Organising the Boycott,Divestment and Sanctions movement: the case of the ‘We Divest’ campaign

In this article, I critically analyse the case of the We Divest campaign as an example of a divestment initiative of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement to highlight aspects of how the movement works, particularly through its organisational structure and processes. The campaign targets TIAA-CREF, one of the largest retirement fund providers in the US, to divest funds currently held in a number of companies the campaign has identified as profiting from Israel’s violations of international law. In examining the case I determine certain organisational characteristics of the movement, i.e. networked, decentralised, grassroots, horizontal and border-crossing. By identifying certain aspects of the movement’s infrastructure through an investigation into the We Divest campaign, I argue that the organisational structure and processes identified in the case study suggest that the movement represents a new and different way of challenging Israel.     

Typologies of Violence Exposure and Cognitive Processing in Incarcerated Male Adolescents

Incarcerated youth experience high rates of violence exposure (VE), cognitive processing (CP) deficits, and mental health (MH) problems. It is not clear whether VE combined with CP deficits are particularly salient risk factors for MH dysfunction. Male incarcerated youth offenders (n?=?115) completed standardized self-reports of MH and VE. CP was measured with executive functioning tasks and academic assessments. Person-centered Ward’s Squared Euclidian Distance cluster analysis was used to examine unique patterns of CP and VE. Cluster analysis defined five distinct profiles of MH functioning, CP, and VE rates within incarcerated adolescents. Two groups, with high rates of VE and CP deficits, showed high rates of MH problems. Linear techniques may obscure important differences within this population.     

Anaphylaxis After the Injection of Buprenorphine

Cause of death rulings in cases when the concentration of a drug or drugs is higher than observed following therapeutic use are generally straightforward “drug deaths.” However, when toxicology testing identifies drug concentrations consistent with therapeutic use or detects no drugs at all, then the cause of death determination is more complicated. Given the rapidity and protean manifestations of anaphylaxis, it should be considered in deaths where no other cause of death is apparent in a suspected drug death. This article reports two cases where an anaphylactic reaction was observed following either the actual or alleged use of therapeutic formulations of buprenorphine intravenously.