Delphine Red Shirt: George Sword's Warrior Narratives: Compositional Processes in Lakota Oral Tradition

George Sword an Oglala Lakota (1846–1914) learned to write in order to transcribe and preserve his people’s oral narratives. In her book Delphine Red Shirt, also Oglala Lakota and a native speaker, examines the compositional processes of George Sword and shows how his writings reflect recurring themes and story patterns of the Lakota oral tradition. Her book invites further studies in several areas including literature, translation studies and more. My review of her book suggests some ways it could be used as a primary resource book in developing curricula in Indigenous philosoph

Ill-Equipped

A poe

Providing effective counseling to substance abusers through the use of biopsychosocialspiritual strategies

The field of substance abuse has had a history of relapse. Both In-Patient and Out-Patient Treatment facilities have experienced the revolving door effect (Walton, Blow, and Booth, 2001). D.R. Laws found in research he conducted that 80% of the patients treated, relapsed 12 months after treatment and two-thirds of the relapses were within 90 days of treatment (Laws, 1999). The federal government has begun questioning the validity of these programs in light of skyrocketing costs for substance abuse treatment (Craig, 2004). Clinicians have begun to examine the cost effectiveness of their current treatment modalities. This paper will provide an overview of some of these treatment techniques

Examining current practice for the analysis and reporting of harm outcomes in phase II and III pharmacology trials: exploring methods to facilitate improved detection of adverse drug reactions

Introduction Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) provide data to help establish the harm-profile of drugs but evidence suggests that this data is underutilised and analysis practices are suboptimal. Aims To develop and assess methods for the analysis and presentation of harm outcomes in phase II/III drug trials that can facilitate the detection of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and enable communication of informative harm-profiles.Methods A systematic review looked at current practice for collection, analysis and reporting of harm outcomes and a scoping review to identify statistical methods proposed for their analysis was undertaken. A survey of clinical trial statisticians measured awareness of methods for the analysis of harm outcomes, barriers to their use and opinions on solutions to improve practice. Alternative strategies for analysis and presentation of harm outcomes were explored. Results The review of current practice confirmed that data on harm outcomes is not being fully utilised, providing evidence of inappropriate and inconsistent practices. The scoping review revealed a broad range of methods for the analysis of both prespecified and emerging harms. The survey confirmed sub-optimal practices and while there was a moderate level of awareness of alternative approaches, use was limited. Guidance and training on more appropriate methods was unanimously supported. Recommendation were devised via consensus to encourage trialists to use visualisations for analysing and reporting harm outcomes. Of the evaluated methods for the analysis of emerging harms none were appropriate in trials ≤5000 participants with some utility in specific scenarios, recommendations for use are provided. Conclusion Clinical trial statisticians agree that there is a need to improve how we analyse and report harm outcomes in RCTs. Efforts to date have focused on prespecified harm outcomes, with little thought given to emerging harms. Several solutions for immediate adoption are proposed but there remains the need for an easy to implement, objective, signal detection approach. Guidelines for best analysis practice that are endorsed by key stakeholders would also enable a more coherent and consistent path for change.Open Acces

Model Language for Supported Decision-Making Statutes

States often impose guardianship on people whose disabilities interfere with their decision-making ability, thereby entrusting another person with decision-making on their behalf. People with disabilities, activists, and scholars have critiqued the guardianship system for not doing enough to investigate the actual limitations of those subjected to guardianship and for denying too many of their rights. Guardianship exposes the tension between protecting an individual’s best interests (from the view of the State) and recognizing the right to self-determination and decision-making. Supported decision-making offers a different approach to balancing the rights of the individual with the State’s obligation to protect people with disabilities. Put simply, the person with a disability retains decision-making authority over their own life and receives any necessary decision-making assistance from others per a voluntary agreement. While advocates initially promoted the model primarily for use by people with intellectual or psychosocial disabilities, there has been a trend to extend its use to other groups, such as older persons and people with dementia. In light of the growing interest in supported decision-making, this Note examines existing supported decision-making statutes to propose model language that best serves people with disabilities. Part I of this Note provides a brief introduction to medical and legal determinations of capacity or competency. These concepts are necessary to understand the circumstances in which guardianship and supported decision-making agreements apply. Part II of this Note then explores the use and history of substituted decision-making, specifically guardianship, and the subsequent development of supported decision-making as an alternative. Part III delves into an analysis of existing statutes on supported decision-making, considering how each answers several key questions: What is required of the principal to enter a supported decision-making agreement? How does supported decision-making relate to guardianship? What is required of the supporter? And finally, what is the role of the State? Part IV takes up these questions again, but this time proposes model statutory language to suggest how legislatures should answer them to better serve people with disabilities

Kids will be kids : raising the age of criminal responsibility in Texas

The federal government draws the boundary between childhood and adulthood at age 18 for activities such as casting a ballot, joining the military, buying a cigarette, and serving time in adult prisons. Texas, however, defies this guideline in one significant respect. Here, the age of criminal responsibility is 17 years old. Thus, Texas lawmakers consider 17-year-olds mature enough to serve time in adult prisons but too immature to sit on the juries that send them there. The departure of Texas statute from federal policies ignores the science of brain development and contradicts cost-benefit analyses. Most importantly, the Texas law jeopardizes the lives of vulnerable youth and fails to improve public safety within local communities. Though the vast majority of arrested 17-year-olds commit minor crimes, the consequences of an adult conviction are far from minor. This report examines the impacts of treating 17-year-olds as adults in the criminal justice system. Impacts include higher risks of physical and sexual victimization, psychological trauma, developmental delays, and long-run economic losses. Together, these effects reach far beyond a teenager’s stay in prison to inflict damage across families, communities, and generations of Texans. Fortunately, there is a better way to manage 17-year-olds who are highly susceptible to the negative impacts of incarceration. In recent years, several states raised their ages of criminal responsibility to divert teens away from the dangers of adult correctional facilities. These states then experienced three levels of benefits: 1. Micro-level improvements to each teenager’s neurological and psychosocial development; 2. Mezzo-level public safety advantages; and 3. Macro-level increases to state and county coffers. This report analyzes the benefits that teens, communities, and budgets could accrue by aligning Texas’ age of criminal responsibility with federal standards. Finally, the report outlines practical recommendations for raising the age of criminal responsibility in Texas. Only then will vulnerable 17-year-olds receive the protection and opportunities that they require to become productive community residents.Public AffairsSocial Wor