The control and learning of patterns of interlimb coordination: past and present issues in normal and disordered control

The present paper provides a historical note on the evolution of the behavioral study of interlimb coordination and the reasons for its success as a field of investigation in the past decades. Whereas the original foundations for this field of science were laid down back in the seventies, it has steadily grown in the past decades and has attracted the attention of various scientific disciplines. A diversity of topics is currently being addressed and this is also expressed in the present contributions to the special issue. The main theme is centered on the brain basis of interlimb coordination. On the one hand, this pertains to the study of the control and learning of patterns of interlimb coordination in clinical groups. On the other hand, basic neural approaches are being merged together with behavioral approaches to reveal the neural basis of interlimb coordination. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Reintegrative and Disintegrative Shaming:Legal and Ethical Issues

Abstract
This chapter considers a range of legal and ethical issues raised by the use of reintegrative and disintegrative shaming techniques (Braithwaite, 1989) with sex offenders. ‘Disintegrative shaming’ labels and stigmatises offenders, ostracises them from the local community and may result in violence directed towards offenders (McAlinden, 2005, 2007). ‘Reintegrative shaming’, on the other hand, focuses on rehabilitating the offender within a supportive community environment and assisting the offender in their efforts to change. The former is evident in the range of recent legislative responses designed to protect the community from sex offenders such as notification as well as the popular demand for measures which ‘name and shame’ known sex offenders. The latter is more clearly related to restorative measures such as circles of support and accountability. This chapter argues that although traditionally at opposite ends of the intervention spectrum, each type of mechanism gives rise to potentially difficult legal and ethical considerations.