Review: "Stir" -- Stephen Wallace

Synopsis and review of the Australian prison film Stir (Stephen Wallace, 1980). Includes cast and credits. Stir was written by a former prisoner, Bob Jewson, who had witnessed first hand a notorious riot at Bathurst Gaol in New South Wales in February 1974, the second serious disturbance at the prison in four years. In 1979, prisoners at Parramatta Gaol staged a peaceful sit-in to protest against the New South Wales’ government’s decision not to pursue criminal charges against prison officers for their actions during the 1974 Bathurst riot. The bashing of China Jackson and his cellmate in the first scene of Stir follows a sit-in, with the rest of the film drawing heavily on events around the 1974 Bathurst riot. The director later claimed that he wanted to call the film ‘The Riot at Bathurst Prison’, but was persuaded by nervous bureaucrats to apply the veneer of fiction. The film was retitled Stir, and set in the fictional Gatunga Gaol. Like other films in this genre, Stir draws heavily on the experiences of former prisoners and warders. The Prisoners’ Action Group played a leading role in the planning and preparation of the film, and many former inmates and guards were employed as extras. And in common with many films in this genre, Stir is concerned to humanise the plight of prisoners. Through the depiction of the routines of punishment, violence and retribution by which order in the institution is maintained, and through careful evocation of the atmosphere of fear and intimidation that prisoners (and warders) live with every day, Stir, again like other films in this genre blames the authorities and the system itself for events like those portrayed here. As producer Richard Brennan says in an interview on the 2005 DVD release of the film, “prisons create monsters”...

Medical negligence, causation and liability for non-disclosure of risk : a post-wallace framework and critique

Through an examination of Wallace v Kam, this article considers and evaluates the law of causation in the specific context of a medical practitioner’s duty to provide information to patients concerning material risks of treatment. To supply a contextual background for the analysis which follows, Part II summarises the basic principles of causation law, while Part III provides an overview of the case and the reasoning adopted in the decisions at first instance and on appeal. With particular emphasis upon the reasoning in the courts of appeal, Part IV then examines the implications of the case in the context of other jurisprudence in this field and, in so doing, provides a framework for a structured consideration of causation issues in future non-disclosure cases under the Australian civil liability legislation. As will become clear, Wallace was fundamentally decided on the basis of policy reasoning centred upon the purpose behind the legal duty violated. Although the plurality in Rogers v Whitaker rejected the utility of expressions such as ‘the patient’s right of self-determination’ in this context, some Australian jurisprudence may be thought to frame the practitioner’s duty to warn in terms of promoting a patient’s autonomy, or right to decide whether to submit to treatment proposed. Accordingly, the impact of Wallace upon the protection of this right, and the interrelation between it and the duty to warn’s purpose, is investigated. The analysis in Part IV also evaluates the courts’ reasoning in Wallace by questioning the extent to which Wallace’s approach to liability and causal connection in non-disclosure of risk cases: depends upon the nature and classification of the risk(s) in question; and can be reconciled with the way in which patients make decisions. Finally, Part V adopts a comparative approach by considering whether the same decision might be reached if Wallace was determined according to English law.

Beyond Moa's Ark and Wallace's Line: extralimital distribution of new species of Austronothrus (Acari, Oribatida, Crotoniidae) and the endemicity of the New Zealand oribatid mite fauna

The genus Austronothrus was previously known from three species recorded only from New Zealand. Austronothrus kinabalu sp. nov. is described from Sabah, Borneo and A. rostralis sp. nov. from Norfolk Island, south-west Pacific. A key to Austronothrus is included. These new species extend the distribution of Austronothrus beyond New Zealand and confirms that the subfamily Crotoniinae is not confined to former Gondwanan landmasses. The distribution pattern of Austronothrus spp., combining Oriental and Gondwanan localities, is indicative of a curved, linear track; consistent with the accretion of island arcs and volcanic terranes around the plate margins of the Pacific Ocean, with older taxa persisting on younger island though localised dispersal within island arc metapopulations. Phylogenetic analysis and an area cladogram are consistent with a broad ancestral distribution of Austronothrus in the Oriental region and on Gondwanan terranes, with subsequent divergence and distribution southward from the Sunda region to New Zealand. This pattern is more complex than might be expected if the New Zealand oribatid fauna was derived from dispersal following re-emergence of land after inundation during the Oligocene (25 mya), as well as if the fauna emanated from endemic, relictual taxa following separation of New Zealand from Gondwana during the Cretaceous (80 mya).