A retrospective study of drugged driving in Norway

The National Institute of Forensic Toxicology, Oslo, receives blood and urine samples from all Norwegian drivers apprehended on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. In 1983 we received samples from 1446 drug-suspected drivers, out of which 445 underwent toxicological analysis. The drugs found most frequently were tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) (n = 199), diazepam (n = 166) and amphetamine (n = 102). A cautious interpretation of the data indicate that about 200 of the 445 subjects selected for toxicological analysis drove under severe influence of drugs. Because of the high percentage of submitted cases not analysed for drugs, this figure represents a minimum estimate. Compared with the results from 1978, we found a several-fold increase in detections of THC and amphetamine in 1983. The number of diazepam detections did not increase in a similar way, but we estimated that the diazepam detections would have increased 3-fold if we had analysed as frequent for this drug in 1983 as in 1978.     

Der Europ?ische Gerichtshof als Motor der Integration: Eine akteursbezogene Erkl?rung

For nearly five decades, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has developed a decisively pro-European case law and has become the ??engine of integration??. Institutional explanations shed light on the Court??s room for manoevre. They have to be complemented by actor-centered explanations that shed light on the judges?? motives of action. The explanation offered by the following paper is unfolded in two steps. In the first one, the article describes idiosyncrasies of the European law discourse that already shaped the judges before they were appointed. The analysis of the idiosyncrasies corresponds to a scepticism towards the idea of national sovereignty, a belief in the necessity of creative and idealist, law-augmenting judges and a dominance of output-oriented legitimization strategies. In a second step, the article shows that in the sociological sense the ECJ judges constitute a group. While the individual judges share an understanding of the aims and functions of European law, the group develops its own identity and grants status to those who perform successful actions with respect to the common integration agenda. This explanation is more realistic than ??rational choice?? explanations which point to the direct and personal benefits that judges derive from their pro-European case law.     

Dialogues,Trialogues and Triangles: The Geometry of Germany's Foreign Policy of Trust-Building

This article explores three formats for interstate relations developed by, or at least significantly influenced by Germany in the post-Cold War period: the Petersburg Dialogue, the German–Russian–Polish Trialogue and the Weimar Triangle. An examination of the form and function of each of these formats is followed by a discussion of what these formats have in common and why they are worthy of further study. The paper addresses whether this ‘variable geometry’ of Germany's foreign policy of trust-building is likely to survive a period of turbulent relations or changes in leadership and, furthermore, how the effectiveness of dialogues, trialogues and triangles might be evaluated.     

Parent-adolescent congruence for adolescent substance use

Parental reports of adolescent substance use were compared to the adolescents' self-reports using identical scales. Congruence was defined as exact agreement on whether adolescents were current users, ex-users, or never-users. Both parents were found to be less accurate in predicting their adolescents' alcohol use compared to cigarette or marijuana use. Single mothers were significantly less likely to be congruent than were mothers from two-parent households. Mother and father congruence on all substances was unrelated to the adolescent's sex, race, or after school employment. For both parents, congruence for adolescent marijuana use was significantly related to the age and GPA of the adolescent. Congruence may also reflect important properties of family functioning, as significant relations were found between both adolescent and parent ratings of family cohesion and parent-adolescent congruence on perceptions of marijuana use.This research was supported by Grant DA03706 from the National Institute of Drug Abuse (Hyman Hops, Principal Investigator).Jennifer Langhinrichsen is a doctoral candidate in psychology interested in adolescent and family interactions. The other authors are psychologists or data analysts working on family influences on substance use and mental health.     

What does “knock and announce” mean? An analysis of<Emphasis Type="Italic">Wilson v. Arkansas</Emphasis> and its progeny

The U.S. Supreme Court held in Wilson v. Arkansas (1994) that the common law “knock-and-announce” principle formed part of the “reasonableness” inquiry under the Fourth Amendment. However, the Court’s opinion gave little guidance as to what would be unreasonable under these circumstances. Some critics expressed concern that this lack of guidance would lead to many variations among lower courts. Other observers discerned a signal that little should be deemed “unreasonable” in the context of “knock and announce.” These criticisms are analyzed through a review of lower court interpretations of Wilson.     

Perceived fairness of drug-testing policies: An application of Leventhal’s principles of procedural justice

Employees rate the fairness of organizational policies by applying principles of distributive and procedural justice. Using Leventhal’s (1980) Principles of Procedural Justice, the current study surveyed 279 upper-level college and graduate students to determine the impact each principle has on support for drugtesting policies. The results support the hypothesis that drug-testing programs that violate these principles are viewed as unfair.