Trauma Affect Regulation Psychoeducation Group and Milieu Intervention Outcomes in Juvenile Detention Facilities

This article reports outcomes of Trauma Affect Regulation: Guide for Education and Therapy (TARGET), a group and milieu intervention, in three juvenile detention facilities, controlling for site, length of stay, ethnicity, number of arrests, mental health and traumatic stress problems, and cohort effects. Linear multiple regression results showed that every session of TARGET received in the first seven days of detention was associated with 54% fewer disciplinary incidents and 72 fewer minutes of disciplinary seclusion ( p < .001) for each youth during the modal stay (14 days) in detention. TARGET group participation was unrelated to recidivism, but recidivism declined significantly following implementation of TARGET. Implementing TARGET in juvenile detention facility milieus might improve safety, reduce punitive sanctions, and potentially reduce recidivism.     

School-Based Services for Pregnant and Parenting Adolescents

The literature on adolescent pregnancy and parenthood is reviewed from the standpoint of services which can be provided within school settings, and in which special services personnel can play a central role. Five potential service areas are discussed: school-based student child care, contraception information and distribution, sexuality values clarification, improvement of parenting skills, and case management/counseling. Exemplary programs are identified and discussed within each of these five areas, and program elements and implementation issues are discussed.     

How WEIRD are positive psychology interventions? A bibliometric analysis of randomized controlled trials on the science of well-being

ABSTRACT

The past two decades have witnessed a rapid rise in well-being research, and a profusion of empirical studies on positive psychology interventions (PPIs). This bibliometric analysis quantifies the extent to which rigorous research on PPIs that employ randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reaches beyond Western Educated Industrialized Rich Democratic (WEIRD) populations. A search was conducted through databases including PubMed, PsycINFO, and Scopus for studies from 1998 to 2017. In total, we found 187 full-text articles that included 188 RCTs from 24 countries. We found that RCTs on the efficacy of PPIs are still predominately conducted in western countries, which accounted for 78.2% of the studies. All these countries are highly industrialized and democratic, and study populations are often highly educated and have a high income. However, there has been a strong and steady increase in publications from non-Western countries since 2012, indicating a trend towards globalization of positive psychology research.     

Human rights,transnational actors and the Chinese government: Another look at the spiral model

This article assesses the usefulness of Thomas Risse, Stephen Ropp and Kathryn Sikkink's spiral model as an explanation of the changes in the Chinese government's human rights practices from the time of the ‘anti-rightist’ campaign in 1957–1958 to the end of 2003. It is concluded that the spiral model has provided a valid explanation for many of the changes in the Chinese government's human rights practices, and its responses to its internal and external critics, over this time period. Many of the responses of the transnational human rights network and the Chinese government by the end of this period indicate that the latter had progressed to phase three of the model. It is also concluded that the spiral model only conceptualises part of the constitutive relationship between the target state and international human rights norms—the influence of these norms on the identities, interests and behaviours of a target state. It does not conceptualise the influence of a target state on international human rights norms or the transnational human rights network. Therefore, the spiral model cannot explain why the Chinese government has had such a significant influence over the enforcement mechanisms of these norms.     

In defence of global egalitarianism

This essay argues that David Miller's criticisms of global egalitarianism do not undermine the view where it is stated in one of its stronger, luck egalitarian forms. The claim that global egalitarianism cannot specify a metric of justice which is broad enough to exclude spurious claims for redistribution, but precise enough to appropriately value different kinds of advantage, implicitly assumes that cultural understandings are the only legitimate way of identifying what counts as advantage. But that is an assumption always or almost always rejected by global egalitarianism. The claim that global egalitarianism demands either too little redistribution, leaving the unborn and dissenters burdened with their societies' imprudent choices, or too much redistribution, creating perverse incentives by punishing prudent decisions, only presents a problem for global luck egalitarianism on the assumption that nations can legitimately inherit assets from earlier generations – again, an assumption very much at odds with global egalitarian assumptions.     

Justice and the distribution of greenhouse gas emissions1

The prospect of dangerous climate change requires Humanity to limit the emission of greenhouse gases. This in turn raises the question of how the permission to emit greenhouse gases should be distributed and among whom. In this article the author criticises three principles of distributive justice that have often been advanced in this context. He also argues that the predominantly statist way in which the question is framed occludes some morally relevant considerations. The latter part of the article turns from critique and advances a new way of addressing the problem. In particular, first, it proposes four key theses that should guide our normative analysis; and, second, it outlines how these four theses can be realised in practice.     

Completing the incomplete: a defense of positive obligations to distant others

Global justice is, at its core, about moral obligations to distant others. But which obligations ought to be included is a matter of considerable debate. In the discussion that follows I will explicate and challenge two objections to the inclusion of foundationally positive obligations in our account of global justice. The first objection is based on the proposition that negative obligations possess and positive obligations lack a property necessary for a moral demand to be a matter justice. The second objection is that even the most trivial positive obligation becomes overly burdensome when applied to the global arena. And, though I do not offer any particular substantive account of positive obligations to distant others; I assess some of the implications that would arise were positive obligations to distant others to be included in our account of global justice.     

Justice and peaceful cooperation

Justice is important, but so is peaceful cooperation. In this article, I argue that if one takes seriously the autonomy of individuals and groups and the fact of moral pluralism, a just system of cooperation cannot guarantee peaceful cooperation in a pluralistic world. As a response to this consideration, I develop a contractarian theory that can secure peace in a pluralistic world of autonomous agents, assuming that the agents who exist in this world expect that peaceful cooperation is the most beneficial form of interaction for them in the long run. The theory specifies the restrictions on the behavior of autonomous individual and collective agents that are indispensable for peaceful cooperation in a pluralistic world. In particular, I argue for the need of (i) a globally valid rule of conflict resolution to settle all intra- and inter-group conflicts that cannot be resolved locally, (ii) a world court to apply this rule in cases where local group authorities are inadequate to do so, and to serve as a final court of appeal, and (iii) a world police to enforce the rule.     

Just open borders? Examining Joseph Carens' open borders argument in the light of a case study of recent Somali migrants to the UK

This essay examines Joseph Carens' open borders argument in the light of a case study of recent Somali migrants to the UK. It argues that, although arguments for significantly more open borders are compelling, they must take into account existing domestic injustice in receiving states as well as existing global injustice.     

Notes on contributors

ABSTRACT

Climate engineering with stratospheric sulfate aerosol injections (SSAI) has the potential to reduce risks of injustice related to anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases. Relying on evidence from modeling studies, this paper makes the case that SSAI could have the potential to reduce many of the key physical risks of climate change identified by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Such risks carry potential injustice because they are often imposed on low-emitters who do not benefit from climate change. Because SSAI has the potential to reduce those risks, it thereby has the potential to reduce the injustice associated with anthropogenic emissions. While acknowledging important caveats, including uncertainty in modeling studies and the potential for SSAI to carry its own risks of injustice, the paper argues that there is a strong case for continued research into SSAI, especially if attention is paid to how it might be used to reduce emissions-driven injustice.