Young people's beliefs about intergenerational communication - An initial cross-cultural comparison

This article examines young people's perceptions of their conversations with older people (age 65-85) across nine cultures-five Eastern and four Western. Responses from more than 1,000 participants were entered into a cross-national factor analysis, which revealed four initial factors that underlie perceptions of intergenerational conversations. Elder nonaccommodation was when young participants reported that older people negatively stereotyped the young and did not attend to their communication needs. On the other hand, elder accommodation was when older people were perceived as supportive, attentive and generally encouraging to young people. A third factor was respect/obligation and a fourth factor labeled age-irrelevant positivity described a situation where young people felt conversations with much older people were emotionally positive and satisfying, age did not matter: Examining cross-cultural differences, some East versus West differences were observed, as might be expected, on the basis of simplistic accounts of Eastern collectivism versus Western individualism. However the results challenge commonsense notions of the status of old age in Eastern versus Western cultures. On some dimensions, participants from Korea, Japan, People's Republic of China, Hong Kong, and the Philippines appear to have relatively less positive perceptions of their conversations with older people than the Western cultures-the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. But there was also evidence of considerable cultural variability, particularly among Eastern cultures-variability that has heretofore all too often been glossed over when global comparisons of East versus West are made. A range of explanations for these cultural differences is explored and implications for older people in these societies are also considered.

The recent Australian debate about the prohibition on cannabis use

This paper outlines the ethical arguments used in the Australian debate about whether or not to relax the prohibition on cannabis use by adults. Over the past two decades a rising prevalence of cannabis use in the Australian population has led to proposals for the decriminalization of the personal use of cannabis. Three states and territories have removed criminal penalties for personal use while criminal penalties are rarefy imposed in the remaining states. Libertarian arguments for legalization of cannabis use have attracted a great deal of media interest but very little public and political support. Other arguments in favour of decriminalization have attracted more support. One has been the utilitarian argument that prohibition has failed to deter cannabis use and the social costs of its continuation outweigh any benefits that it produces. Another has been the argument from hypocrisy that cannabis is less harmful than alcohol and so, on the grounds of consistency, if alcohol is legally available then so should cannabis. To date public opinion has not favoured legalization, although support for the decriminalization of personal cannabis use has increased. In the long term, the outcome of the debate may depend more upon trends in cannabis use and social attitudes among young adults than upon the persuasiveness of the arguments for a relaxation of the prohibition of cannabis.