The Road from Medical Injury to Claims Resolution: How No-Fault and Tort Differ

In the area of medical malpractice, no-fault has been offered as a response to the criticisms leveled against tort litigation for medical injuries. Five issues of no-fault are examined within the context of obstetrical malpractice

China\u27s Official Media Portrayal of Religion (1996-2005): Policy Change in a \u3cem\u3eDesecularizing\u3c/em\u3e Society

This content analysis of religion news coverage in the People\u27s Daily during a 10-year period (1996–2005) found a more positive tone toward religion after 2001, when a significant policy change was announced by Chinese political leaders. The number of newspaper articles about religion increased steadily. Under-representation of Christianity suggested by previous studies was not found, but a prejudicial tone toward different religions was identified

Study of aircraft in intraurban transportation systems, volume 1

An analysis of an effective short range, high density computer transportation system for intraurban systems is presented. The seven county Detroit, Michigan, metropolitan area, was chosen as the scenario for the analysis. The study consisted of an analysis and forecast of the Detroit market through 1985, a parametric analysis of appropriate short haul aircraft concepts and associated ground systems, and a preliminary overall economic analysis of a simplified total system designed to evaluate the candidate vehicles and select the most promising VTOL and STOL aircraft. Data are also included on the impact of advanced technology on the system, the sensitivity of mission performance to changes in aircraft characteristics and system operations, and identification of key problem areas that may be improved by additional research. The approach, logic, and computer models used are adaptable to other intraurban or interurban areas

Lack of Mutual Respect in Relationship The Endangered Partner

Violence in a relationship and in a family setting has been an issue of concern to various interest groups and professional organizations. Of particular interest in this article is violence against women in a relationship. While there is an abundance of knowledge on violence against women in general, intimate or partner femicide seems to have received less attention. Unfortunately, the incidence of violence against women, and intimate femicide in particular, has been an issue of concern in the African setting. This article examines the trends of intimate femicide in an African setting in general, and in Botswana in particular. The increase in intimate femicide is an issue of concern, which calls for collective effort to address. This article also examines trends offemicide in Botswana, and the antecedents and the precipitating factors. Some studies have implicated societal and cultural dynamics as playing significant roles in intimate femicide in the African setting. It is believed that the patriarchal nature of most African settings and the ideology of male supremacy have relegated women to a subordinate role. Consequently, respect for women in any relationship with men is lopsided in favor of men and has led to abuse of women, including intimate femicide. Other militating factors in intimate femicide ,are examined and the implications for counseling to assist the endangered female partner are discussed

Consumer Welfare & the Rule of Law: The Case Against the New Populist Antitrust Movement

Populist antitrust notions suddenly are fashionable again. At their core is the view that antitrust law is responsible for a myriad of purported socio-political problems plaguing society today, including but not limited to rising income inequality, declining wages, and increasing economic and political concentration. Seizing on Americans’ fears about changes to the modern US economy, proponents of populist antitrust policies assert the need to fundamentally reshape how we apply our nation’s competition laws in order to implement a variety of prescriptions necessary to remedy these perceived social ills. The proposals are varied and expansive but have the unifying theme of returning antitrust to the “big-is-bad” enforcement era prevalent in the first half of the twentieth century. But the criticisms populist antitrust proponents raise are generally unsupported and often dramatized, and the resulting policy proposals are, accordingly, fatally flawed. There is sparse evidence today suggesting that the underlying trends these critics purportedly identify are real or in any way linked to lax antitrust enforcement. Ironically, populist antitrust proponents ignore that antitrust law debated over 50 years ago the same proposals that they are raising anew today. At that time, leading jurists, economists, enforcers, and practitioners from across the political spectrum rejected the use of liability standards that seek to evaluate a variety of vague and often contradictory socio-political goals or that condemn conduct based simply on the size of a company. They recognized that these tests led to incoherent and paradoxical results that often did more to hinder than to promote competition by undermining the rule of law and fostering corporate welfare. Instead, antitrust evolved the elegant “consumer welfare standard” that simplified the core issue of what constitutes harm to competition into a straightforward question: does the conduct at issue harm consumers? Today, the consumer welfare standard offers a rigorous, objective, and evidence-based framework for antitrust analysis. It leverages developments in modern economics more reliably to predict when conduct is likely to harm consumers as a result of harm to competition. It offers a tractable test that is broad enough to contemplate a variety of evidence related to consumer welfare but also sufficiently objective and clear to cabin discretion and honor the principle of the rule of law. Perhaps most significantly, it is inherently an economic approach to antitrust that benefits from new economic learning and is capable of evaluating an evolving set of commercial practices and business models. These virtues are precisely the target of the new populist antitrust movement, which seeks to reject economics in favor of mere supposition. This Article makes the case in support of the current consumer welfare standard and against a sweeping set of unsupported populist antitrust reforms. There is significant room for debate within the consumer welfare model for what types of conduct should face antitrust scrutiny, what evidence is relevant, and where liability standards should be drawn. Such debate is healthy and to the benefit of antitrust enforcement. But it does not require abandoning decades of experience and economic learning that would turn back the hands of time and return us to an era where antitrust enforcement was incoherent and deleterious