Evaluating the Potential for Unintentional Occupational Exposure to Fentanyl and Fentanyl Analogues Among Medicolegal Death Investigators and Autopsy Technicians

Recent increases in deaths in the United States from synthetic opioids such as fentanyl and fentanyl analogues (fentanyls) have raised concerns about possible occupational exposures to these potent agents. Medicolegal death investigators and autopsy suite staff might perform job tasks involving exposure to fentanyls. The potential for exposure to fentanyls among medicolegal death investigators and autopsy technicians at a state medical examiner's office was evaluated through review of caseload characteristics, injury and illness logs, and procedures and policies and discussions with management and employee representatives. The evaluation showed that this medical examiner's office had low potential for work-related exposure to fentanyls; its standard operating procedures and personal protective equipment requirements should reduce the potential for occupational exposure. Medicolegal death investigation agencies can develop and implement guidance to control exposures and provide workforce education and training to reduce the potential for work-related exposure to fentanyls.     

Negotiating the review process: a CIA guide to intelligence analysis, 1970

The literature on intelligence analysis contains many references to the ‘review process’, the mechanism by which analysts’ drafts are converted into corporate products. Analysts whose drafts consistently navigate the process quickly and smoothly are regarded as star performers. Divining the practical meaning of organizational definitions of ‘good’ analysis and the personal preferences of specific senior reviewers is not easy, however. Analysts occasionally commit their understanding of reviewers’ stylistic preferences to paper, effectively providing style guides to help others. This essay presents and explains the development and implications of one such guide, which was designed to help analysts in CIA’s Office of Strategic Research in the early 1970s.     

Power and changing modes of governance in the euro crisis

Which European Union actors are most powerful in the governance of the euro crisis? The euro crisis has reignited the classic debate between intergovernmentalists, who tend to stress the coercive power of dominant member states in the European Council, and supranationalists, who maintain that through the use of institutional power, the Commission, and the European Central Bank turned out the “winners” of the crisis. This article argues that euro crisis governance is best understood not just in terms of one form of power but instead as evolving through different constellations of coercive, institutional, and ideational power that favored different EU actors over the course of the crisis, from the initial fast‐burning phase (2010–2012), where the coercive and ideational power of Northern European member states in the European Council was strongest, to the slow‐burning phase (2012–2016), when greater influence was afforded supranational actors through the use of ideational and institutional power.     

Brexit: A Cliff Edge or a Small Bump in the Road?

It is becoming increasingly accepted, not least by the Prime Minister and opposition leadership, that the negotiation of a comprehensive trade relationship with the EU is necessary to prevent the UK economy falling off a ‘cliff edge’. This concern is shaping the UK's strategy towards negotiations with the EU and has provided at least part of the motivation for the UK to consider requesting a transition period to facilitate the Brexit process. But how accurate are these fears? What evidence is there for the existence of a ‘cliff edge’? How disastrous would it be for the UK to revert to trading with the EU on the same basis as most other countries in the world, namely according to World Trade Organisation rules? This article seeks to address these issues and it highlights a number of implications for policy makers which flow from understanding the available evidence a little more clearly.     

What drives the polarisation and moderation of opinions? Evidence from a Finnish citizen deliberation experiment on immigration

In the study of deliberation, a largely under‐explored area is why some participants polarise their opinion after deliberation and why others moderate them. Opinion polarisation is usually considered a suspicious outcome of deliberation, while moderation is seen as a desirable one. This article takes issue with this view. Results from a Finnish deliberative experiment on immigration show that polarisers and moderators were not different in socioeconomic, cognitive or affective profiles. Moreover, both polarisation and moderation can entail deliberatively desired pathways: in the experiment, both polarisers and moderators learned during deliberation, levels of empathy were fairly high on both sides, and group pressures barely mattered. Finally, the low physical presence of immigrants in some discussion groups was associated with polarisation in the anti‐immigrant direction, bolstering longstanding claims regarding the importance of presence for democratic politics.     

EU Simulations and Engagement: Motivating Greater Interest in European Union Politics

While the effects of simulation-based courses on the knowledge of participating students may be marginal in relation to standard lecture and discussion-based courses, this article argues that the greatest leverage is gained by increasing participating students’ level of interest in the subject of study and in politics more broadly. Participants tend to become increasingly absorbed in their roles and in the politics of the institutions at the center of the simulation. To better consider this possibility, we conducted a survey of students participating in the 2015 Mid-Atlantic European Union Simulation and of appropriate control populations. The survey results indeed suggest that, much more than simply acquiring knowledge about the EU, the simulation experience serves to generate more robust interest in the subject of study.     

Does U.S. Marine Corps Recruit Training Constitute a Type of Civic Education?

In what respects can military basic training affect veterans’ civic identities? According to a 2015 report published by the National Conference on Citizenship (NCoC), military service positively affects civic health. While social scientists have also noted this possible connection, little attention has been paid to how and why this link might exist. To test the purported relationship between military training and increased civic capacities, I explored the United States Marine Corps’ (USMC) Recruit Training program. I conducted 20 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 17 enlisted Marine veterans and Marine drill instructors (DI) to ascertain their perceptions of the pedagogical aspirations of their service’s recruit training. The study’s participants reported that Marine Corps Recruit Training does seek to inculcate skills, values, and habits that are consistent with a civic identity as discussed in the civic-engagement and civic-education literature.