Transparency as transparagency—New “meaning” for new contexts

A literature review was undertaken to find how transparency is connected to different models of governance. This paper addresses transparency in a wider sense than usual and claims its recognition from the systemic point of view. With this goal in mind, Wittgenstein's language games were used to show that transparency means what practice shows it is to regain its meaning in the never‐ending circle. On this basis, a new notion of transparency is proposed: transparagency, which connects knowing, understanding, acting, and evaluating under a new umbrella term. On the basis of Google Trends, the paper exposes a link between transparency and freedom of expression that is contrary to common understanding—Transparency is ensured more when people talk about it less.     

Fat and the law: who should take the blame?

The incidence of obesity in both adults and children is rising at a rapid rate in most developed countries, including in Australia. Some obese people are seeking to place the blame for their condition on the fast-food industry, as demonstrated by the recent litigation in the United States brought by two obese plaintiffs against McDonald's. This litigation was unsuccessful, and on existing Australian negligence principles any similar litigation commenced here is likely to suffer the same fate. Principles of personal responsibility, autonomy and free will should prevail to deny a negligence claim. The risk of obesity and concomitant health problems from eating fast food to excess is an obvious risk which the plaintiff should not have ignored and which he or she has voluntarily assumed. It is for the Australian Government, not the courts, to regulate the behaviour of the fast-food industry. The government should take action by requiring all major fast-food chains to label their products with nutritional information, and by imposing restrictions on the advertising of food to children.     

Effects of Cremation on Fetal Bones

The charring process is a weak point of anthropological analysis as it changes bone morphology and reduces information obtainable, specially in fetuses. This experiment aims at verifying the conservation of fetal bones after cremation. A total of 3138 fetuses of unknown sex and age were used, deriving from legal and therapeutic abortions from different hospitals of Milan. Cremations took place in modern crematoria. Nine cremation events were analyzed, each ranging from 57 to 915 simultaneously cremated fetuses. During the cremations, 4356 skeletal remains were recovered, 3756 of which (86.2%) were morphologically distinguishable. All types of fetal skeletal elements were found, with the exception of some cranial bones. Only 3.4% of individuals could be detected after the cremation process, because of the prevalence of abortions under 12 lunar weeks. All fire alterations were observed and the results were statistically analyzed. This pilot study confirmed the possibility of preservation of fetal skeletal elements after cremation.     

The Right to an Impartial Hearing Trumps the Social Imperative of Bringing Accused to Trial Even ‘Down Under’

Accused persons who are subjected to a saturation level of negative media coverage may be denied an impartial hearing, which is perhaps the most important aspect of the right to a fair hearing. Despite this, the courts have generally held that the social imperative of prosecuting accused trumps the interests of the accused. The justification for an impartial hearing stems from the repugnance of convicting the innocent. Viewed dispassionately, this imperative is not absolute, given that every legal system condones procedures which result in the conviction of some innocent people. While the importance of guarding against wrongful convictions has been overstated, the imperative to bring to trial all accused has been even more exaggerated. The legal system has displayed a capacity to deal with cases where the guilty walk free. The institutional integrity of the criminal justice system would be significantly compromised by convictions that are tarnished by pre-judgment. Confidence in the criminal justice system is more important than individual criminal accountability. The inability to receive an impartial hearing should result in a permanent stay. The only exception is where the alleged crime has the capacity to cause widespread fear or social unrest. This only applies in relation to serious acts of terrorism. This article focuses on recent legal fair trial developments in Australia, however, the analysis, reasoning and conclusion applies in relation to all jurisdictions where juries determine guilt and innocence.     

Moving from voluntary euthanasia to non-voluntary euthanasia: equality and compassion

Abstract.  The recent Dutch law legalising active voluntary euthanasia will reignite the euthanasia debate. An illuminating method for evaluating the moral status of a practice is to follow the implications of the practice to its logical conclusion. The argument for compassion is one of the central arguments in favour of voluntary active euthanasia. This argument applies perhaps even more forcefully in relation to incompetent patients. If active voluntary euthanasia is legalised, arguments based on compassion and equality will be directed towards legalising active non-voluntary euthanasia in order to make accelerated termination of death available also to the incompetent. The removal of discrimination against the incompetent has the potential to become as potent a catch-cry as the right to die. However, the legalisation of non-voluntary euthanasia is undesirable. A review of the relevant authorities reveals that there is no coherent and workable "best interests" test which can be invoked to decide whether an incompetent patient is better off dead. This provides a strong reason for not stepping onto the slippery path of permitting active voluntary euthanasia.     

Why wrongful birth actions are right

A wrongful birth action is a claim in negligence brought by parents of a child against a doctor who has "wrongfully" caused their child to be born. These claims can be divided into two categories: those where a doctor performs a failed sterilisation procedure that leads to a healthy child being born; and those where a doctor fails to provide sufficient information to allow parents to choose to abort a handicapped child. The recent decision of the High Court of Australia in Cattanach v Melchior (2003) 77 ALJR 1312 falls into the former category. The decision to allow the parents to receive damages for the costs of raising and maintaining their child has generated much public debate. Despite the endorsement of this "wrongful birth" action, there are indications that the legislature will overturn the decision. This article examines whether there is a sound doctrinal basis for recognising wrongful birth actions.     

Euthanasia: why it doesn't matter (much) what the doctor thinks and why there is no suggestion that doctors should have a duty to kill

A major reason that The Netherlands has taken a different approach to the rest of the world on such a fundamental moral issue is that the courts and legislature in that country have accorded the interests of doctors a cardinal role in the euthanasia debate. This article argues that the interests of doctors are of only incidental and peripheral relevance in relation to the moral status of euthanasia. The moral status of euthanasia has little to do with the preparedness of doctors to administer the lethal injection or their general attitude towards the practice. Euthanasia is principally about the interests of the patient and the impact that the practice may have on the community in general, not preserving the conscience or improving the working life of doctors.     

Y-chromosomal STR haplotypes in Macedonian population samples

Eleven Y-chromosomal short tandem repeats (STRs), DYS19, DYS389I, DYS389II, DYS390, DYS391, DYS392, DYS393, DYS385, DYS437, DYS438, DYS439 were typed in DNA samples from Macedonian population (n = 150).     

Management by Measurement? Public Management Practices Amidst Ambiguity

In the public sphere, a management by measurement (MBM) movement can be traced. Practitioners attempt to strengthen the transparency and effectiveness of administrative systems by introducing rational measurement cycles. When issues are managed, ambitions must be stated, options must be assessed, optimal options must be chosen and performance must be monitored and evaluated. This cycle rests upon assumptions that are often untenable. When issues are ambiguous, interpretative spaces exist; when interpretative spaces exist, strict measurement cycles do not work because required conditions and assumptions cannot be met. This article explores the nature of interpretative spaces by identifying three types of public management practice. In this typology of public management, practices differ in terms of the extent to which issues can be classified, as well as the extent to which standards are contested. Management by measurement fits canonical practices where issues are known and standards are shared, it is argued, but is less appropriate for evaluating non-canonical practices and practices-in-transition where such a classification of issues is weak and consensus on standard is absent. MBM focuses on data; the other practices require dialogue in order to manage ambiguity and interpretative spaces.