La última aplicación de la doctrina norteamerica del «strict scrutiny» en el derecho de la libertad religiosa: González V. o Centro espiritista

In its last term 2005-2006, the United States Supreme Court (USSC) decided its first case regarding religious freedom under the Roberts Court on February 21, 2006. The USSC (Gonzales v. o Centro Espirita) applied again the doctrine of the strict scrutiny (Sherbert-Yoder), and affirmed the federal application of the RFRA '93. This controversy did not enter in the USSC's contradictions on the free exercise of religion. Thus, we have to wait a new USSC's decision that affirms the strict scrutiny (Sherbert) or the neutrality standard (Smith), overrulling one or another precedent and defining the doctrine of «free exercise exemptions». But, the «free exercise exemptions», are a legal or a constitutional..

Crónica Judicial de Derecho Eclesiástico en los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica (2017-2019)

Due to its novelty, interest or significance, the most important cases in the federal and state jurisprudence of the United States of America on religious freedom during the last two judicial years (2017-2019) are presented here, with special attention to the federal Supreme Court.Por su novedad, interés o importancia, se presentan aquí los principales casos planteados en la jurisprudencia federal y estatal de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica sobre libertad religiosa durante los dos últimos años judiciales (2017- 2019), con especial referencia al Tribunal Supremo federal

Jurisprudencia norteamericana sobre autonomía de las Iglesias y relaciones laborales: Doctrina de la "excepción ministerial". Parte I: Antes de "Hosanna-Tabor" (2012)

By applying the two religion clauses of the First Amendment (free exercise and non-establishment), the Supreme Court of the United States defended the autonomy of churches through the definition of ecclesiastical abstention in Watson v. Jones (1879). A century later, as a development of this decision in the field of labor relations, the federal courts recognized a ministerial exception by which churches would enjoy a sphere of autonomy in relation to their ministers. The Fifth Circuit did so in McClure (1972) and the US Supreme Court admitted the constitutionality of the ministerial exception ruling in Hosanna-Tabor (2012). This Court resolved a number of issues that had occupied the courts for forty years in relation to the identity of the minister and its evaluation as such, as well as the nature and application of that decision.En aplicación de las dos cláusulas religiosas de la Primera Enmienda (libre ejercicio y no establecimiento), el Tribunal Supremo de los Estados Unidos defendió la autonomía de las Iglesias a través de la doctrina de la abstención eclesiástica en el caso Watson v. Jones (1879). Un siglo después, los tribunales federales reconocieron, como una evolución de esta doctrina en la esfera de las relaciones laborales, la excepción ministerial por la que las Iglesias gozarían de una esfera de autonomía en relación con sus ministros. Es lo que hizo el quinto circuito en McClure (1972), admitiendo el Supremo su validez constitucional en el 2012 (Hosanna-Tabor). Al hacerlo así se pronunció sobre una serie de cuestiones que habían venido ocupando a los tribunales por espacio de cuatro décadas acerca de la identificación del ministro y del examen a emplear en ello, de la aplicación de esa doctrina y de su naturaleza

Crónica Judicial de Derecho Eclesiástico en los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica (2015-2017)

Due to its novelty, interest or significance, the most important cases in the federal and state jurisprudence of the United States of America on religious freedom during the last two judicial years (2017-2019) are presented here, with special attention to the federal Supreme Court.Por su novedad, interés o importancia, se presentan aquí los principales casos planteados en la jurisprudencia federal y estatal de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica sobre libertad religiosa durante los dos últimos años judiciales (2017- 2019), con especial referencia al Tribunal Supremo federal

Bladder cancer index: cross-cultural adaptation into Spanish and psychometric evaluation

BACKGROUND: The Bladder Cancer Index (BCI) is so far the only instrument applicable across all bladder cancer patients, independent of tumor infiltration or treatment applied. We developed a Spanish version of the BCI, and assessed its acceptability and metric properties. METHODS: For the adaptation into Spanish we used the forward and back-translation method, expert panels, and cognitive debriefing patient interviews. For the assessment of metric properties we used data from 197 bladder cancer patients from a multi-center prospective study. The Spanish BCI and the SF-36 Health Survey were self-administered before and 12 months after treatment. Reliability was estimated by Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was assessed through the multi-trait multi-method matrix. The magnitude of change was quantified by effect sizes to assess responsiveness. RESULTS: Reliability coefficients ranged 0.75-0.97. The validity analysis confirmed moderate associations between the BCI function and bother subscales for urinary (r = 0.61) and bowel (r = 0.53) domains; conceptual independence among all BCI domains (r ≤ 0.3); and low correlation coefficients with the SF-36 scores, ranging 0.14-0.48. Among patients reporting global improvement at follow-up, pre-post treatment changes were statistically significant for the urinary domain and urinary bother subscale, with effect sizes of 0.38 and 0.53. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish BCI is well accepted, reliable, valid, responsive, and similar in performance compared to the original instrument. These findings support its use, both in Spanish and international studies, as a valuable and comprehensive tool for assessing quality of life across a wide range of bladder cancer patients