We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This volume introduces the legal philosopher Adolf Reinach and his contributions to speech act theory, as well as his analysis of basic legal concepts and their relationship to positive law. Reinach's thorough analysis has recently garnered growing interest in private law theory, yet his 'phenomenological realist' philosophical approach is not in line with contemporary mainstream approaches. The essays in this volume resuscitate and interrogate Reinach's unique account of the foundations of private law, situating him in contemporary private law theory and broader philosophical currents. The work also makes Reinach's methods more accessible to those unfamiliar with early phenomenology. Together these contributions prove that while Reinach's perspective on private law shares similarities and points of departure with trends in today's legal theory, many of his insights remain singular and illuminating in their own right. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.
Although the link between alcohol involvement and behavioral phenotypes (e.g. impulsivity, negative affect, executive function [EF]) is well-established, the directionality of these associations, specificity to stages of alcohol involvement, and extent of shared genetic liability remain unclear. We estimate longitudinal associations between transitions among alcohol milestones, behavioral phenotypes, and indices of genetic risk.
Methods
Data came from the Collaborative Study on the Genetics of Alcoholism (n = 3681; ages 11–36). Alcohol transitions (first: drink, intoxication, alcohol use disorder [AUD] symptom, AUD diagnosis), internalizing, and externalizing phenotypes came from the Semi-Structured Assessment for the Genetics of Alcoholism. EF was measured with the Tower of London and Visual Span Tasks. Polygenic scores (PGS) were computed for alcohol-related and behavioral phenotypes. Cox models estimated associations among PGS, behavior, and alcohol milestones.
Results
Externalizing phenotypes (e.g. conduct disorder symptoms) were associated with future initiation and drinking problems (hazard ratio (HR)⩾1.16). Internalizing (e.g. social anxiety) was associated with hazards for progression from first drink to severe AUD (HR⩾1.55). Initiation and AUD were associated with increased hazards for later depressive symptoms and suicidal ideation (HR⩾1.38), and initiation was associated with increased hazards for future conduct symptoms (HR = 1.60). EF was not associated with alcohol transitions. Drinks per week PGS was linked with increased hazards for alcohol transitions (HR⩾1.06). Problematic alcohol use PGS increased hazards for suicidal ideation (HR = 1.20).
Conclusions
Behavioral markers of addiction vulnerability precede and follow alcohol transitions, highlighting dynamic, bidirectional relationships between behavior and emerging addiction.
Several hypotheses may explain the association between substance use, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and depression. However, few studies have utilized a large multisite dataset to understand this complex relationship. Our study assessed the relationship between alcohol and cannabis use trajectories and PTSD and depression symptoms across 3 months in recently trauma-exposed civilians.
Methods
In total, 1618 (1037 female) participants provided self-report data on past 30-day alcohol and cannabis use and PTSD and depression symptoms during their emergency department (baseline) visit. We reassessed participant's substance use and clinical symptoms 2, 8, and 12 weeks posttrauma. Latent class mixture modeling determined alcohol and cannabis use trajectories in the sample. Changes in PTSD and depression symptoms were assessed across alcohol and cannabis use trajectories via a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of variance.
Results
Three trajectory classes (low, high, increasing use) provided the best model fit for alcohol and cannabis use. The low alcohol use class exhibited lower PTSD symptoms at baseline than the high use class; the low cannabis use class exhibited lower PTSD and depression symptoms at baseline than the high and increasing use classes; these symptoms greatly increased at week 8 and declined at week 12. Participants who already use alcohol and cannabis exhibited greater PTSD and depression symptoms at baseline that increased at week 8 with a decrease in symptoms at week 12.
Conclusions
Our findings suggest that alcohol and cannabis use trajectories are associated with the intensity of posttrauma psychopathology. These findings could potentially inform the timing of therapeutic strategies.
The objective of this study is to determine the physical evaluations and assessment tools used by a group of Canadian healthcare professionals treating adults with spasticity.
Methods:
A cross-sectional web-based 19-question survey was developed to determine the types of physical evaluations, tone-related impairment measurements, and assessment tools used in the management of adults with spasticity. The survey was distributed to healthcare professionals from the Canadian Advances in Neuro-Orthopedics for Spasticity Congress database.
Results:
Eighty study participants (61 physiatrists and 19 other healthcare professionals) completed the survey and were included. Nearly half (46.3%, 37/80) of the participants reported having an inter- or trans-disciplinary team managing individuals with spasticity. Visual observation of movement, available range of motion determination, tone during velocity-dependent passive range of motion looking for a spastic catch, spasticity, and clonus, and evaluation of gait were the most frequently used physical evaluations. The most frequently used spasticity tools were the Modified Ashworth Scale, goniometer, and Goal Attainment Scale. Results were similar in brain- and spinal cord-predominant etiologies. To evaluate goals, qualitative description was used most (37.5%).
Conclusion:
Our findings provide a better understanding of the spasticity management landscape in Canada with respect to staffing, physical evaluations, and outcome measurements used in clinical practice. For all etiologies of spasticity, visual observation of patient movement, Modified Ashworth Scale, and qualitative goal outcomes descriptions were most commonly used to guide treatment and optimize outcomes. Understanding the current practice of spasticity assessment will help provide guidance for clinical evaluation and management of spasticity.
This chapter examines two modalities of equitable intervention in corporate governance in cases of shareholder conflict. The first involves the extension of fiduciary duties to controlling shareholders, and the second judicial review on the grounds of oppression. Both forms of intervention are intended to be responsive to pathologies inherent in majoritarian governance in organizations featuring enfranchised members. Notwithstanding long-settled authority in Delaware and other American states for the proposition that controlling shareholders are fiduciaries of minority shareholders, I argue that fiduciary regulation is an inapt modality of equitable intervention given the nature of the problems generated by majority rule in corporations. By comparison, the oppression remedy—favored in commonwealth jurisdictions—enables more apt and effective tailored responses to these problems. The choice between these modalities of intervention implicates a choice between equity’s supplemental contributions to first-order law and its corrective, second-order intervention in first-order law. The chapter concludes with some general reflections on the place of equity in contemporary law.
This article provides an overview of selected ongoing international efforts that have been inspired by Edward Zigler's vision to improve programs and policies for young children and families in the United States. The efforts presented are in close alignment with three strategies articulated by Edward Zigler: (a) conduct research that will inform policy advocacy; (b) design, implement, and revise quality early childhood development (ECD) programs; and (c) invest in building the next generation of scholars and advocates in child development. The intergenerational legacy left by Edward Zigler has had an impact on young children not only in the United States, but also across the globe. More needs to be done. We need to work together with a full commitment to ensure the optimal development of each child.
We begin with two bibliographical observations. First, scholarly interest in trust is no recent phenomenon, but lately there has been a flowering of academic literature studying numerous dimensions of trust from the standpoints of philosophy, economics, sociology and psychology. The depth and richness of this literature is impressive but hardly surprising, given that trust itself is a notoriously complex, elusive and fact-specific phenomenon. Secondly, scholarly interest in the fiduciary principle that plays such a central role in common law legal systems with a tradition of equity was scarce until the late twentieth century. However, that situation has most definitely changed (for the better), and we now enjoy an abundance of scholarship exploring the fiduciary principle in private law. Moreover, there is a growing body of work exploring ideas of fiduciary government and international law. Scholars are puzzling over fiduciaries and trust as never before.
Political (Dis)Trust and Fiduciary Government analyzes the relationship between two key ideas in modern political thought: political trust and fiduciary government. The chapter begins with fiduciary government. Miller distinguishes ‘thick’ from ‘thin’ variants on the idea of fiduciary government. Thick variants place substantial normative weight on the idea, claiming, for example, that it solves the problem of political authority and provides an independent normative basis for the recognition of specific legal rights. Thin variants make much more modest claims. Miller’s own thin account, deployed here, suggests that fiduciary government articulates conditions under which the conduct of government can be understood as truly representative. By comparison with this thin conception of fiduciary government, an understanding of political trust as a particularized (or focused) and objective (or manifest) form of trust shown (or withheld) by citizens in public officials does distinct work. Briefly: it illuminates understanding of the political conditions and activity on which fiduciary government depends. That said, Miller also notes that ideals of fiduciary government and of political trust, where instantiated, dovetail: demands of fiduciary government enable public officials to prove trustworthy in ways that promote political trust, while also creating space for constructive forms of political distrust.
Systematic analysis of fiduciaries and trust is rare. The aim of this volume is to help fill this gap. The chapters explore the interactions of fiduciary law and trust, drawing on literatures on trust that have been generated in a variety of disciplines. They do so with an eye to the full scope of extension claimed for the fiduciary principle, from its heartland in private law, to its frontiers in public law and government more broadly. Overall, the volume advances an integrated and wide-ranging understanding of the relation of fiduciaries and trust that illuminates key legal and political problems, and challenges and deepens our understanding of fiduciaries and trust themselves.