A Qualitative Study of Potential Suicide Risk Factors Among Soldiers Transitioning From Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom

Using qualitative methods, this study explored potential risk factors for suicide, as defined by Joiner's Interpersonal-Psychological Theory of Suicide (IPTS), in a population of Soldiers returning from deployment in Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom (OEF/OIF). Sixty-eight Soldiers participated in semi-structured interviews during the period of transition from deployment to the garrison environment. These Soldiers were asked about changes in perception of pain, experiences of perceived burdensomeness, and lack of belonging. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed. A phenomenological methodology was employed (Creswell, 2006). In response to questions about perception of pain, Soldiers discussed both positive and negative changes in their experience of physical and emotional pain. When asked about experiences of perceived burdensomeness, Soldiers described changes related to deployment, such as injuries and combat related guilt, as well as changes related to transition from combat, including care seeking, reintegration into family and society, and emotional distancing. Regarding the experience of lack of belonging, Soldiers described difficulties related to the deployment, such as combat injuries, leadership roles, and individual differences, as well as difficulties related to reintegration such as symptoms of emotional numbing and distancing. Findings highlight the potential utility of IPTS in exploring both acute and chronic suicide risk factors associated with deployment and transition, as well as potential treatment strategies that may reduce suicide risk in the population of Soldiers during reintegration.

Integrated Solar City: Application of the Ecological Risk Assessment Paradigm to Inform Reclamation

The Integrated Solar City (ISC) is a large solar project that has been proposed for development in the western state of Gujarat, India. The project will be the largest solar project in the world. It will require the use of large land resources to construct. An ecological risk assessment (ERA) is used to assess potential impacts from project construction and operation. Previous research suggests that a solar project of this scale would require the removal of vegetation along with other negative effects on vegetation and soil. The ERA was used to lay out a revegetation plan that would help mitigate the long-term environmental impacts in the Banaskantha and Kachchh regions of Gujarat, India.

In-House Risk

Over the last thirty years or so, as the number of in-house counsel rose and their role increased in scope and prominence, increased attention has been given the various challenges these lawyers face under the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, from figuring out who is the client the in-house lawyer represents, to navigating conflicts of interest, maintaining independence, and engaging in a multijurisdictional practice of law. Less attention, to date, has been given to business risk assessment, perhaps in part because that function appears to be part of in-house counsel’s role as a business person rather than as a lawyer. Overlooking the role of in-house counsel in assessing risk, however, is a risky proposition, because risk assessment constitutes for some in-house counsel a significant aspect of their role, a role that in turn informs and shapes how in-house counsel perform other more overtly legal tasks. For example, wearing her hat as General Counsel, a lawyer for the entity-client may opine and explain issues of compliance with the law. Wearing her hat as the Chief Legal Officer, however, the same lawyer may now be called upon as a member of business management to participate in the decision whether to comply with the law. After outlining some of the traditional challenges faced by in-house counsel under the Rules, this short essay explores risk assessment by in-house counsel and its impact on their role and function under the Rules. It argues that the key to in-house lawyers’ successful navigation of multiple roles, and, in particular, to their effective assessment of business risk is keen awareness of the various hats they are called upon to wear. Navigating these various roles may not be easy for lawyers, whose training and habits of mind often teach them to zoom in on legal risks to the exclusion of business risks. Indeed, law schools continue to teach law students “to think like a lawyer” and law firms, the historical breeding grounds for in-house counsel positions, in a world of increased specialization master the narrower contemplation of legal questions. Yet the present and future of in-house counsel practice demand of its practitioners the careful and gradual coming to terms, buildup and mastery of business risk analysis skills, alongside the cultivation of traditional legal risk analysis tools.