The consequences of political disagreement in interpersonal communication: New insights from a comparative perspective

Political disagreement in interpersonal communication increases attitudinal ambivalence and can depress voter turnout. These effects seem to be driven by a wish to avoid social controversy rather than informational gains from encountering other opinions. This article shows that political disagreement in interpersonal communication increases the difficulty of deciding for which party to vote. Moreover, this effect is a result of social disapproval of one's party preference, while political expertise in interpersonal communication has no effect. For voter turnout, no direct effect of social disapproval of one's party preference is found. However, disapproval has an indirect influence on turnout via difficulty of vote choice. In sum, both political attitudes and political behaviour are affected by social pressures. Students of political attitudes and behaviour should try to include interpersonal discussion in their models in greater detail than is common practice today.     

Duel or Dual: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Parenting Coordination for Uber‐Conflicted Parenting Relationships

Parenting coordination for families struggling with severe conflict can be challenging for both the family and the parenting coordinator (PC). These families can put an inordinate strain on the PC as they lobby their positions and try to bias the PC against the other parent. The interdisciplinary dual‐PC model is an innovative approach using aspects of the collaborative practice model to enhance the efficacy of the process while utilizing the strengths of both disciplines. Through a case illustration, the identification of the family dynamics and situations that give rise to use of this approach shall become clear. This article also demonstrates the potential benefits to both the family and the PCs. All aspects synthesize into a cohesive, well‐balanced approach to the uber‐conflicted parenting relationships.     

Evaluation of the University of Denver's Center for Separating and Divorcing Families: The First Out‐of‐Court Divorce Option1

The Resource Center for Separating and Divorcing Families (RCSDF) is the first U.S. alternative dispute resolution model to provide legal dispute resolution, therapeutic, educational, and financial services to separating and divorcing families in a single location outside the courthouse. Data were collected on 82 families at entry and service completion: service utilization, process timeliness, family satisfaction, and outcomes. Parents were highly satisfied with the process and demonstrated significant improvements in personal well‐being, co‐parenting, parenting quality, and reported reductions in children's anxiety/depression. Community partners felt RCSDF was a positive innovation in their community. The RCSDF model represents a culture shift from an adversarial process to a cohesive alternative that supports the well‐being of all family members.     

Critical Review of Research Evidence of Parenting Coordination's Effectiveness

Parenting coordination (PC) has been in use since the mid‐1980s, but research on its effectiveness is sorely lacking. We review the extant research organized by three themes: (1) parenting coordinators’ perceptions of their role and function; (2) professionals’ and parents’ views and perceptions of PC; and (3) outcomes of PC, including some measures of effectiveness of the PC process. While these studies provide some insight into PC effectiveness, there is still a lack of research that uses objective outcome measures of efficacy and that considers characteristics of the co‐parent dyad, personality difficulties, or the professional discipline of the parenting coordinator. Future research recommendations are discussed.     

A Paradigm Shift in the Practice of Family Law: A Response to Mosten and Traum

In their article, Interdisciplinary Teamwork in Family Law Practice, Mosten and Traum promote the use of an interdisciplinary, team‐based approach to family law practice. This commentary focuses on the two pronged shift in the current zeitgeist of family law practice. First, Mosten and Traum guide us away from an historically adversarial approach to family law practice, in which attorneys advocate for the legal rights of a single client, to a more holistic approach in which the focus is on the Family Global Case. Furthermore, the push toward Family Global Case shifts the focus away from discrete legal issues associated with reorganization to empowering families to self‐determine through their reorganization. This shift follows the movement in both medicine and mental health away from direct intervention for people with disorders to promoting wellness for at‐risk yet healthy individuals. The second prong of Mosten and Traum's approach is a movement toward more collaborative interdisciplinary functioning. However, the shift in the practice of family law from the sole practitioner working alone to being one member of a broader multidisciplinary team focusing on the future well‐being of the family brings with it not only issues of professional role definitions but also the development of a new combined set of ethics and models for training. These are discussed in detail.     

论证券投资基金所持股份之表决权的行使

证券投资基金所持股份之表决权理应由基金管理人代表基金份额持有人自由行使,但由于证券投资基金持股数额一般较大,且该表决权的行使具有权义复合性和双重共益性,故基金管理人在行使基金持股之表决权时应尽忠实、勤勉义务。建议我国立法对基金持股之表决权进行一定的规制,以维护基金份额持有人的利益,并更好地发挥基金作为机构投资者在股份公司治理中的作用。     

The Interdisciplinary Settlement Conference: A Grassroots Alternative for Resolving High‐Conflict Parenting Disputes in Lean Times

This article describes a court‐connected alternative dispute resolution program, the Interdisciplinary Settlement Conference. The key feature of this program is the participation of two volunteer panelists, one a family law attorney and the other a mental health professional experienced in parenting disputes, who assist the judicial officer in working with the parties and their attorneys (if any) to reach a resolution of their parenting dispute. Significantly, in addition to addressing the parties’ legal issues, the panelists also address the parties’ psychological and emotional issues relevant to the dispute on an as‐needed basis. Findings from six years of experience with the program are discussed, including evidence of high satisfaction with the program, a high rate of settlement, a decrease in relitigation, and a concomitant savings of scarce judicial resources.     

Families in Circle Process: Restorative Justice in Family Law

This article explores the use of “circle process”—a form of restorative justice—in family law and places this effort within a larger movement within the law toward law as a healing profession, or the “comprehensive law movement.” It explores the features and underpinnings of circle process and its relationship to original forms of dispute resolution such as those used in African‐style mediation and indigenous people's dispute resolution in North America. Values expressed by these forms of dispute resolution are argued to be particularly relevant in family law. Finally, it focuses on an innovative and exciting court‐sponsored program begun in Chicago in 2008, using circle process with families in conflict, in the Cook County Parentage and Child Support Court. This program's results suggest potential benefits and cautions of using circle process in family law.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Restorative justice, in particular, circle process, can be used to resolve family law cases.
• Circle process widens the group of participants in alternative dispute resolution of family law matters.
• Circle process brings more voices to the table, namely, extended family, friends, and supporters, thus enhancing the group's decisionmaking.
• Judges will want to be sure the families in question are appropriate for circle process before referring them to this method of resolving disputes.
• Circle processes can result in improved communication and relations among families in conflict.
• Circle process reflects the values of “original dispute resolution,” which often in turn reflects ubuntu, the idea that all humankind is interconnected.
• Circle process is part of a greater movement towards law as a healing profession/the comprehensive law movement, which includes therapeutic jurisprudence.

     

透过新闻看我国选举制度的理论与实践

选举权之权态不仅仅是"投票选举"(此仅为投票权),还包括投票必需之知情、获得允诺等权态,以及作为保障与救济之需的对选任对象的任职考核、罢免等权态;被选举权之权态也不仅仅是"被选举为"(此仅为当选权),尚包括作为当选前提之参选、竞选、候选等权态,以及当选之后的任职、辞职等权态。选举活动被当成组织的人事安排活动,存在极大的道德风险,同时也使国家面临政治民主虚化的风险。