When the State Takes Over a Life: The Public Guardian as Public Administrator

Public guardians are appointed by the state to meet the needs of incapacitated citizens when no other willing or responsible surrogate decision maker exists. These public administrators, who live the decisional life of another citizen, need meaningful controls and accountability because of the great private and public authority that is entrusted to them. A review of program documents, interviews with public guardians and their program supervisors, and participant observations revealed complex roles for the public guardian: service monitor, service broker, client advocate, surrogate decision maker, and relationship architect. Because of the multiplicity of roles and few controls on their actions, public guardians' accountability should first be drawn from mechanical mechanisms (for instance, thorough audits and sanctions for infractions), but a second and necessary control is the principles of public administration, which are grounded in normative values and democratic governance.     

TRANSITION OR NOT?

The article focuses on a quantitative evaluation of Families In Transition (FIT), a court-mandated divorce education program. In this evaluation, the operationalization of the impact of FIT on its participants is guided by a social psychology theory. Findings indicate that parents view FIT as a valuable experience, and they gain in their attitude toward and likelihood to engage in child-centered divorce adjustment behaviors from pre- to post-FIT. Factors are highlighted, such as counseling and conflict status of the parents that affect the degree of influence of FIT. Implications for evaluations of these programs and for the structure of these programs are discussed.     

ONE PRESIDENT,ONE FIRST LADY AND ONE GREAT WALL

正The Great Wall was at the top of my must-see list on my first trip to China as a tourist in May 2014. Over the past seven years, this wondrous engineering miracle and historical landmark has become my most frequently visited treasure on China's long list of UNESCO World Heritage sites.     

The (Dis)Advantage of Certainty: The Importance of Certainty in Language

How can legal decision makers increase the likelihood of a favorable response from other legal and social actors? To answer this, we propose a novel theory based on the certainty expressed in language that is applicable to many different legal contexts. The theory is grounded in psychology and legal advocacy and suggests that expressing certainty enhances the persuasiveness of a message. We apply this theory to the principal–agent framework to examine the treatment of Supreme Court precedent by the Federal Courts of Appeal. We find that as the level of certainty in the Supreme Court's opinion increases, the lower courts are more likely to positively treat the Court's decision. We then discuss the implications of our findings for using certainty in a broader context.     

Public vs. elite opinion on correctional reform: Implications for social policy

Demands for changes and reform in our correctional system have a long history. Currently many of those active in determining policy are advocating a shift away from the use of imprisonment to greater local supervision. However, many of these “elites” perceive the public as unreceptive and thereby an obstacle to change. This study focuses on an analysis of public opinion in the state of Washington and a comparison of those attitudes with the attitudes of elites (decision makers) in the state. Further, the study describes elite perceptions of public opinion and the implications of those perceptions for social policy. The public is found to be far less punitively oriented than elites expected and far more receptive to the reforms advocated.