual impact (Cramer’s v?=?.15) on new misdemeanor arrests after 18 months.

Conclusions

Adaptive programming shows promise for enhancing short-term outcomes in drug courts; however, additional efforts are needed to extend the effects beyond the first 4 to 6 months of enrollment.     

What’s Special about the Insult of Paternalism?

Law and Philosophy - A common assumption is that paternalism generates a special, and especially grievous, insult. Identifying this distinctive insult is then presented as the key to unlocking the...