A discussion of the merits of random man not excluded and likelihood ratios

DNA mixture interpretation is undertaken either by calculating a LR or an exclusion probability (RMNE or its complement CPI). Debate exists as to which has the greater claim. The merits and drawbacks of the two approaches are discussed. We conclude that the two matters that appear to have real force are: (1) LRs are more difficult to present in court and (2) the RMNE statistic wastes information that should be utilised.     

IF A THREAT OF VIOLENCE IS PRESENTED,WHEN DOES THE LAW REQUIRE FAMILY MEDIATORS TO BREACH CONFIDENTIALITY?

For a family mediator to protect his client, a third party, and/or himself from unlawfully disclosing a client's admission, the family mediator should use the principles set forth in Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California when a threat of violence is presented by one of his clients, since many states have adopted these principles through case law and statute to protect third parties from acts of violence. The two most significant factors in determining whether to breach confidentiality are the identifiability of the victim and the likelihood of the potential physical harm. If a jurisdiction has not explicitly done so via statute, the family mediator should nonetheless follow these principles since they are likely to be adopted by that jurisdiction through case law, because the probability of a court's finding a special relationship between a family mediator and a client is relatively high.     

Parenting in Dependency Drug Court

The Dependency Drug Court (DDC) in Miami, Florida, addresses the needs of families affected by substance abuse through a comprehensive and therapeutic approach. The DDC works with community agencies to provide services that effectively treat the family as a unit. This article discusses the process of adapting a parenting program to meet the needs of families in the DDC.