Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Half Title -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Dedication -- Table of Contents -- Foreword -- Preface -- Editors -- Contributors -- Section I: HISTORY OF DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE -- 1: Driving Under the Influence of Psychoactive Substances: A Historical Review -- Section II: OTHER HISTORICAL EVENTS OF INTEREST -- 2: Professor Robert F. Borkenstein: An Appreciation of His Life and Work -- 3: Epidemiology of Alcohol-Related Accidents and the Grand Rapids Study -- 4: The Analysis of Ethanol in Blood and Breath for Legal Purposes: A Historical Review -- Section III: FORENSIC ISSUES INVOLVING ALCOHOL -- 5: Use of Punishable Limits of Blood- and Breath-Alcohol Concentration in Traffic-Law Enforcement: Some Advantages and Limitations -- 6: Common Legal Challenges, Responses, and Court Decisions in Forensic Breath- and Blood-Alcohol Analysis -- 7: Quality Assurance in Forensic Breath-Alcohol Analysis -- 8: Pharmacokinetics of Ethanol: A Primer for Forensic Practitioners -- 9: Biomarkers for the Identification of Alcohol Use/Misuse -- Section IV: USE OF NON-ALCOHOL DRUGS AND IMPAIRED DRIVING -- 10: Driving Under the Influence of Non-alcohol Drugs: Review of Earlier Studies -- 11: Driving Under the Influence of Non-alcohol Drugs: Experimental Studies -- 12: Driving Under the Influence of Non-alcohol Drugs: Epidemiological Studies -- 13: International Trends in Alcohol and Drug Use Among Motor Vehicle Drivers -- Section V: EPIDEMIOLOGY, ENFORCEMENT, AND COUNTERMEASURES -- 14: Alcohol Limits and Public Safety -- 15: Methodologies for Establishing the Relationship Between Alcohol/Drug Use and Driving Impairment: Differences Between Epidemiological, Experimental, and Real-Case Studies -- 16: Vehicle Safety Features Aimed at Preventing Alcohol-Related Crashes.

This article is premised on the relation of technology and applied sciences with law. The three subjects are not only interwoven but cannot be protected and regulated without the viable use of law. The unprecedented advancement ofscientific innovations has far-reaching implication in virtually all ramifications of human endeavour. Technology is an invention created using science, which needs to be sustained by prudent management and law. The research goal is to narrow down a middle ground where all these independent fields can meet and share a symbiotic relationship without stifling each other. The research seeks to ascertain the knowledge and perception of selected university students of Nigeria and India, about Science, Law and Technology. The authors adopted the doctrinal and empirical research methodology coupled with the use of cases and legislations as source of information. The research revealed that majority of the participants has knowledge about the co-existence and impact of Science, Technology and Law in the society. However, the attitude and perception of the participants constitute a fundamental influence on the degree to which technological orientations occur during learning process. Also, 85% of 200 participants agreed that there is need for frequent education and legislation as science and technology evolves in the society. Hence, this article recommends the implementation and frequent modifications of law to continually protect, encourage and ensure the societal sustainability of ethical standards.

Parental Alienation: Science and Law is a book that brings together known supporters of parental alienation theory to review the definitions, prevalence, consequences and interventions for treating cases where parental alienation has been identified as the dominant cause of parent‐child contact problems. The book provides a review of published literature that favors parental alienation theory and highlights topics and issues that are central to the promotion of parental alienation in the family courts. The book is purposely written with the aim to educate about parental alienation and to debunk the detractors (including sections that specifically refute opposing claims).

This book proposes a new institutional constructivist model, for social scientific and legal enquiries, based on the interrelations within the social and political world and the application of change in EU laws and politics. Much of the research conducted in social sciences and law examines the diverse activities of individuals and collectivities and the role of institutions in the social and political world. Although there exist many vantage points from which one can gain entry into understanding how agents in the world act, interact, shape and bear the world, socio-legal scientific epistemology has found monism and dualism to be convincing models. This book argues that current models do not capture the complexity of our micro-worlds, macro-worlds and meso-worlds. Nor can they account for the forms and patterns of socio-legal change. Mind, time and change are brought together in an attempt to contribute to socio-legal epistemology and to enhance its toolkit.

Stoett reviews 'Our Children's Toxic Legacy: How Science and Law Fail to Protect Us from Pesticides' by John Wargo.

As a result of intensive international debate and the adoption of a number of renowned international anticorruption conventions and initiatives in the 1990s and 2000s, the issue of corruption has become a convenient theme for different kinds of generalizations in social sciences. However, national legislation does not reflect these developments in its legal regulation due to conservatism inherent in jurisprudence. One of the most evident gaps in this respect is the sphere of political corruption. While political science and political economy for decades have been successful in explaining political processes in different countries as corrupt conspiracies of political elites, business structures, and other actors in the political process, legal science has kept itself separate from such problems and prefers to deal with individual acts of corruption. But if for criminal law such an approach seems logical due to the methodology of the criminal law, for other branches of law which set forth a systemic view on social processes – primarily administrative and constitutional – there seems to be an omission.Nowadays, there is a quite favourable environment for the development of a consistent legal understanding of anticorruption in Russia. This has become possible thanks to current Russian administrative reforms, when the need for a highly professional bureaucracy led to a greater demand for various anticorruption mechanisms. The next possible step in Russia may be an attempt to ensure the effectiveness of well-proven anti-corruption methods of the political system as a whole.In this article we propose a brief background to the evolution of the concept of political corruption in Western and Russian political and legal science, which entails the necessity of complex scientific legal synthesis on this issue, allows to discuss the existing methodological potential and creates new opportunities to build up appropriate systemic legislative models. ; As a result of intensive international debate and the adoption of a number of renowned international anticorruption conventions and initiatives in the 1990s and 2000s, the issue of corruption has become a convenient theme for different kinds of generalizations in social sciences. However, national legislation does not reflect these developments in its legal regulation due to conservatism inherent in jurisprudence. One of the most evident gaps in this respect is the sphere of political corruption. While political science and political economy for decades have been successful in explaining political processes in different countries as corrupt conspiracies of political elites, business structures, and other actors in the political process, legal science has kept itself separate from such problems and prefers to deal with individual acts of corruption. But if for criminal law such an approach seems logical due to the methodology of the criminal law, for other branches of law which set forth a systemic view on social processes – primarily administrative and constitutional – there seems to be an omission.Nowadays, there is a quite favourable environment for the development of a consistent legal understanding of anticorruption in Russia. This has become possible thanks to current Russian administrative reforms, when the need for a highly professional bureaucracy led to a greater demand for various anticorruption mechanisms. The next possible step in Russia may be an attempt to ensure the effectiveness of well-proven anti-corruption methods of the political system as a whole.In this article we propose a brief background to the evolution of the concept of political corruption in Western and Russian political and legal science, which entails the necessity of complex scientific legal synthesis on this issue, allows to discuss the existing methodological potential and creates new opportunities to build up appropriate systemic legislative models.

In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court made its first major pronouncement on the evaluation of scientific evidence, calling on judges to act as gatekeepers for scientific knowledge and validity, despite lack of scientific training among judges. Daubert offers the science studies community a case study for examining how judges (and scientists acting as experts) engage in boundary-work and construct scientific validity. In constructing scientific validity under Daubert, judges must evaluate the scientific method behind a particular scientific claim, and will look to the parties' experts and the relevant scientific community for assistance. To combat the oft-cited problem of the battle of the experts, judges may be tempted to obtain assistance from court-appointed neutral experts, an inquisitorial (rather than adversarial) system in the civil law tradition of many European countries. The judicial evaluation of scientific evidence, the resulting construction of scientific validity, and the push for a greater use of court-appointed experts reveal judges' desire to segregate "objective" scientific facts from aspects of the legal process that are infused with adversaries' values. Yet the scientific and judicial construction of validity mixes empirical results and research methods with the personal, political, and institutional values of judges and scientists.