Sterilization of girls and women with intellectual disabilities - Past and present justifications

This article describes findings from empirical research examining sterilization applications for miners made to the Family Court of Australia between 1992 and 1999. Original materials and written reports from experts,family members, and judicial officers are used to highlight the dominant discourse and themes. These are compared with historical characterizations of young women with disabilities used during the notorious eugenics period in the first half of the 20th century. The new ways of justifying sterilization use the sanitized language of best interests, silencing constructionist approaches to disability and gender issues. The new ways are reminiscent of the old ways of discrimination, prejudice, and violation.

Language strategies in the attribution of blame for HIV and AIDS

This article examines the language strategies used in everyday explanation by young heterosexual adults to attribute blame for the transmission of HIV: Seventy-two-female and 60 male Australian university students took part in the study. They were formed into groups of four, with each group taking part in discussions about HIV: AIDS, and related matters. Transcripts were examined for instances of blaming, and a coding scheme for levels of attributed responsibility applied to those instances found. Language strategies of distancing self from HN and AIDS were then coded, including checks for who was blamed whether they were members of participants' ingroups or outgroups, and whether justifications were used. These findings are discussed in terms of positioning the self vis-a-vis HIV and AIDS, as well as the ways in which negative stereotypes were used in attributing blame to members of outgroups.

Young children's performance on the balance scale: The influence of relational complexity

Three experiments investigated the effect of complexity on children's understanding of a beam balance. In nonconflict problems, weights or distances varied, while the other was held constant. In conflict items, both weight and distance varied, and items were of three kinds: weight dominant, distance dominant, or balance (in which neither was dominant). In Experiment 1, 2-year-old children succeeded on nonconflict-weight and nonconflict-distance problems. This result was replicated in Experiment 2, but performance on conflict items did not exceed chance. In Experiment 3, 3- and 4-year-olds succeeded on all except conflict balance problems, while 5- and 6-year-olds succeeded on all problem types. The results were interpreted in terms of relational complexity theory. Children aged 2 to 4 years succeeded on problems that entailed binary relations, but 5- and 6-year-olds also succeeded on problems that entailed ternary relations. Ternary relations tasks from other domains-transitivity and class inclusion-accounted for 93% of the age-related variance in balance scale scores. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science (USA).

Ethics and intervention: The 'humanitarian exception' and the problem of abuse in the case of Iraq

This article investigates the ethics of intervention and explores the decision to invade Iraq. It begins by arguing that while positive international law provides an important framework for understanding and debating the legitimacy of war, it does not cover the full spectrum of moral reasoning on issues of war and peace. To that end, after briefly discussing the two primary legal justifications for war (implied UN authorization and pre-emptive self-defence), and finding them wanting, it asks whether there is a moral 'humanitarian exceptions to this rule grounded in the 'just war' tradition. The article argues that two aspects of the broad tradition could be used to make a humanitarian case for war: the 'holy war' tradition and classical just war thinking based on natural law. The former it finds problematic, while the latter it argues provides a moral space to justify the use of force to halt gross breaches of natural law. Although such an approach may provide a moral justification for war, it also opens the door to abuse. It was this very problem that legal positivism from Vattel onwards was designed to address. As a result, the article argues that natural law and legal positivist arguments should be understood as complementary sets of ideas whose sometimes competing claims must be balanced in relation to particular cases. Therefore, although natural law may open a space for justifying the invasion of Iraq on humanitarian terms, legal positivism strictly limits that right. Ignoring this latter fact, as happened in the Iraq case, opens the door to abuse.

Referral to rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury: practitioners and the process of decision-making

The study aimed to examine the factors influencing referral to rehabilitation following traumatic brain injury (TBI) by using social problems theory as a conceptual model to focus on practitioners and the process of decision-making in two Australian hospitals. The research design involved semi-structured interviews with 18 practitioners and observations of 10 team meetings, and was part of a larger study on factors influencing referral to rehabilitation in the same settings. Analysis revealed that referral decisions were influenced primarily by practitioners' selection and their interpretation of clinical and non-clinical patient factors. Further, practitioners generally considered patient factors concurrently during an ongoing process of decision-making, with the combinations and interactions of these factors forming the basis for interpretations of problems and referral justifications. Key patient factors considered in referral decisions included functional and tracheostomy status, time since injury, age, family, place of residence and Indigenous status. However, rate and extent of progress, recovery potential, safety and burden of care, potential for independence and capacity to cope were five interpretative themes, which emerged as the justifications for referral decisions. The subsequent negotiation of referral based on patient factors was in turn shaped by the involvement of practitioners. While multi-disciplinary processes of decision-making were the norm, allied health professionals occupied a central role in referral to rehabilitation, and involvement of medical, nursing and allied health practitioners varied. Finally, the organizational pressures and resource constraints, combined with practitioners' assimilation of the broader efficiency agenda were central factors shaping referral. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Responsibility to protect or Trojan Horse? The crisis in darfur and humanitarian intervention after Iraq

What does the world's engagement with the unfolding crisis in Darfur tell us about the impact of the Iraq war on the norm of humanitarian intervention? Is a global consensus about a "responsibility to protect" more or less likely? There are at least three potential answers to these questions. Some argue that the merging of strategic interests and humanitarian goods amplified by the intervention in Afghanistan makes it more likely that the world's most powerful states will act to prevent or halt humanitarian crises. Others insist that the widespread perception that the United States and its allies "abused" humanitarian justifications to legitimate its invasion of Iraq has set back efforts to build a global consensus about humanitarian action. A third group argues that the "responsibility to protect" inhibits the potential for abuse and, as a result, consensus is likely to strengthen post-Iraq for precisely this reason. Through a detailed study of the international engagement with Darfur, I suggest that the latter two arguments have merit but need to be adjusted. I argue that the humanitarian intervention norm has changed in two subtle ways. First, while the strength of the norm itself has not changed, the credibility of the United States and U.K. as "norm carriers" has been significantly undermined. Second, while the "responsibility to protect" has been invoked to support international activism, it has also re-legitimated anti-interventionist arguments.