Selecting people randomly

This article considers what justification can be found for selecting randomly and in what circumstances it applies, including that of selecting patients to be treated by a scarce medical procedure. The author demonstrates that balancing the merits of fairness, common good, equal rights, and equal chance as they apply in various situations frequently leads to the conclusion that random selection may not be the most appropriate mode of selection. Broome acknowledges that, in the end, we may be forced to conclude that the only merit of random selection is the political one of guarding against partiality and oppression.     

The co-therapy relationship: Mutuality,agreement and client outcome

This project, utilizing a pretest and posttest design, studied interactions between co-therapists and the relationships of their interactions to client outcome. Six co-therapist pairs at a counseling center saw two clients in multiple treatments yielding twelve cases. The study investigated co-therapist relationships in regard to: (a) their level of mutuality or caring for their partners, (b) their ratings of the quality of their relationships, and (c) their agreement as to perceptions and behavior during sessions. Also investigated were: the relation of co-therapist interaction to client outcome and the personal growth of the therapists over the course of therapy. Results supported success claims of the literature concerning co-therapy.