'Against the World': Michael Field, female marriage and the aura of amateurism'

This article considers the case of Katherine Bradley and Edith Cooper, an aunt and niece who lived and wrote together as ‘Michael Field’ in the fin-de-siècle Aesthetic movement. Bradley’s bold statement that she and Cooper were ‘closer married’ than the Brownings forms the basis for a discussion of their partnership in terms of a ‘female marriage’, a union that is reflected, as I will argue, in the pages of their writings. However, Michael Field’s exclusively collaborative output, though extensive, was no guarantee for success. On the contrary, their case illustrates the notion, valid for most products of co-authorship, that the jointly written work is always surrounded by an aura of amateurism. Since collaboration defied the ingrained notion of the author as the solitary producer of his or her work, critics and readers have time and again attempted to ‘parse’ the collaboration by dissecting the co-authored work into its constituent halves, a treatment that the Fields too failed to escape

Insulin micro-secretion in Type 1 diabetes and related microRNA profiles

The aim of this cross-sectional study was to compare plasma C-peptide presence and levels in people without diabetes (CON) and with Type 1 diabetes and relate C-peptide status to clinical factors. In a subset we evaluated 50 microRNAs (miRs) previously implicated in beta-cell death and associations with clinical status and C-peptide levels. Diabetes age of onset was stratified as adult (≥ 18 y.o) or childhood ( 20 years. Plasma C-peptide was measured by ultrasensitive ELISA. Plasma miRs were quantified using TaqMan probe-primer mix on an OpenArray platform. C-peptide was detectable in 55.3% of (n= 349) people with diabetes, including 64.1% of adults and 34.0% of youth with diabetes, p 20 years) had detectable C-peptide (60%) than in those with shorter diabetes duration (39%, p for trend< 0.05). Nine miRs significantly correlated with detectable C-peptide levels in people with diabetes and 16 miRs correlated with C-peptide levels in CON. Our cross-sectional study results are supportive of (a) greater beta-cell function loss in younger onset Type 1 diabetes; (b) persistent insulin secretion in adult-onset diabetes and possibly regenerative secretion in childhood-onset long diabetes duration; and (c) relationships of C-peptide levels with circulating miRs. Confirmatory clinical studies and related basic science studies are merited

“I Don't Really Want to Be Associated With the Self-Righteous Left Extreme”: Disincentives to Participation in Collective Action

This paper considers collective action non-participation by people sympathetic but not committed to participating in actions for social change (‘sympathisers’). We conducted a thematic analysis of open-ended written accounts of the barriers to participating in sustained collective action (N = 112), finding that people can be reluctant to engage in some types of collective action. Participants wrote about the potential for detrimental consequences resulting from association with ‘protesters’, concern that they may be undermined by ‘extreme’ fringes of a movement, ambivalence about the visible performance of group normative behaviours (specifically, protesting), and trepidation about ‘loss of self’ within a group. We discuss the findings in relation to theory on social (dis)identification, social (dis)incentives, and identity performances, arguing that inaction does not necessarily stem from apathy. Rather, people may engage in motivated inaction – that is, active avoidance of some types of actions, or from affiliations with particular groups, as a response to negative inferences about the legitimacy or efficacy of some forms of collective action. Practical strategies are suggested for groups and individuals, including the potential for people to take actions for social change independently of a formally organised movement

“I Don't Really Want to Be Associated With the Self-Righteous Left Extreme”: Disincentives to Participation in Collective Action

This paper considers collective action non-participation by people sympathetic but not committed to participating in actions for social change (‘sympathisers’). We conducted a thematic analysis of open-ended written accounts of the barriers to participating in sustained collective action (N = 112), finding that people can be reluctant to engage in some types of collective action. Participants wrote about the potential for detrimental consequences resulting from association with ‘protesters’, concern that they may be undermined by ‘extreme’ fringes of a movement, ambivalence about the visible performance of group normative behaviours (specifically, protesting), and trepidation about ‘loss of self’ within a group. We discuss the findings in relation to theory on social (dis)identification, social (dis)incentives, and identity performances, arguing that inaction does not necessarily stem from apathy. Rather, people may engage in motivated inaction – that is, active avoidance of some types of actions, or from affiliations with particular groups, as a response to negative inferences about the legitimacy or efficacy of some forms of collective action. Practical strategies are suggested for groups and individuals, including the potential for people to take actions for social change independently of a formally organised movement

Managing ethically questionable parental requests: Growth suppression and manipulation of puberty

Doctors sometimes struggle with ethically challenging requests for treatment from children’s parents. For instance, we have recently had two requests by parents of children, a girl and a boy, each with a severe developmental disability, for hormonal therapy to suppress growth and puberty: the girl’s parents requested, in addition, hysterectomy and mastectomy. We propose a reliable approach to assessing the ethical and legal aspects of these and other requests for ‘non-therapeutic’ treatment of a minor who lacks the capacity to give informed consent. We argue that a doctor should first assess whether the request is one that he or she can, in conscience, accede to, and then, if it is, seek the authorisation of a court. We outline considerations relevant to the doctor’s assessment of both the ethical issues and to the need for court authorisation