Military combat, posttraumatic stress disorder, and criminal behavior in Vietnam veterans

Although data are inconclusive, popular perception has linked military combat, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and criminal behavior. This paper discusses the multifactorial elements of this association that include both conscious and unconscious parameters of psychologic functioning. Testimony on combat-related PTSD has been presented in the courtroom to support veterans' claims of not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) and diminished capacity and for consideration during judicial sentencing. Because there is a known connection between the degree of combat involvement and PTSD, verification through collateral sources of the veteran's report of combat experiences is an important component of forensic assessment. The DSM-III-defined diagnosis of PTSD and the presence of a dissociative state have particular relevance in NGRI determinations. In other aspects of the judicial process demonstration of the absolute presence or absence of PTSD is often irrelevant and should be replaced by efforts to establish plausible links between provable combat experiences and the circumstances of the crime.     

Risk Aversion, Liability Rules, and Safety

This paper investigates the performance of liability rules in two-party stochastic externality problems where negotiations are feasible and side payments are based on the realized level of externalities. Results show that an increase in polluter liability does not necessarily increase safety or efficiency in cases where the polluter is risk neutral. Complete polluter liability is found to yield Pareto optimality. When either party is risk averse, an increase in polluter liability may sometimes reduce safety and efficiency. If the polluter is risk neutral and the victim is risk averse, Pareto optimality is only achieved by assigning full liability on the polluter, i.e. giving the victim complete property rights to a clean environment. If the polluter is risk averse and the victim is risk neutral, no level of polluter liability is optimal. In this case, optimality can only be achieved through a contract on abatement activities, such that the risk-averse polluter receives a guaranteed payment regardless of the stochastic outcome.     

CHILDREN'S RIGHTS IN EUROPEAN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: WHY ARE FAMILY PRACTICES SO DIFFERENT FROM LEGAL THEORIES?

Debates about child custody following parental separation often have been framed in terms of a battle between the competing rights of different family members. In the United States, advocates of mothers’ rights square off against proponents of fathers’ rights, with each side claiming to truly represent children's rights. Of course, not all advocates lay claim to children's rights in contact and custody disputes merely as a tactical maneuver. Some experts believe that children are entitled to (and benefit from) their own, independent legal advocate in custody cases. In theory, at least, the position that children lay claim to a third set of independent rights is strongly held in Europe, more strongly than in many U.S. states, because of the adoption of United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in Europe, but not in the United States. In this article, we examine children's rights in custody disputes from a European perspective, particularly children's legal right to contact with their parents, as well as the children's right to be heard in custody and contact disputes. We find that, despite differences in legal theory, tradition, and family demographics, European countries ultimately face a familiar reality: Custody and contact disputes are, in reality, more about renegotiating family relationships than they are a matter of a mother's, father's, or child's rights.