Influence of light exposure during early life on the age of onset of bipolar disorder

BACKGROUND: Environmental conditions early in life may imprint the circadian system and influence response to environmental signals later in life. We previously determined that a large springtime increase in solar insolation at the onset location was associated with a younger age of onset of bipolar disorder, especially with a family history of mood disorders. This study investigated whether the hours of daylight at the birth location affected this association. METHODS: Data collected previously at 36 collection sites from 23 countries were available for 3896 patients with bipolar I disorder, born between latitudes of 1.4 N and 70.7 N, and 1.2 S and 41.3 S. Hours of daylight variables for the birth location were added to a base model to assess the relation between the age of onset and solar insolation. RESULTS: More hours of daylight at the birth location during early life was associated with an older age of onset, suggesting reduced vulnerability to the future circadian challenge of the springtime increase in solar insolation at the onset location. Addition of the minimum of the average monthly hours of daylight during the first 3 months of life improved the base model, with a significant positive relationship to age of onset. Coefficients for all other variables remained stable, significant and consistent with the base model. CONCLUSIONS: Light exposure during early life may have important consequences for those who are susceptible to bipolar disorder, especially at latitudes with little natural light in winter. This study indirectly supports the concept that early life exposure to light may affect the long term adaptability to respond to a circadian challenge later in life.

Negligence and the wrongdoing plaintiff: a corrective justice analysis

 The thesis demonstrates that the only legitimate basis for denying a claim in negligence arising out of an unlawful act by the plaintiff is the need to preserve the coherence of the legal system.

Jail up; crime down does not justify Australia becoming an incarceration nation

The imprisonment rate in Australia is at unprecedented high levels, both interms of actual prisoner numbers and the rate at which it is increasing. Forthe first time in recorded history the incarceration rate in Australia has morethan doubled in less than 25 years. Prison is the harshest form ofpunishment in our system of justice and imposes considerable hardship onoffenders. It also comes at a considerable financial cost to the community.Accordingly, the surge in prisoner numbers is a significant macro social,economic and legal development. The increase did not occur pursuant to anoverarching strategic plan and is an area that is under-researched. Theprison population increase has arisen as a result of a ‘tough on crime’approach that continues without any sign of abatement. The use ofimprisonment should only be increased if there is a demonstrable benefit tothe community. This article examines whether there is a sound rationalebehind the rising trend in prison numbers. The increasing incarceration ratehas coincided with a significant reduction in the crime rate. A causalconnection between the two events (increased prisoner numbers andreduced crime) could constitute a powerful argument in favour of the surgein prison numbers. However, an examination of the empirical data inAustralia fails to demonstrate even a tenable link between these events. Wealso conclude that at the theoretical level there is no rationale for theincreased use of imprisonment. If the imprisonment rate continues to rise,there is a risk of a prison and financial crisis similar to that currently beingexperienced in the United States, which has resulted in an extremecounter-reaction in the form of a retrospective reduction of some prison terms.

Migration and refugee law: principles and practice in Australia

Migration and refugee law and policy is fundamentally concerned with the choices that we as a nation make regarding the people that we allow into our community and to share our resources. Migration and Refugee Law: Principles and Practice in Australia 2nd Edition provides an overview of the legal principles governing the entry of people into Australia. The 2nd edition encompasses legislative amendments and significant judicial decisions to 2007. As well as dealing with migration and refugee law today, the book analyses the policy and moral considerations underpinning this area of law. This is especially so in relation to refugee law, which is one of the most divisive social issues of our time. The book suggests proposals for change and how this area of law can be made more coherent and principled. This book is written for all people who have an interest in migration and refugee law.

Rethinking the employer's summary dismissal power in the employment contract

 The principal subject of this thesis is the employer’s summary dismissal power under Australian contract law. Summary dismissal is by far the most brutal way that an employment relationship may end. Its suddenness can have long-lasting economic and psychological impacts upon the dismissed employee. However, the area has been neglected in legal scholarship. The result of this is that issues arising from the jurisprudence have not been the subject of critique and scrutiny, until now. This thesis addresses this gap in the scholarship. The thesis also proposes a new approach to resolving these disputes based on the proportionality concept. An employer's decision to dismiss its employees in this way should be commensurate to the detriment caused by the employee's actions. Therefore, one 'should not use a sledgehammer to crack a nut.'

The fallacy of punishing offenders for the deeds of others: an argument for abolishing offence prevalence as a sentencing aggravating consideration

Sentencing outcomes are often marked by a considerable degree ofunpredictability. A key reason for this is the large number of aggravating andmitigating considerations, some of which have unstable questionablefoundation. This article argues that one well-established aggravating factor —offence prevalence — should be abolished. Pragmatically, the courts have notestablished workable criteria or a process for establishing whether an offence isprevalent. From a normative perspective, increasing the penalty for prevalentoffences is unsound because defendants should be punished for their acts, notthose of other offenders. Further, on close analysis, all of the rationales (in theform of general deterrence, denunciation and specific deterrence) invoked tojustify offence prevalence do not do so. Abolishing one sentencing variable willnot make sentencing a significantly more coherent or predictable discipline, butthe methodology applied in this article can be used to assess the viability ofother sentencing considerations.

The irrelevance to sentencing of (most) incidental hardships suffered by offenders

Criminal offenders often experience hardships beyond the imposition of a court-imposed sanction. These hardships typically take a variety of forms, but can be grouped into a number of relatively well-established categories, including loss of employment, public opprobrium and injuries sustained during or around the time of the commission of the crime. Other examples are deportation from Australia and the imposition of traditional forms of punishment.1 Collectively, these harms are termed incidental hardships or extra-curial punishment.2 Formally, extra-curial punishment is defined as a ‘loss or detriment imposed on an offender by persons other than the sentencing court, for the purpose of punishing the offender for his [or her] offence or at least by reason of the offender having committed the offence’.

Sober assessment of the link between substance abuse and crime-eliminating drug and alcohol use from the sentencing calculus

The relevance of drug and alcohol involvement to sentencing law and practice is one of the most perplexing and unsettled areas of sentencing law and practice.1 It is also one of the most important issues in the criminal justice system. Most crimes are committed by offenders who are substance involved, and nearly half of all crimes that are committed are done so by offenders who are intoxicated at the time of the offense. Substance involved individuals are grossly over-represented in the criminal courts. Addiction and intoxication impair sound judgment, and hence, it intuitively appears that intoxicated offenders are less culpable for their crimes. Moreover, there is often a sense that addiction and intoxication causes aberrant behavior and that curing the substance involvement will lead to more prudent (law-abiding) conduct.

Saving the United States from lurching to another sentencing crisis: taking proportionality seriously and implementing fair fixed penalties

We make recommendations regarding how the United States cansignificantly lower its incarceration rate, while at the same time ensuring that community safety is not diminished. Moreover, we identify and recommend a consolidation and extension of the positive aspects of the current sentencing regime.