The Implementation of European Anti‐Discrimination Directives: Converging towards a Common Model?

This article examines the impact on national law and policy of two Directives on combating discrimination adopted by the EU in 2000. It considers the extent to which their transposition has resulted in the 'Europeanisation' of anti-discrimination law and whether this implies convergence in the direction of a common model. Two themes are examined: the list of protected grounds of discrimination and the creation of equality institutions. All 27 states have introduced legal reforms in response to the Directives and a loose level of convergence can be identified. Nevertheless, specific national traditions have proved resilient, for example, shaping the meaning attached to terms such as 'disability' or the structure and powers of equality bodies.     

GOVERNANCE AND THE PUBLIC GOOD

The paper examines the control of power, using an account of the public good developed from Aristotle. It identifies three different perspectives on the relationship between governance (the control of power) and the public good: a 'cybernetic' perspective, an 'axiological' perspective, and a perspective of 'critique'. This framework offers a way to scrutinize the exercise of power, and to evaluate the linkages between a political administration and its citizenry. To evaluate an administration's legacy, this framework suggests we should study: (1) how an administration controls power over time; (2) how an administration exhibits virtue; and (3) how an administration creates conditions which enable its citizens to live the good life. Narrative theory is one basis for empirical development of this framework. This contributes to some long-standing debates in management, public administration, economics and political science. It also enables critical examination of a fashionable, though vague, term: 'public value'.     

After Number Ten: What Do Former Prime Ministers Do?

The article reviews the experience of former British prime ministers in the twentieth century. There is no fixed or predetermined role for former prime ministers. What they do after they leave office depends on personal choices and on circumstances. Some have largely disappeared from the political stage. Others have become active international 'elder statesmen'. A couple-Heath and Thatcher-were embittered 'models to avoid'. A quarter of the former prime ministers since 1900 have served in other government posts in their successors' Cabinets, while a handful have turned down such appointments. Most have gone to the Lords, which offers a political platform, but sometimes they do not think much of the quality of the second chamber. The retirements of some former prime ministers have been clouded by money worries, but they nowadays get substantial pensions and can make money from business directorships, international lectures and writing memoirs. The article concludes with speculation about what Tony Blair's post-premiership might hold.     

TOWARDS A BETTER PUBLIC LAW?

In the UK Constitution, the major weapon of judicial control over the exercise of governmental power is provided by the action for judicial review. This action serves to keep public bodies within the scope of the powers conferred on them by law. Prior to the present Law Commission inquiry into procedural aspects of judicial review, the matter was last examined in 1977 since when there have been significant changes in the ways in which governmental power is exercised and controlled. This article takes as its focus the Law Commission's Report No.226 Judicial Review and Statutory Appeals and examines specific proposals contained therein arguing that, underlying the reforms, there exists no coherent vision of the future role of public law. Instead, what is revealed is a confused cocktail of measures in which the tension between the legitimate needs of public administration and the opposing requirement that government act according to law remains unacknowledged and thereby unresolved. There is, moreover, a disappointing failure to evaluate the experience of public law procedures found in other jurisdictions. In response to these perceived deficiencies, the authors set out an alternative and principled account of judicial review, the central feature of which is to ensure that public power is subjected to an appropriate degree of judicial scrutiny. This alternative account is later used to inform arguments about specific reforms. In this regard, the valuable experience of other jurisdictions'public law procedures is also drawn upon.     

A SYSTEMS ANALYSIS OF CRIME CONTROL STRATEGIES

Comparisons were made between 92 male prisoners over the age of 50 and 539 younger male prisoners at Utah State Prison, and between groups of first and muhiply incarcerated ot Utah and younger inmates. The older prisoners committed more crimes against persons, fewer property crimes, were older at first arrest, and were less socially deviant, impulsive, and hostile. The first incarcerated older inmates were found to have more often engaged in crimes of violence. were less involved in a criminal way of life, and were the best adjusted of all the groups. The multiply incarcerated older inmates were found to resemble the younger inmates in terms of a criminal way of life and were not different from their younger counterparts in their adjustment.     

Reflective political reasoning: Political disagreement and empathy

As political polarization increases across many of the world's established democracies, many citizens are unwilling to appreciate and consider the viewpoints of those who disagree with them. Previous research shows that this lack of reflection can undermine democratic accountability. The purpose of this paper is to study whether empathy for the other can motivate people to reason reflectively about politics. Extant studies have largely studied trait-level differences in the ability and inclination of individuals to engage in reflection. Most of these studies focus on observational moderators, which makes it difficult to make strong claims about the effects of being in a reflective state on political decision making. We extend this research by using a survey experiment with a large and heterogeneous sample of UK citizens (N = 2014) to investigate whether a simple empathy intervention can induce people to consider opposing viewpoints and incorporate those views in their opinion about a pressing political issue. We find that actively imagining the feelings and thoughts of someone one disagrees with prompts more reflection in the way that people reason about political issues as well as elicits empathic feelings of concern towards those with opposing viewpoints. We further examine whether empathy facilitates openness to attitude change in the counter-attitudinal direction and find that exposure to an opposing perspective (without its empathy component) per se is enough to prompt attitude change. Our study paints a more nuanced picture of the relationship between empathy, reflection and policy attitudes.     

Forensic Methods and Procedures Applied to Child Custody Evaluations: What Judges Need to Know in Determining a Competent Forensic Work Product

Judges are seeing an increase in the number of forensic reports in the area of child custody. This increase in forensic mental health involvement suggests that judges need to better understand the application of current forensic mental health methodology to assist them in determining a competent forensic work product. Recent literature has argued that child custody evaluators need to craft their reports consistent with scientific methods and procedures as well as legal standards governing admissibility of scientific evidence. This paper provides a framework for judges to assist in determining whether a child custody evaluation has been crafted consistent with current behavioral science literature pertaining to use of forensic mental health methods and procedures.