[Killing and dignity of animals: a problem for veterinarians?]

Killing of animals is an important task to be performed by veterinarians. Killing decisions and their implementation often raise ethical questions. As a result of an interdisciplinary workshop targeting the subject "killing of animals" with veterinarians and ethicists, a three-dimensional dimension scheme was developed. Whereas the first two dimensions are focused on the animal's past and future life and are discussed with regard to life quality and life accomplishment (the "telos"), the third dimension incorporates the reason to kill and may integrate the concept of dignity. This form of dignity and the weighing of interests are applied to example scenarios and the resulting responsibilities of veterinarians and society are discussed.

Rationale and first results of developing at-risk (prodromal) criteria for bipolar disorder

Bipolar affective disorder (BD) is a severe, recurrent and disabling disorder with devastating consequences for individuals, families and society. Although these hazards and costs provide a compelling rationale for development of early detection and early intervention strategies in BD, the development of at-risk criteria for first episode mania is still in an early stage of development. In this paper we review the literature with respect to the clinical, neuroantomical and neuropsychological data, which support this goal. We also describe our recently developed bipolar at-risk criteria (BAR). This criteria comprises the peak age range of the first onset of bipolar disorder, genetic risk, presenting with sub-threshold mania, cyclothymic features or depressive symptoms. An initial pilot evaluation of the BAR criteria in 22 subjects indicated conversion rates to proxies of first-episode mania of 23% within 265 days on average, and high specificity and sensitivity of the criteria. If prospective studies confirm the validity of the BAR criteria, then the criteria would have the potential to open up new avenues of research for indicated prevention in BD and might therefore offer opportunities to ameliorate the severity of, or even prevent BD.

The Dynamics of the Policies of Ethnic Cleansing in Silesia in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries

Through studying German, Polish and Czech publications on Silesia, Mr. Kamusella found that most of them, instead of trying to objectively analyse the past, are devoted to proving some essential "Germanness", "Polishness" or "Czechness" of this region. He believes that the terminology and thought-patterns of nationalist ideology are so deeply entrenched in the minds of researchers that they do not consider themselves nationalist. However, he notes that, due to the spread of the results of the latest studies on ethnicity/nationalism (by Gellner, Hobsbawm, Smith, Erikson Buillig, amongst others), German publications on Silesia have become quite objective since the 1980s, and the same process (impeded by under funding) has been taking place in Poland and the Czech Republic since 1989. His own research totals some 500 pages, in English, presented on disc. So what are the traps into which historians have been inclined to fall? There is a tendency for them to treat Silesia as an entity which has existed forever, though Mr. Kamusella points out that it emerged as a region only at the beginning of the 11th century. These same historians speak of Poles, Czechs and Germans in Silesia, though Mr. Kamusella found that before the mid-19th century, identification was with an inhabitant's local area, religion or dynasty. In fact, a German national identity started to be forged in Prussian Silesia only during the Liberation War against Napoleon (1813-1815). It was concretised in 1861 in the form of the first Prussian census, when the language a citizen spoke was equated with his/her nationality. A similar census was carried out in Austrian Silesia only in 1881. The censuses forced the Silesians to choose their nationality despite their multiethnic multicultural identities. It was the active promotion of a German identity in Prussian Silesia, and Vienna's uneasy acceptance of the national identities in Austrian Silesia which stimulated the development of Polish national, Moravian ethnic and Upper Silesian ethnic regional identities in Upper Silesia, and Polish national, Czech national, Moravian ethnic and Silesian ethnic identities in Austrian Silesia. While traditional historians speak of the "nationalist struggle" as though it were a permanent characteristic of Silesia, Mr. Kamusella points out that such a struggle only developed in earnest after 1918. What is more, he shows how it has been conveniently forgotten that, besides the national players, there were also significant ethnic movements of Moravians, Upper Silesians, Silesians and the tutejsi (i.e. those who still chose to identify with their locality). At this point Mr. Kamusella moves into the area of linguistics. While traditionally historians have spoken of the conflicts between the three national languages (German, Polish and Czech), Mr Kamusella reminds us that the standardised forms of these languages, which we choose to dub "national", were developed only in the mid-18th century, after 1869 (when Polish became the official language in Galicia), and after the 1870s (when Czech became the official language in Bohemia). As for standard German, it was only widely promoted in Silesia from the mid 19th century onwards. In fact, the majority of the population of Prussian Upper Silesia and Austrian Silesia were bi- or even multilingual. What is more, the "Polish" and "Czech" Silesians spoke were not the standard languages we know today, but a continuum of West-Slavic dialects in the countryside and a continuum of West-Slavic/German creoles in the urbanised areas. Such was the linguistic confusion that, from time to time, some ethnic/regional and Church activists strove to create a distinctive Upper Silesian/Silesian language on the basis of these dialects/creoles, but their efforts were thwarted by the staunch promotion of standard German, and after 1918, of standard Polish and Czech. Still on the subject of language, Mr. Kamusella draws attention to a problem around the issue of place names and personal names. Polish historians use current Polish versions of the Silesian place names, Czechs use current Polish/Czech versions of the place names, and Germans use the German versions which were in use in Silesia up to 1945. Mr. Kamusella attempted to avoid this, as he sees it, nationalist tendency, by using an appropriate version of a place name for a given period and providing its modern counterpart in parentheses. In the case of modern place names he gives the German version in parentheses. As for the name of historical figures, he strove to use the name entered on the birth certificate of the person involved, and by doing so avoid such confusion as, for instance, surrounds the Austrian Silesian pastor L.J. Sherschnik, who in German became Scherschnick, in Polish, Szersznik, and in Czech, Sersnik. Indeed, the prospective Silesian scholar should, Mr. Kamusella suggests, as well as the three languages directly involved in the area itself, know English and French, since many documents and books on the subject have been published in these languages, and even Latin, when dealing in depth with the period before the mid-19th century. Mr. Kamusella divides the policies of ethnic cleansing into two categories. The first he classifies as soft, meaning that policy is confined to the educational system, army, civil service and the church, and the aim is that everyone learn the language of the dominant group. The second is the group of hard policies, which amount to what is popularly labelled as ethnic cleansing. This category of policy aims at the total assimilation and/or physical liquidation of the non-dominant groups non-congruent with the ideal of homogeneity of a given nation-state. Mr. Kamusella found that soft policies were consciously and systematically employed by Prussia/Germany in Prussian Silesia from the 1860s to 1918, whereas in Austrian Silesia, Vienna quite inconsistently dabbled in them from the 1880s to 1917. In the inter-war period, the emergence of the nation-states of Poland and Czechoslovakia led to full employment of the soft policies and partial employment of the hard ones (curbed by the League of Nations minorities protection system) in Czechoslovakian Silesia, German Upper Silesia and the Polish parts of Upper and Austrian Silesia. In 1939-1945, Berlin started consistently using all the "hard" methods to homogenise Polish and Czechoslovakian Silesia which fell, in their entirety, within the Reich's borders. After World War II Czechoslovakia regained its prewar part of Silesia while Poland was given its prewar section plus almost the whole of the prewar German province. Subsequently, with the active involvement and support of the Soviet Union, Warsaw and Prague expelled the majority of Germans from Silesia in 1945-1948 (there were also instances of the Poles expelling Upper Silesian Czechs/Moravians, and of the Czechs expelling Czech Silesian Poles/pro-Polish Silesians). During the period of communist rule, the same two countries carried out a thorough Polonisation and Czechisation of Silesia, submerging this region into a new, non-historically based administrative division. Democratisation in the wake of the fall of communism, and a gradual retreat from the nationalist ideal of the homogeneous nation-state with a view to possible membership of the European Union, caused the abolition of the "hard" policies and phasing out of the "soft" ones. Consequently, limited revivals of various ethnic/national minorities have been observed in Czech and Polish Silesia, whereas Silesian regionalism has become popular in the westernmost part of Silesia which remained part of Germany. Mr. Kamusella believes it is possible that, with the overcoming of the nation-state discourse in European politics, when the expression of multiethnicity and multilingualism has become the cause of the day in Silesia, regionalism will hold sway in this region, uniting its ethnically/nationally variegated population in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity championed by the European Union.

Through the back door : Melungeon literacies and 21st century technologies

The Melungeons, a minority recognized in Southern Appalachia where they settled in the early 1800s, have mixed heritage—European, Mediterranean, Native American, and Sub-Saharan African. Their dark skin and distinctive features have marked them and been the cause of racial persecution both by custom and by law in Appalachia for two centuries. Their marginalization has led to an insider mentality, which I call a “literacy” of Melungeon-ness that affects every facet of their lives. Just a century ago, while specialized practices such as farming, preserving food, hunting, gathering, and distilling insured survival in the unforgiving mountain environment, few Melungeons could read or write. Required to pay property taxes and render military service, they were denied education, suffrage, and other legal rights. In the late 1890s visionary Melungeon leader Batey Collins invited Presbyterian homemissionaries to settle in one Tennessee Melungeon community where they established a church and built a school of unparalleled excellence. Educator-ministers Mary Rankin and Chester Leonard creatively reified the theories of Dewey, Montessori, and Rauschenbusch, but, despite their efforts, school literacy did not neutralize difference. Now, taking reading and writing for granted, Melungeons are exploring their identity by creating websites and participating in listserv discussions. These online expressions, which provide texts for rhetorical, semiotic, and socio-linguistic analysis, illustrate not solidarity but fragmentation on issues of origins and legitimacy. Armed with literacies of difference stemming from both nature and nurture, Melungeons are using literacy practices to embrace the difference they cannot escape.

Subverting the subject position : toward a new discourse about students as writers and engineering students as technical communicators

There is ample evidence of a longstanding and pervasive discourse positioning students, and engineering students in particular, as “bad writers.” This is a discourse perpetuated within the academy, the workplace, and society at large. But what are the effects of this discourse? Are students aware faculty harbor the belief students can’t write? Is student writing or confidence in their writing influenced by the negative tone of the discourse? This dissertation attempts to demonstrate that a discourse disparaging student writing exists among faculty, across disciplines, but particularly within the engineering disciplines, as well as to identify the reach of that discourse through the deployment of two attitudinal surveys—one for students, across disciplines, at Michigan Technological University and one for faculty, across disciplines at universities and colleges both within the United States and internationally. This project seeks to contribute to a more accurate and productive discourse about engineering students, and more broadly, all students, as writers—one that focuses on competencies rather than incompetence, one that encourages faculty to find new ways to characterize students as writers, and encourages faculty to recognize the limits of the utility of practitioner lore.

Past is Prologue: Montana’s Historic Women’s Movement Re-emerges in the Progressive 1970s -- Dorothy Bradley, Marilyn Wessel & Jane Jelinski “In the Crucible of Change”

One-hundred years ago, in 1914, male voters in Montana (MT) extended suffrage (voting rights) to women six years before the 19th Amendment to the US Constitution was ratified and provided that right to women in all states. The long struggle for women’s suffrage was energized in the progressive era and Jeanette Rankin of Missoula emerged as a leader of the campaign; in 1912 both major MT political party platforms supported women suffrage. In the 1914 election, 41,000 male voters supported woman suffrage while nearly 38,000 opposed it. MT was not only ahead of the curve on women suffrage, but just two years later in 1916 elected Jeanette Rankin as the first woman ever elected to the United States Congress. Rankin became a national leader for women's equality. In her commitment to equality, she opposed US entry into World War I, partially because she said she could not support men being made to go to war if women were not allowed to serve alongside them. During MT’s initial progressive era, women in MT not only pursued equality for themselves (the MT Legislature passed an equal pay act in 1919), but pursued other social improvements, such as temperance/prohibition. Well-known national women leaders such as Carrie Nation and others found a welcome in MT during the period. Women's role in the trade union movement was evidenced in MT by the creation of the Women's Protective Union in Butte, the first union in America dedicated solely to women workers. But Rankin’s defeat following her vote against World War I was used as a way for opponents to advocate a conservative, traditionalist perspective on women's rights in MT. Just as we then entered a period in MT where the “copper collar” was tightened around MT economically and politically by the Anaconda Company and its allies, we also found a different kind of conservative, traditionalist collar tightened around the necks of MT women. The recognition of women's role during World War II, represented by “Rosie the Riveter,” made it more difficult for that conservative, traditionalist approach to be forever maintained. In addition, women's role in MT agriculture – family farms and ranches -- spoke strongly to the concept of equality, as farm wives were clearly active partners in the agricultural enterprises. But rural MT was, by and large, the bastion of conservative values relative to the position of women in society. As the period of “In the Crucible of Change” began, the 1965 MT Legislature included only three women. In 1967 and 1969 only one woman legislator served. In 1971 the number went up to two, including one of our guests, Dorothy Bradley. It was only after the Constitutional Convention, which featured 19 women delegates, that the barrier was broken. The 1973 Legislature saw 9 women elected. The 1975 and 1977 sessions had 14 women legislators; 15 were elected for the 1979 session. At that time progressive women and men in the Legislature helped implement the equality provisions of the new MT Constitution, ratified the federal Equal Rights Amendment in 1974, and held back national and local conservatives forces which sought in later Legislatures to repeal that ratification. As with the national movement at the time, MT women sought and often succeeded in adopting legal mechanisms that protected women’s equality, while full equality in the external world remained (and remains) a treasured objective. The story of the re-emergence of Montana’s women’s movement in the 1970s is discussed in this chapter by three very successful and prominent women who were directly involved in the effort: Dorothy Bradley, Marilyn Wessel, and Jane Jelinski. Their recollections of the political, sociological and cultural path Montana women pursued in the 1970s and the challenges and opposition they faced provide an insider’s perspective of the battle for equality for women under the Big Sky “In the Crucible of Change.” Dorothy Bradley grew up in Bozeman, Montana; received her Bachelor of Arts Phi Beta Kappa from Colorado College, Colorado Springs, in 1969 with a Distinction in Anthropology; and her Juris Doctor from American University in Washington, D.C., in 1983. In 1970, at the age of 22, following the first Earth Day and running on an environmental platform, Ms. Bradley won a seat in the 1971 Montana House of Representatives where she served as the youngest member and only woman. Bradley established a record of achievement on environmental & progressive legislation for four terms, before giving up the seat to run a strong second to Pat Williams for the Democratic nomination for an open seat in Montana’s Western Congressional District. After becoming an attorney and an expert on water law, she returned to the Legislature for 4 more terms in the mid-to-late 1980s. Serving a total of eight terms, Dorothy was known for her leadership on natural resources, tax reform, economic development, and other difficult issues during which time she gained recognition for her consensus-building approach. Campaigning by riding her horse across the state, Dorothy was the Democratic nominee for Governor in 1992, losing the race by less than a percentage point. In 1993 she briefly taught at a small rural school next to the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation. She was then hired as the Director of the Montana University System Water Center, an education and research arm of Montana State University. From 2000 - 2008 she served as the first Gallatin County Court Administrator with the task of collaboratively redesigning the criminal justice system. She currently serves on One Montana’s Board, is a National Advisor for the American Prairie Foundation, and is on NorthWestern Energy’s Board of Directors. Dorothy was recognized with an Honorary Doctorate from her alma mater, Colorado College, was named Business Woman of the Year by the Bozeman Chamber of Commerce and MSU Alumni Association, and was Montana Business and Professional Women’s Montana Woman of Achievement. Marilyn Wessel was born in Iowa, lived and worked in Los Angeles, California, and Washington, D.C. before moving to Bozeman in 1972. She has an undergraduate degree in journalism from Iowa State University, graduate degree in public administration from Montana State University, certification from the Harvard University Institute for Education Management, and served a senior internship with the U.S. Congress, Montana delegation. In Montana Marilyn has served in a number of professional positions, including part-time editor for the Montana Cooperative Extension Service, News Director for KBMN Radio, Special Assistant to the President and Director of Communications at Montana State University, Director of University Relations at Montana State University and Dean and Director of the Museum of the Rockies at MSU. Marilyn retired from MSU as Dean Emeritus in 2003. Her past Board Service includes Montana State Merit System Council, Montana Ambassadors, Vigilante Theater Company, Montana State Commission on Practice, Museum of the Rockies, Helena Branch of the Ninth District Federal Reserve Bank, Burton K. Wheeler Center for Public Policy, Bozeman Chamber of Commerce, and Friends of KUSM Public Television. Marilyn’s past publications and productions include several articles on communications and public administration issues as well as research, script preparation and presentation of several radio documentaries and several public television programs. She is co-author of one book, 4-H An American Idea: A History of 4-H. Marilyn’s other past volunteer activities and organizations include Business and Professional Women, Women's Political Caucus, League of Women Voters, and numerous political campaigns. She is currently engaged professionally in museum-related consulting and part-time teaching at Montana State University as well as serving on the Editorial Board of the Bozeman Daily Chronicle and a member of Pilgrim Congregational Church and Family Promise. Marilyn and her husband Tom, a retired MSU professor, live in Bozeman. She enjoys time with her children and grandchildren, hiking, golf, Italian studies, cooking, gardening and travel. Jane Jelinski is a Wisconsin native, with a BA from Fontbonne College in St. Louis, MO who taught fifth and seventh grades prior to moving to Bozeman in 1973. A stay-at-home mom with a five year old daughter and an infant son, she was promptly recruited by the Gallatin Women’s Political Caucus to conduct a study of Sex-Role Stereotyping in K Through 6 Reading Text Books in the Bozeman School District. Sociologist Dr. Louise Hale designed the study and did the statistical analysis and Jane read all the texts, entered the data and wrote the report. It was widely disseminated across Montana and received attention of the press. Her next venture into community activism was to lead the successful effort to downzone her neighborhood which was under threat of encroaching business development. Today the neighborhood enjoys the protections of a Historic Preservation District. During this time she earned her MPA from Montana State University. Subsequently Jane founded the Gallatin Advocacy Program for Developmentally Disabled Adults in 1978 and served as its Executive Director until her appointment to the Gallatin County Commission in 1984, a controversial appointment which she chronicled in the Fall issue of the Gallatin History Museum Quarterly. Copies of the issue can be ordered through: http://gallatinhistorymuseum.org/the-museum-bookstore/shop/. Jane was re-elected three times as County Commissioner, serving fourteen years. She was active in the Montana Association of Counties (MACO) and was elected its President in 1994. She was also active in the National Association of Counties, serving on numerous policy committees. In 1998 Jane resigned from the County Commission 6 months before the end of her final term to accept the position of Assistant Director of MACO, from where she lobbied for counties, provided training and research for county officials, and published a monthly newsletter. In 2001 she became Director of the MSU Local Government Center where she continued to provide training and research for county and municipal officials across MT. There she initiated the Montana Mayors Academy in partnership with MMIA. She taught State and Local Government, Montana Politics and Public Administration in the MSU Political Science Department before retiring in 2008. Jane has been married to Jack for 46 years, has two grown children and three grandchildren.

The Impact of Western Social Workers in Romania - a Fine Line between Empowerment and Disempowerment

Ideally the social work profession promotes social change, problem solving in human relationships and the empowerment and liberation of people to enhance their well-being (IFSW 2004). The social work practice, however, often proves to be different. Social workers are always in the danger to make decisions for their clients or define problems according to their own interpretation and world view. In quite a number of cases, the consequence of such a social work practice is that the clients feel disempowered rather than empowered. This dilemma is multiplying when western social workers get involved in developing countries. The potential that intervention, with the intention to empower and liberate the people, turns into disempowerment is tremendously higher because of the differences in tradition, culture and society, on the one side and the power imbalance between the ‘West’ and the ‘Rest’ on the other side. Especially in developing countries, where the vast majority of people live in poverty, many Western social workers come with a lot of sympathy and the idea to help the poor and to change the world. An example is Romania. After the collapse of communism in 1989, Romania was an economically, politically and socially devastated country. The pictures of the orphanages shocked the western world. As a result many Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), churches and individuals were bringing humanitarian goods to Romania in order to alleviate the misery of the Romanian people and especially the children. Since then, important changes in all areas of life have occurred, mostly with foreign financial aid and support. At the political level, democratic institutions were established, a liberal market economy was launched and laws were adapted to western standards regarding the accession into the European Union and the NATO. The western world has left its marks also at the grassroots level in form of NGOs or social service agencies established through western grants and individuals. Above and beyond, the presence of western goods and investment in Romania is omnipresent. This reflects a newly-gained freedom and prosperity - Romania profits certainly from these changes. But this is only one side of the medal, as the effect of westernisation contradicts with the Romanian reality and overruns many deep-rooted traditions, thus the majority of people. Moreover, only a small percentage of the population has access to this western world. Western concepts, procedures or interpretations are often highly differing from the Romanian tradition, history and culture. Nevertheless, western ideas seem to dominate the transition in many areas of daily life in Romania. A closer look reveals that many changes take place due to pressure of western governments and are conditioned to financial support. The dialectic relationship between the need for foreign aid and the implementation becomes very obvious in Romania and often leads, despite the substantial benefits, to unpredictable and rather negative side-effects, at a political, social, cultural, ecological and/or economic level. This reality is a huge dilemma for all those involved, as there is a fine line between empowering and disempowering action. It is beyond the scope of this journal to discuss the dilemma posed by Western involvement at all levels; therefore this article focuses on the impact of Western social workers in Romania. The first part consists of a short introduction to social work in Romania, followed by the discussion about the dilemma posed by the structure of project of international social work and the organisation of private social service agencies. Thirdly the experiences of Romanian staff with Western social workers are presented and then discussed with regard to turning disempowering tendencies of Western social workers into empowerment.

Education and Ideologies of the Knowledge Economy: Europe and the Politics of Emulation

The Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein famously proposed a style of philosophy that was directed against certain pictures [bild] that tacitly direct our language and forms of life. His aim was to show the fly the way out of the fly bottle and to fight against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language: “A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably” (Wittgenstein 1953, 115). In this context Wittgenstein is talking of philosophical pictures, deep metaphors that have structured our language but he does also use the term picture in other contexts (see Owen 2003, 83). I want to appeal to Wittgenstein in my use of the term ideology to refer to the way in which powerful underlying metaphors in neoclassical economics have a strong rhetorical and constitutive force at the level of public policy. Indeed, I am specifically speaking of the notion of ‘the performative’ in Wittgenstein and Austin. The notion of the knowledge economy has a prehistory in Hayek (1937; 1945) who founded the economics of knowledge in the 1930s, in Machlup (1962; 1970), who mapped the emerging employment shift to the US service economy in the early 1960s, and to sociologists Bell (1973) and Touraine (1974) who began to tease out the consequences of these changes for social structure in the post-industrial society in the early 1970s. The term has been taken up since by economists, sociologists, futurists and policy experts recently to explain the transition to the so-called ‘new economy’. It is not just a matter of noting these discursive strands in the genealogy of the ‘knowledge economy’ and related or cognate terms. We can also make a number of observations on the basis of this brief analysis. First, there has been a succession of terms like ‘postindustrial economy’, ‘information economy’, ‘knowledge economy’, ‘learning economy’, each with a set of related concepts emphasising its social, political, management or educational aspects. Often these literatures are not cross-threading and tend to focus on only one aspect of phenomena leading to classic dichotomies such as that between economy and society, knowledge and information. Second, these terms and their family concepts are discursive, historical and ideological products in the sense that they create their own meanings and often lead to constitutive effects at the level of policy. Third, while there is some empirical evidence to support claims concerning these terms, at the level of public policy these claims are empirically underdetermined and contain an integrating, visionary or futures component, which necessarily remains untested and is, perhaps, in principle untestable.