Journals

Interpreting the 2004 Moroccan Family Law: Street-Level Bureaucrats, Women's Groups, and the Preservation of Multiple Normativities

Law & Social Enquiry - Fri, 2017-08-18 12:15

A decade after celebrating Morocco's 2004 family law as a social revolution, women's groups became dismayed by the persistence of minor marriage, polygyny, and marriage guardianship. Conventional explanations for why statutory law reform often fails to produce intended outcomes depart from the concept of the homogeneous state, pointing to insufficient enforcement mechanisms and cultural resistance to the new law within society. Arguing against this conceptualization, this article adopts the state-in-society approach. It compares how two types of street-level bureaucrats and secular and Islamist women's groups have engaged with the 2004 law. It finds that different groups have emphasized and rejected different categories and norms of the law. Street-level bureaucrats' interpretations have sometimes overlapped with those of civil society actors. The state is therefore not enforcing one normative order against cultural resistance from society; instead, different state actors are themselves actively involved in the production and preservation of multiple normativities.

Categories: Journals

Books Received

Medical Law Review - Thu, 2017-08-17 00:00
If you are interested in writing a review of one of the books listed below please contact the Book Reviews Editor, Dr Sara Fovargue: s.fovargue@lancaster.ac.uk. Reviews are usually about 2,000 words long, but shorter reviews will be considered with the agreement of the Reviews Editor.
Categories: Journals

Measles Vaccination is Best for Children: The Argument for Relying on Herd Immunity Fails

Journal of Bioethical Enquiry - Wed, 2017-08-16 00:00
This article examines an argument which may negatively influence measles vaccination uptake. According to the argument, an individual child in a highly vaccinated society may be better off by being non-vaccinated; the child does not risk vaccine adverse effects and is protected against measles through herd immunity. Firstly, the conclusion of the argument is challenged by showing that herd immunity ’s protection is unreliable and inferior to vaccination. Secondly, the logic of the argument is challenged by showing that the argument is inherently self-defeating and therefore logically inconsistent. In practice the argument cannot be used to protect children against measles. Measles vaccinatio n is undoubtedly best for children, even in highly vaccinated societies. Only if a medical contra...
Categories: Journals

Exploring Vaccine Hesitancy Through an Artist –Scientist Collaboration

Journal of Bioethical Enquiry - Wed, 2017-08-16 00:00
AbstractThis project explores vaccine hesitancy through an artist –scientist collaboration. It aims to create better understanding of vaccine hesitant parents’ health beliefs and how these influence their vaccine-critical decisions. The project interviews vaccine-hesitant parents in the Netherlands and Finland and develops experimental visual-narrative means t o analyse the interview data. Vaccine-hesitant parents’ health beliefs are, in this study, expressed through stories, and they are paralleled with so-called illness narratives. The study explores the following four main health beliefs originating from the parents’ interviews: (1) perceived benef its of illness, (2) belief in the body’s intelligence and self-healing capacity, (3) beliefs about the “inside–outside” flow...
Categories: Journals

A Feminist Critique of Justifications for Sex Selection

Journal of Bioethical Enquiry - Wed, 2017-08-16 00:00
AbstractThis paper examines dominant arguments advocating for the procreative right to undergo sex selection for social reasons, based on gender preference. I present four of the most recognized and common justifications for sex selection: the argument from natural sex selection, the argument from procreative autonomy, the argument from family balancing, and the argument from children ’s well-being. Together these represent the various means by which scholars aim to defend access to sex selection for social reasons as a legitimate procreative choice. In response, I contend that these justifications are flawed and often inconsistent and therefore fail to vindicate the practice. (Source: Journal of Bioethical Inquiry)
Categories: Journals

A Virtuous Death: Organ Donation and Eudaimonia

Journal of Bioethical Enquiry - Wed, 2017-08-16 00:00
(Source: Journal of Bioethical Inquiry)
Categories: Journals

Editors' Comment

Law & Society Review - Mon, 2017-08-14 16:16
Categories: Journals

The Jury as a Translation of Democratic Participation and Political Conflict

Law & Society Review - Mon, 2017-08-14 16:16

In this response to Valerie Hans's Presidential address, I use her “legal translating” term to argue that the implementation of liberal democratic structures in new democracies opens new opportunities to translate the jury system into and onto new democratic societies. While policy makers have concerns about the strength and vibrancy of lay participation in the legal system, policy makers' decisions to adopt trial by jury are not always democratic. Nonetheless, the consequence of the translation of trial by jury furthers democratic development. Using Nicaragua, Mexico, and Russia as case studies, I suggest that one goal of policy makers who attempt to adopt trial by jury is to reduce the discretionary power of judges who remain from the prior government. Comparative trial-by-jury research can contribute more to our understanding of democratic development than prior research has indicated.

Categories: Journals

The Difference Law Makes: Domestic Atrocity Laws and Human Rights Prosecutions

Law & Society Review - Mon, 2017-08-14 16:16

This article offers the first systematic analysis of the effects of domestic atrocity laws on human rights prosecutions. Scholars have identified various political and sociological factors to explain the striking rise in human rights prosecutions over the past 30 years, yet the role of domestic criminal law in enabling such prosecutions has largely been unexamined. That is surprising given that international legal prohibitions against human rights atrocities are designed to be enforced by domestic courts applying domestic criminal law. We argue that domestic criminal laws against genocide and crimes against humanity facilitate human rights prosecutions in post-authoritarian states by helping to overcome formal legal roadblocks to prosecution, such as retroactivity, amnesties, immunities, and statutes of limitations. Using original data on domestic atrocity laws and human rights prosecutions in new democracies, we find that atrocity laws increase the speed with which new democracies pursue prosecutions, as well as the overall numbers of trials they initiate and complete.

Categories: Journals

Crossing Borders and Criminalizing Identity: The Disintegrated Subjects of Administrative Sanctions

Law & Society Review - Mon, 2017-08-14 16:16

This paper draws on in-depth, qualitative interviews that examine individual experiences in two different legal contexts: deportation regimes and supermax prisons. Through putting these contexts and experiences into dialogue, we identify common legal processes of punishment experiences across both contexts. Specifically, the U.S. legal system re-labels immigrants (as deportable noncitizens) and supermax prisoners (as dangerous gang offenders). This re-labeling begins a process of othering, which ends in categorical exclusions for both immigrants and supermax prisoners. As individuals experience this categorical exclusion, they cross multiple borders and boundaries—often against their will—moving from prison to detention center to other countries beyond the U.S. border, and from isolation to prison to “free” society. In both cases, the state action that subjects experience as punishment is civil and, therefore, nominally not punitive. Ultimately, excluded individuals find themselves in a space of legal nonexistence. By examining these common processes and experiences, we argue that a new kind of subject is revealed: a disintegrating subject (as opposed to a juridical or disciplinary subject) whose exclusion reinforces the power of the state.

Categories: Journals

Pages

Subscribe to Jurisprudence aggregator - Journals