Conceptualising and measuring ‘centrism’ correctly on the Left–Right scale (RILE) - without systematic bias. A general response by MARPOR

The purpose of this response is to point out that claims of undue centrism in the MARPOR data are directly contradicted by its use to correct centrism in other leading policy measures including expert surveys.     

Post‐Secularism and the European Court of Human Rights: Or How God Never Really Went Away

This article analyses the critical yet elusive notions of state neutrality, secularism and religious coercion under the European Convention in light of the European Court of Human Rights recent decision in Lautsi v Italy. We contend that the real concern in the Italian crucifix case was not the infringement of the school pupils’ religious freedom nor the proselytising or coercive effect of the ‘passive’ religious symbols. Rather, opponents of the longstanding symbols were animated by desire for strict religious equality, a notion that is, correctly in our view, not guaranteed under the Convention. Lautsi has significantly cleared the conceptual undergrowth surrounding state neutrality and the varieties of secularism, reined in the elastic notion of religious coercion and eschewed attempts to squeeze the constitutional diversity of European religion‐state frameworks into a strict American‐style separationist mould. The Convention jurisprudence on freedom of religion has finally come of age.     

Umbilical cord blood banking and the next generation of human tissue regulation: an agenda for research

The transformation of umbilical cord blood from being a waste product to being a valuable source of stem cells has led to the emergence of significant legal, ethical and social issues. This editorial proposes an agenda for research into the regulation of umbilical cord blood banking which focuses on issues of characterisation, consent, the interplay of public and private services, and the importance of applying property concepts. It concludes by stressing the need for reform to be based on well-informed public debate.     

Community Solutions for the Community's Problem: An Evaluation of Three New Zealand Community-Based Treatment Programs for Child Sexual Offenders

The recidivism rate of 203 people mandated by the courts to attend three community-based child sexual offender treatment programs (175 treatment cases and 28 assessment-only cases) was assessed and compared with a probation comparison group. The recidivism rate was 8.1% for all participants treated in the community-based programs and 5.2% for participants who completed treatment. The recidivism rate for program attendees was approximately half that of those in the probation comparison group. The drop-out rate for treatment appears to be relatively high (45%) and noncompletion was associated with higher recidivism. These results indicate significantly better outcomes for offenders receiving specialized treatment and are consistent with, and toward the lower end of, recidivism rates reported in local and international evaluation studies.     

Containing the secret of child sexual abuse

This study reports a grounded theory study of the process of how children tell of their experiences of child sexual abuse from the perspectives of young people and their parents. Individual interviews were conducted with 22 young people aged 8 to 18, and 14 parents. A theoretical model was developed that conceptualises the process of disclosure as one of containing the secret of child sexual abuse. Three key dynamics were identified: the active withholding of the secret on the part of the child, the experience of a 'pressure cooker effect' reflecting a conflict between the wish to tell and the wish to keep the secret, and the confiding itself which often occurs in the context of an intimacy being shared. Children's experiences of disclosure were multidetermined and suggest the need for multifaceted and multisystemic approaches to prevention and intervention. The need for the secret to be contained, individually and interpersonally in appropriate safeguarding and therapeutic contexts needs to be respected in helping children tell.     

The suitability of using domestic pigs (Sus spp.) as human proxies in the geophysical detection of clandestine graves

Research in many forensic science fields commonly uses domestic pigs (Sus spp.) as proxies for human remains, due to their physiological and anatomical similarities, as well as being more readily available. Unfortunately, previous research, especially that which compares the decompositional process, has shown that pigs are not appropriate proxies for humans. To date, there has not been any published research that specifically addresses whether domestic pigs are adequate human proxies for the geophysical detection of clandestine graves. As such, the aim of this paper was to compare the geophysical responses of pig cadavers and human donor graves, in order to determine if pigs can indeed be used as adequate human proxies. To accomplish this, ground penetrating radar (GPR) and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) responses on single and multiple pig cadaver graves were compared to single and multiple human donor graves, all of which are in known locations within the same geological environment. The results showed that under field conditions, both GPR and ERT were successful at observing human and pig burials, with no obvious differences between the detected geophysical responses. The results also showed that there were no differences in the geophysical responses of those who were clothed and unclothed. The similarity of the responses may reflect that the geophysical techniques can detect graves despite what their contents are. The study implications suggest that experimental studies in other soil and climate conditions can be easily replicated, benefiting law enforcement with missing persons cases.     

Marginalisation or legitimation? Mainstream party positioning on immigration and support for radical right parties

Abstract

Does mainstream party positioning contribute to marginalising or legitimising niche party positions? This article argues that voter perceptions of the legitimacy and credibility of niche party positions play a role in individuals’ propensity to vote for niche parties. It finds that the adoption of more restrictive immigration positions by mainstream parties increases the likelihood that those people who do not recognise the issue competence of radical right parties on immigration will vote radical right. However, for individuals who already perceive the radical right to be competent on immigration, mainstream party adoption of more restrictive immigration positions has no effect on propensity to vote radical right. In addition, the increase in the propensity of individuals to vote radical right is predominantly a function of mainstream left parties adopting more restrictive immigration positions. These results imply that mainstream parties risk fuelling radical right party support by adopting more restrictive immigration positions.