SUBSTANCE-ABUSING FATHERS IN FAMILY COURT

Although all forms of substance abuse disproportionately affect men during early to middle adulthood, when many are fathering children, the status of substance-abusing men as parents is largely ignored in public policy, service delivery, and research exploring the consequences of chronic drug and alcohol abuse. In this review, the authors highlight issues of potential concern to professionals working with this poorly understood, negatively stereotyped population of fathers in family court settings. After reviewing the existing literature on substance-abusing fathers and their children, the authors challenge family court personnel to use (a) awareness of stereotyping, (b) clinical assessment, (c) the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence, and (d) treatment resources to minimize, as much as possible, the risk for poor developmental outcomes incurred by children with a substance-abusing father.     

Road Traffic and Efficient Fines

Road traffic is a typical example of an occupation with bilateral care and activity choices. In such a setting, common liability rules which simply divide damages cannot induce efficient outcomes. It is shown that fines for the violation of traffic regulations which depend on the occurrence of an accident can induce optimal behaviour. The properties of such efficient fines are derived. In particular, efficient fines tend to increase more than proportionally with the severity of an offence, while fines for repeat offenders can rise at a decreasing rate with the number of violations. To evaluate the scope for efficiency-enhancing reforms of fine systems, it is investigated whether actual regulations particularly for speeding conform to the non-proportionality requirement in selected European countries.     

警察出庭作证相关问题探讨

警察出庭作证是推进证人出庭作证制度完善的重要环节。警察出庭作证不仅有利于案件真实的发现和实体法律的正确适用,而且也是确立司法权威,实现程序正义的需要,因此,应尽快建立警察出庭作证制度。但由于警察身份的特殊性,在警察出庭作证的范围上应有一定的限制。     

严格责任在交通肇事罪中的适用

交通事故发生后当事人往往采取逃离事故现场,破坏现场,伪造现场,毁灭证据等行为,致使无法认定事故当事人的过错情况,给追究事故当事人责任带了极大的障碍,增加肇事者的侥幸心理。解决的对策是改变交通肇事罪中单纯适用过错责任的沿袭,对于违背现场保护义务人应适用严格责任来追究其刑事责任。同时,适用严格责任符合刑法的谦抑性要求,允许当事人自证其无过错以阻却其刑事责任,量刑应从轻。     

浅论构建和谐农村道路交通环境的有效途径

"和谐"体现在道路交通方面就是安全、有序、畅通,而这正是道路交通管理的目标和方向。因此,道路交通管理工作是构建社会主义和谐社会工程的一个不可或缺的重要分支。新一代党中央领导集体对"三农"问题高度关注,农村道路交通安全问题也随之成为当前的社会焦点,因为它关系到占全国人口三分之二的农村群众的贴身利益,关系到整个社会的稳定,进而影响到构建和谐社会的进程。保障农村道路交通安全、促进农村道路交通和谐发展,不仅是道路交通管理工作的重中之重,也是构建社会主义和谐社会的重要环节。     

交通警察心理健康问题分析与对策

面对日趋紧张、繁重的交通管理重任,交通警察承受着越来越多的工作、生活、学习以及社会各方面的压力,使这一群体普遍存在心理健康问题,这应引起公安机关的关注以及交通警察个人的警惕。     

让证人走向法庭——刑事案件证人出庭作证制度研究

证人出庭作证是审查证人证言的需要，是司法礼仪的需要，是被诉方行使质证权的需要。但在我国由于公民法律意识淡薄，相关法律规范有缺漏，司法人员能动性和积极性发挥不足，刑事证人不出庭成为常态，出庭率极低。因此，必须对法律作出一系列修改，使证人的权利义务趋于平衡，为证人出庭创造良好的条件，最终让证人走向法庭。     

法院调解的“复兴”与未来

进入二十一世纪以来,法院调解制度重新获得重视,有再度兴盛之势。法院调解制度是适应国家治理社会需要的产物。国家社会治理战略的调整必然影响法院调解制度的发展。转型时期社会自我解纷能力低下和社会纠纷的特殊性,决定了法院调解制度将继续发挥社会整合与治理功能。而对法院调解的实证分析表明,该制度的"审判权本位"是影响其功能发挥的重要因素。提高法院调解的制度化程度,构建诉权对审判权的制约机制,是法院调解发展的未来走向。     

醉酒的原因行为能否支配逃逸情节

醉酒后驾车发生交通事故,行为人在无意识的状态下离开现场,能否认定交通肇事后逃逸?这个问题可以从理论和实践两个方面加以考虑.在理论上以原因自由行为理论为基础,可以得出原因行为对逃逸行为已失去支配力;在实践方面,审查案件要以证据为基础,还要依赖于相关司法鉴定的发展.     

ROMANCING THE COURT

Problem‐solving courts, created at the end of the twentieth century, make court‐based solutions central to addressing significant societal problems, such as substance abuse and its impact on criminal activity and family functioning. Yet, lessons gleaned from over 100 years of family court history suggest that court‐based solutions to intractable social problems have rarely been effective. This article asks three questions of the problem‐solving court movement: What problem are we trying to solve? Is the court the best place to solve the problem? What are the consequences of giving authority to a court for solving the problem? Answering those questions through the lens of specific examples from family court—the original problem‐solving court—leads to the conclusion that neither the structural issues that courts face, such as overwhelming numbers of cases, nor the momentous societal issues that problem‐solving courts have recently begun to shoulder can be adequately addressed through court‐based solutions. The factors that allegedly distinguish new problem‐solving courts from earlier exemplars, especially the family court, are both less unique and less successful than they have been portrayed by problem‐solving court enthusiasts. These factors alone fail to justify the expansion of problem‐solving courts without further evidence of their effectiveness. Moreover, the potential dangers inherent in problem‐solving courts are not theoretical. By examining illustrative examples from the history of the family court, the dangers become clearly apparent.