POSTDECREE LITIGATION Is Joint Custody to Blame?

The Joint Custody Symposium Project examined almost 600 court files in five judicial districts to investigate the common perception that joint custody contributes significantly to relitigation rates. Data indicated that joint custody as a factor accounted for only 10.8% of court returns. Financial concerns accounted for the majority of actions. Disputes over child custody appeared to be related to finances as well. Unfortunately, returns to court do not necessarily resolve the financial needs of divorced parents. The findings suggest that children may be used as pawns in court battles over money that are disguised as parenting concerns, as evidenced by the close relationship found between visitation or custody disputes and child support modification filings.     

Of Athenians and Spartans: Profiles of freedom and enlightenment in the leadership styles of criminal justice academic administrators: An essay

This essay examines the dubious relationship between the quality of criminal justice education and the kind of treatment faculty members and students receive from their academic administrators. It is based on three premises: criminal justice colleges and departments should be held to higher rational and moral standards not because they are qualitatively different from other liberal arts departments, but because they teach justice; if the virtues of criminal justice are worth teaching, then criminal justice faculty members and students should be treated in a manner consistent with these virtues; and treating criminal justice faculty members and students unfairly, disrespectfully, or irresponsibly makes them unable or disinterested in endorsing the noble nature of criminal justice. This article categorizes academic administrators as either Athenians or Spartans. The former are best suited intellectually and temperamentally to administer because they possess a talent for reasoning and act in good faith. The latter are unsuited because, regardless of how well they mask it, they practice domination, deception, favoritism, and indignity.This essay is a theoretical discourse based on the contiguity of modalities, experiences, and impressions generally shared by criminal justice educators and graduate students. Its logic is Humeian and its method is broadly ethnographic.     

Patents and Appropriation: Concerns and Evidence1

For over the past twenty years, the United States has witnessed a pro-patent movement. In response, numerous concerns have been raised, including possible impediments to innovation in cumulative technologies, emergence of anti-commons, barriers to entry and an elevation of costs of innovation associated with defensive patenting, growth in patent litigation and poor quality patents. Although there is little systematic evidence that these concerns have materialized in any substantial way, vigilance is nonetheless warranted.     

The Dictator Game, Fairness and Ethnicity in Postwar Bosnia

This study considers the effects of ethnic violence on norms of fairness. Once violence is a foregone conclusion, will cooperative norms ever (re‐)emerge beyond ethnic boundaries? We use an experiment that measures how fairly individuals in a postconflict setting treat their own ingroup in comparison to the outgroups—in this case, examining the behavior of 681 Muslims, Croats, and Serbs in postwar Bosnia‐Herzegovina. To assess fairness, we use the dictator game wherein subjects decide how to allocate a sum of money between themselves and an anonymous counterpart of varying ethnicity. We find that the effects of ethnicity on decision making are captured by our experiments. Although results indicate preferential ingroup treatment, the incidence and magnitude of outgroup bias is much less than expected. We conclude that norms of fairness across ethnicity are remarkably strong in Bosnia, and we take this to be a positive sign for reconciliation after violent conflict.     

Negotiating Integrative Medicine: A Framework for Provider–Patient Conversations

Efforts to integrate complementary and alternative medical (CAM) therapies into conventional medical settings are creating a variety of negotiation challenges between various stakeholders. Focusing on the two-party encounter between physician and patient offers a way to understand the application of principled negotiation to perhaps the most fundamental and emotionally charged place within the health care system in which the introduction of CAM therapies is likely to disrupt relationships and produce conflict. This article suggest ways in which the theory and analysis of principled negotiation can add to current liability and ethical frameworks, and might thereby contribute to optimal future health care by helping to wisely integrate CAM therapies into conventional medical care.     

Foreign advisors and capacity building: The case of Kenya

Approximately 100,000 foreign advisors work in the public sectors of Sub-Saharan African countries at an annual cost of more than $4 billion. The numbers, range of services, and costs of such advisors increased during the 1980s while at the same time donors launched new efforts to build professional capacity in the African civil service. Based on a study of advisors and their counterpart economists in Kenya's Ministry of Planning and National Development, this article addresses three important questions: what are the functions carried out by advisors in the development ministries?; why is it so difficult to retain skilled professionals in the civil service?; and how does the provision of advisors affect the retention of skilled government officers?     

A dynamic test of the marginality hypothesis

The marginality hypothesis is an attempt to relate the voting margins of members of Congress to their subsequent legislative behavior. A major corollary of the hypothesis is that members of Congress with small victory margins will be more responsive to constituents than those with large victory margins. This has been assumed to mean that electorally secure representatives can afford to be more loyal to their congressional parties, since they have less cause to worry about their chances for reelection. Previous empirical studies have produced mixed results. We ask the question in a different way: Do changes in marginality affect party voting within Congress? If so, major shifts in the electorate potentially can have a fundamental impact on the behavior of Congress itself. We find that this is not true. Electoral margin is simply not related to party loyalty.