Empowered Women Empower Women

Good afternoon and thank you for your determination to hold this important event today regardless of the weather. When Jenny said that we would go forward rain, sleet, or snow, I did not anticipate that we would have all three in the same day! Maybe your determination derives from the residual spirit of a group of women who gathered here 100 years ago, also determined, but that time they were determined to ensure that their community acknowledged their right to vote. They were empowered, excited, and ready to act because, five years prior, in 1915, Katherine Wentworth of the Pennsylvania Women’s Suffrage Association, commissioned the Justice Bell, also known as the Women’s Liberty Bell or the Suffrage Bell. Once it was done, they loaded in the back of a flatbed truck and drove it to all 67 Pennsylvania counties. But they chained the clapper so it would not ring to symbolize the silence imposed upon women through the denial of the right to vote. When the 19th Amendment finally was ratified in 1920, Wentworth and her fellow suffragists gathered in Philadelphia to ring the bell 48 times to honor the 48 states of the Union at the time. All courthouses and churches in Pennsylvania were supposed to join in a statewide ringing at 4 pm that afternoon. The women of Gettysburg were gathered here, anxiously awaiting 4 pm. It came and passed. 4:01. 4:02. Then, as the Gettysburg Times reported “they decided that action would have to be taken by themselves.” They rushed the courthouse and proceeded to ring the bell “several minutes,” which, as the Times also reported, “the women thoroughly enjoyed . . . until officials arrived and relieved them.” Sometimes, you have to take matters into your own hands if you want to make a difference in your community. [excerpt

Best Practices among Certain Classes of Pennsylvania Destination Marketing Organizations (DMOs)

The researchers originally became aware of the existence of DMOs (previously known as tourism promotion agencies or TPAs) when reading materials in the Gettysburg Times. The two student-authors plan to work in local government following graduation, and they were curious about perspectives shared in the Gettysburg Times about the local DMO. Thereafter, a representative from the Gettysburg Borough Council approached the faculty-author about conducting research on DMOs’ policies, procedures, and practices, and, relatedly, the “pillow tax,” a hotel room occupancy tax that is administered by counties and disbursed to DMOs, among others. Specifically, the Borough Council representative was curious about best practices with respect to allocation of the pillow tax; how DMOs use pillow tax revenue; and how DMOs account for such use. The Borough representative also was curious about general business practices among DMOs. The faculty-author applied for and obtained approval from the Gettysburg College Institutional Review Board for research among Pennsylvania DMOs and their representatives on these issues. This white paper briefly summarizes the history of the relationship between Pennsylvania DMOs and the pillow tax then describes the researchers’ methodology. Next, the white paper describes what Study DMOs appear to believe are best practices, or most commonly accepted practices, in six categories: Boards of Directors; Revenue; Grant Making; Spending; Assessment; and Future Planning. All data are reported in aggregate to minimize the risk of revealing individually identifiable data. These findings may inform DMO, community, and county decision-making

Noble Intent Is Not Enough To Run Veterans Court Mentoring Programs: A Qualitative Study of Mentors’ Role Orientation and Responsibilities

Mentoring is a key component of veterans treatment courts, a diversionary problem-solving court for justice-involved military veterans. Mentoring programs are unique to veterans’ courts; no other problem-solving courts systematically include them as critical components of their court programming. Despite their prominence in veterans courts, little is known about mentor program operations and court expectations for mentors’ roles and responsibilities. This study examines mentors’ roles and responsibilities as perceived by mentees, mentors, and veterans treatment court staff. Using in-depth interview data from respondents from each of these groups, supplemented by observational data from court hearings and pre-court meetings, we identify three types of mentoring styles: enforcers, sponsor/advocates, and friend. We find a lack of clarity in mentors’ roles and responsibilities, which negatively impacted mentor-mentee relationships and mentors’ relationships with the court. The three mentoring styles identified in this study offer veterans treatment courts a framework to shape and refine the mentor role and guide future efforts to provide standardized training for mentors

Why Prison Dental Care Matters: Legal, Policy, and Practical Concerns

Even when controlling for demographic characteristics, prisoners are far more likely than people in the general population to suffer from periodontal disease, to have unresolved oral health issues, to have decayed teeth, and/or to be missing teeth. Correlates of poor oral health, such as poor nutrition and smoking, are more prevalent among people of lower socioeconomic status, and this same population is at a higher risk than others for offending and incarceration. For some, prison is the only time in their adult lives when they will have seen a dentist. There are few free dental clinics in communities, regardless of economic climate, and there are almost none that serve adults. Dental care is expensive, and dental insurance is rarely provided to employees in lower income jobs. Therefore, many will enter correctional facilities having been financially precluded from seeking dental care even if they had wanted it. [excerpt

International genome-wide meta-analysis identifies new primary biliary cirrhosis risk loci and targetable pathogenic pathways.

Primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) is a classical autoimmune liver disease for which effective immunomodulatory therapy is lacking. Here we perform meta-analyses of discovery data sets from genome-wide association studies of European subjects (n=2,764 cases and 10,475 controls) followed by validation genotyping in an independent cohort (n=3,716 cases and 4,261 controls). We discover and validate six previously unknown risk loci for PBC (Pcombined<5 × 10(-8)) and used pathway analysis to identify JAK-STAT/IL12/IL27 signalling and cytokine-cytokine pathways, for which relevant therapies exist

When a Veterans’ Treatment Court Fails: Lessons Learned from a Qualitative Evaluation

More than 500 veterans treatment courts (VTCs) provide thousands of eligible veterans across the nation alternative means of resolving criminal charges through a therapeutic, judicially supervised programs. The majority of those VTCs mandate that veteran participants work with a volunteer veteran mentor throughout their tenure in VTC programs. Mentoring has been heralded as a critical and valuable component of VTCs, and it is believed that mentoring discourages substance abuse and promotes adherence to substance abuse interventions. But very little is known about how mentoring actually works. Scant research documents how mentors interact with mentees, what their responsibilities are, or what impact they have on veterans’ progress through rigorous VTC protocols. Through interview data collected following the death of a veteran mentee in a northeastern Study VTC, this research provides in-depth analysis of how mentors and mentees understand their responsibilities with respect to illicit substance use and violations of VTCs’ sobriety requirements. This article provides background data on VTCs and veterans who participate in them, then explores interview and documentary data as part of a case study of a policy failure in the Study VTC. The article concludes with recommendations that could improve mentor/mentee relationships and VTC participants’ access to treatment

Are Victims’ Rights Honored in Veterans Courts? A Statewide Assessment of Law on the Books versus Law in Action

Veterans treatment courts provide alternative resolution of a wide variety of crimes, including crimes of victimization, for eligible veterans. These courts have been evaluated on multiple fronts, from eligibility to outcomes, yet almost no scholarly attention has been given to whether these courts incorporate victims’ rights into operations. This study of veterans treatment courts in one state employs content analysis, surveys, and interviews to examine these courts through a victims’ rights lens. The authors conclude that the courts omit victims’ rights from most of their procedures but seem amenable to adopting policy changes to improve responsiveness to victims’ needs

If You Build It, Will Vets Come? An Identity Theory Approach to Expanding Veterans’ Treatment Court Participation

Veterans’ treatment courts (VTCs) provide a veteran-centric diversion option to traditional court case processing. These courts have proliferated across the United States without much consideration about whether veterans want, or need, a specialty court. In this article, we investigate the underlying importance of a veteran identity in the decision to enroll in a VTC. Based on in-depth qualitative interviews with veterans, we identify four primary implications for practitioners. First, veterans are ashamed of their criminal justice involvement. Second, they are concerned about increased punitiveness by criminal justice actors, particularly law enforcement, because of their veteran status. Third, veterans perceive the VTC process to bestow upon them stigma and retaliation. Fourth, veterans resist VTC involvement for fear of dishonoring their branch of service. To expand enrollment, results demonstrate that practitioners should consider how veterans reconcile their veteran and offender identities when considering VTC enrollment

A Trifecta of Challenges for Veterans Treatment Courts

This chapter examines veterans treatment court operations15 years after the first veterans court appeared to recommend three areas of focus for development to improve procedural justice and increase implementation fidelity