Short Term Change in Attitude and Motivating Factors to Change Abusive Behavior of Male Batterers after Participating in a Group Intervention Program Based on the Pro-Feminist and Cognitive-Behavioral Approach

The Domestic Abuse Education Project (DAEP), in Burlington, Middlebury, and St. Albans, Vermont, is a group based domestic abuse intervention program, based in a pro-feminist and cognitive-behavioral approach for domestic violence intervention and prevention. A pre and post-test instrument was developed and implemented to determine short-term change in attitude of participants and motivating factors to change behavior, after completing the twenty-seven session program. After the program, participants reported a positive change in attitudes regarding their abusive behavior and stereotypical beliefs about women. Participants were also more motivated to change their behavior by the effect abuse has on their family relationships. However, many participants continued to agree that insecurity, jealousy, and alcohol and drug use can cause violence. The positive changes in attitude and motivational factors show that this is an effective model in changing underlying batterer attitudes that provide rationale for abusive behavior.     

Neutrality and Judicial Review

Law and Philosophy -     

A tax by any other name: The donor directed automatic percentage contribution bonus,a budget alternative for financing governmental support of charity

Our paper analyzes the merits of four alternatives for providing governmental support to charity—the existing tax write-off, a tax credit, a sliding matching grant, and a percentage contribution bonus. After searching for an appropriate budget mechanism (a five-year fixed-sum authorization and appropriation), we apply a wide-ranging set of criteria—equity, legitimacy, efficiency, reciprocity, controllability, etc.—to each of the four alternatives. In brief, the existing tax write-off is grossly inequitable among donors, poorly controlled by government, and is part of a tax system increasingly viewed as illegitimate by citizens. The advantages of the write-off are that it produces predictable amounts of income at low administrative cost without overtly raising questions of constitutionality. Its disadvantages would be mitigated by a tax credit in proportion to the amounts contributed by taxpayers. But the credit does not reach people who do not file returns and may significantly decrease income to charitable agencies. The sliding matching grant (under which the government pays to charity in proportion as the individual gives of his income) provides a particular form of equity for taxpayers but is deficient in other respects. The contribution bonus—a percentage of each dollar contributed paid to charity by government—is wholly equitable, includes all givers, sustains reciprocity with recipients, is controllable by government, and is legitimate in treating expenditures as expenditures and not as tax dodges. It also raises the possibility of increasing the government's contribution. The defects of the bonus are higher administrative costs and potential doubt about constitutionality. We conclude in favor of a percentage contribution bonus set high enough to provide marginally more income for charity and reduce financial uncertainties during the transition. Appraisal of political feasibility suggests that supporters of charity are likely to be worse off unless they come up with a more defensible approach, such as the contribution bonus. To help resolve doubts, we suggest adding on a small percentage contribution bonus to the present tax write-off for three years so as to test constitutionality and assess more precisely administrative costs. While there is no one proposal that will make everyone better off, the contribution bonus is far superior on most criteria to the alternatives.The paper was written for The Commission on Private Philanthropy and Public Needs. For their criticisms and constructive comments, including those with which we disagreed, we express our appreciation to Professors John McNulty and Lawrence Stone, Law School, and Professors Arnold Meltsner and William Niskanen, Graduate School of Public Policy, all of the University of California (Berkeley).     

Drinking adolescents on the roads

A social-learning model [R. C. Akers, M. D. Krohn, L. Lanza-Koduce, and M. Radosevich (1979), Social Learning and Deviant Behavior: A Specific Test of a General Theory,American Sociology Review, 44: 636–655] was tested for its ability to explain why adolescents drive under the influence of alcohol and ride with drinking drivers. Data were gathered from a survey of 1,082 high school students. Findings indicate that all five subsets of the model are significant determinants of adolescent driving under the influence and riding with drinking drivers. The study demonstrates that if adolescent drinking and driving is to be prevented, careful attention must be paid to ways that it is learned and maintained.Received his Ph.D. from Virginia Commonwealth University. Research interests include child and adolescent behavior and clinical practice issues.     

The Troubled Renewal of the Canada-Ontario Agreement Respecting Great Lakes Water Quality

Powerful constituent governments can have a significant impacton a federal nation's ability to implement international agreements.Negotiating written agreements is one strategy for achievingpolicy coordination in nations with such governments. This articleexamines the Canada-Ontario Agreement (COA) Respecting GreatLakes Water Quality, which helps Canada to meet its obligationsunder its Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement with the UnitedStates. First negotiated in 1971, COA was regularly renegotiatedwithout incident until the most recent round of negotiations,which began in 1991 and continued into 1994. The negotiatingissues that proved so contentious during this round are examined,as is the impact on the negotiations of developments on thebroader Canadian political scene.