Partners No More: Relational Transformation and the Turn to Litigation in Two Conservationist Organizations

The rise in litigation against administrative bodies by environmental and other political interest groups worldwide has been explained predominantly through the liberalization of standing doctrines. Under this explanation, termed here the floodgate model, restrictive standing rules have dammed the flow of suits that groups were otherwise ready and eager to pursue. I examine this hypothesis by analyzing processes of institutional transformation in two conservationist organizations: the Sierra Club in the United States and the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel (SPNI). Rather than an eagerness to embrace newly available litigation opportunities, as the floodgate model would predict, the groups\u27 history reveals a gradual process of transformation marked by internal, largely intergenerational divisions between those who abhorred conflict with state institutions and those who saw such conflict as not only appropriate but necessary to the mission of the group. Furthermore, in contrast to the pluralist interactions that the floodgate model imagines, both groups\u27 relations with pertinent agencies in earlier eras better accorded with the partnership-based corporatist paradigm. Sociolegal research has long indicated the importance of relational distance to the transformation of interpersonal disputes. I argue that, at the group level as well, the presence or absence of a (national) partnership-centered relationship determines propensities to bring political issues to court. As such, well beyond change in groups\u27 legal capacity and resources, current increases in levels of political litigation suggest more fundamental transformations in the structure and meaning of relations between citizen groups and the state

Patterns of analgesic and anti-inflammatory medicine use by Australian veterans

Background: We examined analgesic and anti-inflammatory medicine use by Australian veterans before and after the introduction of selective Cox-2 inhibitors. Methods: We studied cohorts of Gold Card-holding veterans using prescription data held by the Department of Veterans' Affairs for the period 1 July 1998 to 30 June 2004. Outcomes were volume dispensed, average daily quantity and cumulative incidence of use of paracetamol-containing and aspirin-containing medicines, non-selective and Cox-2-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), tramadol and dextropropoxyphene. Results: Overall, we found high levels of use of analgesic and anti-inflammatory medicines, which increased by 43% over the study period. Use of paracetamol-containing medicines was overtaken by NSAIDs in 1999/2000, corresponding to the introduction of the Cox-2-selective agents. Between 12 and 17% of Cox-2-selective medicine recipients were supplied amounts indicative of continuous use in relatively high doses and 51% of veterans received at least one relatively Cox-2-selective medicine (celecoxib, rofecoxib, meloxicam, diclofenac) by the end of the study period. Dextropropoxyphene use declined during the study and tramadol use increased 10-fold. Conclusion: This study shows very high levels of Cox-2 inhibitor use during the 6-year period. Cox-2-selective agents were more likely to be taken continuously and at higher doses than non-selective NSAIDs. This is relevant in view of the cardiovascular toxicity of this group of medicines. The study shows the value of using unit record dispensing data to assess drug use patterns. Linking dispensing records to hospital separation and mortality data will further enhance our ability to monitor drug safety