American diplomatic realism: A tradition practised and preached by George F. Kennan

George F. Kennan's work remains pertinent to the contemporary debate over American foreign policy in which voices calling for a realistic conduct of American diplomacy have been faint. Kennan's thought contains a framework that can be used to examine critically the drift in American diplomacy from the realist assumptions held by the American Founding Fathers towards the liberal or Wilsonian school of international relations. Wilsonianism has seized the world view of contemporary American diplomats and statesmen, particularly during the Clinton administration. Kennan's analysis provides a salutary word in the debate over the course of post‐Cold War American foreign policy that takes Wilsonian assumptions for granted.     

Does Training and Documentation Improve Emergency Department Assessments of Domestic Violence Victims?

This study aimed to determine whether training and documentation led to improved assessment of female victims of assault due to domestic violence presenting to an emergency department. Eighty clinical records were audited using a valid and reliable audit tool over four time periods for variables including history, risk assessment, and examination. Documentation differed across the four groups (p?=?0.011). Between group analysis found there was a difference (p?=?0.055) between Groups 1 (before training) and 2 (after training), and Group 3 (with a specialist form in place), and there was a difference (p?=?0.009) between Groups 1 and 4 (8 years later). Training alone did not lead to change. Introducing specialist documentation with training was associated with an improvement in the standard of clinical assessment of female victims of assault due to domestic violence and this change increased over time.     

Stressful Life Experiences and Peer Externalizing Behaviors Mediate the Relation Between Reduced Family Support and Externalizing Symptoms in Low-Income Urban Youth

Family support, urban stressors, and peer behavior were examined in relation to externalizing symptoms in 605 predominantly low-income urban sixth through eighth grade adolescents. Mother and father support were each associated with lower levels of externalizing symptoms in both males and females. For males, father absence was associated with increased peer externalizing behavior and heightened rates of youth externalizing symptoms. Stress (in the form of major life events, daily hassles, and exposure to violence) and peer externalizing behavior were examined as mediators of the relation between parent support and youth externalizing symptoms. Increased stress exposure mediated the relation between weak mother and father support and youth externalizing symptoms. Additionally, for females, peer externalizing behavior mediated the relation between weak mother support and youth externalizing symptoms.     

Does Ambivalent Sexism Influence Verdicts for Heterosexual and Homosexual Defendants in a Self-Defense Case?

The current research examined the role of defendant and participant sex, presence or absence of expert testimony of the “battered person syndrome”, and sexual orientation of the defendant on perceptions of guilt in a self-defense case. The role of sexism in judgments of culpability was also examined. A sample of 442 participants read a self-defense case scenario and responded to questions pertaining to verdict, defendant culpability, legal element ratings, and sexist attitudes. Results revealed a four-way interaction, showing female participants prescribed the lowest guilt ratings to heterosexual female and homosexual male defendants who received expert testimony of the battered person syndrome. When heterosexual male defendants received expert testimony, ratings of guilt significantly increased. A multiple regression was conducted to determine whether legal and extra-legal factors predicted defendant culpability. Sexist attitudes (benevolent sexism towards men and women) and certain legal elements were predictive of defendant culpability. Limitations and implications are discussed. Study findings were presented in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society (APLS), Jacksonville, Florida (March, 2008).     

ARE WE REALLY LOOKING OUT FOR THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD? APPLYING THE NEW ZEALAND MODEL OF FAMILY GROUP CONFERENCES TO CASES OF CHILD NEGLECT IN THE UNITED STATES

This Note advocates for state laws to be amended to implement family group conferencing (FGC) as the first step in cases of alleged child neglect. FGC was developed in New Zealand nearly twenty years ago and have since become a realistic method of balancing the best interests of the children, families, agencies, courts, and communities involved in the child welfare system. A FGC is a meeting among family members and professionals that is conducted in order to develop a plan for a child who is the victim of neglect. FGC places the family at the center of the welfare proceedings and empowers them to reach a solution without having to resort to the often lengthy and expensive adversarial court system. If FGC is incorporated into the child welfare systems throughout the United States, communication between the parents, social services, and the courts could increase, helping families adequately address the problem of neglect and getting the children out of the child welfare system quickly and more efficiently.