Notes from Some Small Countries: A Study of the 'New Punitiveness' in Ireland, Scotland and New Zealand

In recent years there has been a remarkable surge of interest in the concept of punitiveness in theoretical criminology. Accounts serve to emphasise rupture over continuity, drawing attention to the increased focus on managerialism, risk and expressive penal policies in countries such as England and the US. Criticisms of these accounts have drawn attention to the weak empirical base for such assertions and the continued relevance of local cultural, historical and political conditions in mediating the effect of more punitive trends. In light of the relative neglect of smaller jurisdictions in this literature it was decided to locate these debates in three small common law jurisdictions, namely, Ireland, Scotland and New Zealand over the period 1976-2006 with a view to assessing the empirical evidence for penal change. This was done using a broader definition of punitiveness than normally employed incorporating indices relating to the ‘front end’ (eg police powers) as well as the ‘back end’ (eg prison and probation) of the criminal justice system. Data were collected on the three case studies using a multi-method approach involving examination of extensive quantitative data, interviews with key criminal justice stakeholders and documentary analysis. The data provide some support for the ‘new punitiveness’ thesis in these countries through a pattern of increased legislative activity aimed at controlling violent and sexual offenders and significant increases in the lengths of sentences imposed. However, analysis of qualitative data and a larger number of variables reveals distinctly different patterns of punitiveness over the thirty year period in the three countries. It is argued that the study holds important lessons for comparative criminology into the ‘new punitiveness’. There is a need for qualitative as well as quantitative data; for multiple rather than singular indices across a wide range of areas (juvenile justice, prison conditions, etc); and for ‘front end’ as well as ‘back end’ indices.

Uses of expertise:Sources, quotes, and voice in the reporting of genetics in the news

Science journalists call upon experts for background and for clarification and comment on scientific findings. This paper examines how science writers choose and use experts, and it focuses on several cases of reporting about genetics and behavior. Our research included two sources of data: interviews with 15 science reporters and three print media samples of coverage of genetics and behavior - alcoholism (between 1980-1995), homosexuality (in 1993 and 1995), and mental illness (between 1970-1995). Science reporters seek relevant and specific experts for nearly every story. Good sources are knowledgeable, are connected to prestigious institutions, are direct and articulate and don't overqualify statements, and they return phone calls. The mean number of experts quoted was 2.8 per story, differing for alcoholism (3.5), homosexuality (2.8), and mental illness (2.6). Researchers and scientists predominated among experts quoted. Quotes were used to provide context, give legitimization, as explication, to provide a kind of balance, and to outline implications. For the homosexuality sample, a significantly greater percentage of activists and advocates were quoted (21 percent compared with 5 percent and 1 percent in other samples, X <0.0001). "Lay" quotes for alcoholism and mental illness were minimal. Except for homosexuality, whose advocates are organized, those "affected" do not have a voice in genetics news stories.

Design, recruitment, logistics, and data management of the GEHA (Genetics of Healthy Ageing) project

In 2004, the integrated European project GEHA (Genetics of Healthy Ageing) was initiated with the aim of identifying genes involved in healthy ageing and longevity. The first step in the project was the recruitment of more than 2500 pairs of siblings aged 90 years or more together with one younger control person from 15 areas in 11 European countries through a coordinated and standardised effort. A biological sample, preferably a blood sample, was collected from each participant, and basic physical and cognitive measures were obtained together with information about health, life style, and family composition. From 2004 to 2008 a total of 2535 families comprising 5319 nonagenarian siblings were identified and included in the project. In addition, 2548 younger control persons aged 50-75 years were recruited. A total of 2249 complete trios with blood samples from at least two old siblings and the younger control were formed and are available for genetic analyses (e.g. linkage studies and genome-wide association studies). Mortality follow-up improves the possibility of identifying families with the most extreme longevity phenotypes. With a mean follow-up time of 3.7 years the number of families with all participating siblings aged 95 years or more has increased by a factor of 5 to 750 families compared to when interviews were conducted. Thus, the GEHA project represents a unique source in the search for genes related to healthy ageing and longevity.

Focus group interviews:a guide for palliative care researchers and clinicians

The focus group interview is an increasingly common qualitative research method used by health professionals. General approaches to conducting focus groups have been published. There has, however, been minimal exploration of issues regarding the use of focus groups with palliative care populations and data analysis procedures have been underreported. The aim of this paper is to provide a guide for conducting focus groups drawing on palliative care examples. A succinct outline of why, when and how to use focus groups is offered. Key ethical and practical issues are explored as well as considerations for data analysis. This guide offers researchers and clinicians fundamental strategies for the use of focus groups within the palliative care context.

Doing Focus Groups and Interviews with Recent Migrants to Northern Ireland: A Dynamic Interplay of Ethics, Language and Access

This case describes a qualitative social science research project that was conducted in 2009 and that examined the experiences of recent migrants to Northern Ireland. While background to the research and key findings are presented, the topic forms a backdrop to the case. The following aspects of the study are presented: the theoretical context; formulating the research question, design and methodology; key methodological issues; data collection and analysis; project dissemination; and research funding and reporting. The case pays particular attention to the needs and impact of different groups including the researcher, the funding body, the researcher’s employer and the researched. The significance of access, language and ethics to this study are examined. Finally, the way in which the research unfolded in an often-unpredictable way throughout the implementation process is highlighted in the narrative.

Uncovering the challenges of managing cachexia in advanced cancer: Preliminary results from semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals in a regional cancer centre

Background: Cancer cachexia is a complex metabolic syndrome characterised by severe and progressive weight loss which is predominantly muscle mass. It is a devastating and distressing complication of advanced cancer with profound bio-psycho-social implications for patients and their families. At present there is no curative treatment for cachexiain advanced cancer therefore the most important healthcare response entails the minimisation of the psycho-social distress associated with it. However the literature suggests healthcare professionals’are missing opportunities to intervene and respond to the multi-dimensional needs of this population.

Objective:The objective of this study was to explore healthcare professionals’ response to cachexia in advanced cancer.

Methods: An interpretative qualitative approach was adopted in this study. A purposive sample of doctors, nurses, specialist nurses and dieticians were recruited from a regional cancer centre between November 2009 and November 2010. Data was collection was twofold: two multi-professional focus groups were conducted first to uncover the main themes and issues in cachexia management. This data then informed the interview schedule for the following 25 individual semi-structured interviews.

Results: Preliminary data analysis of the semi-structured interviews revealed distinct differences between disciplines in their perceptions of cancer cachexia which influenced their response to it in clinical practice. The commonality between disciplines, with the exception of palliative care, was a reliance on the biomedical approach to cancer cachexia management.

Discussion and Conclusions: Cancer cachexia is a complex and challenging syndrome which needs to be addressed from a holistic model of care to reflect the multi-dimensional needs of this patient group. The perspectives of those involved in care delivery is required in order to inform the development of interventions aimed at minimising the distress associated with this devastating syndrome.

The use of patient experience survey data by out-of-hours primary care services: a qualitative interview study

Background English National Quality Requirements mandate out-of-hours primary care services to routinely audit patient experience, but do not state how it should be done.

Objectives We explored how providers collect patient feedback data and use it to inform service provision. We also explored staff views on the utility of out-of-hours questions from the English General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS).

Methods A qualitative study was conducted with 31 staff (comprising service managers, general practitioners and administrators) from 11 out-of-hours primary care providers in England, UK. Staff responsible for patient experience audits within their service were sampled and data collected via face-to-face semistructured interviews.

Results Although most providers regularly audited their patients’ experiences by using patient surveys, many participants expressed a strong preference for additional qualitative feedback. Staff provided examples of small changes to service delivery resulting from patient feedback, but service-wide changes were not instigated. Perceptions that patients lacked sufficient understanding of the urgent care system in which out-of-hours primary care services operate were common and a barrier to using feedback to enable change. Participants recognised the value of using patient experience feedback to benchmark services, but perceived weaknesses in the out-of-hours items from the GPPS led them to question the validity of using these data for benchmarking in its current form.

Conclusions The lack of clarity around how out-of-hours providers should audit patient experience hinders the utility of the National Quality Requirements. Although surveys were common, patient feedback data had only a limited role in service change. Data derived from the GPPS may be used to benchmark service providers, but refinement of the out-of-hours items is needed.