Theoretical versus pragmatic design in qualitative research

For many years, discussions of the relative merits of generic and theoretical approaches to qualitative research have divided researchers while overshadowing the need to focus on addressing clinical questions. Drawing on the challenges of designing a study that explored parents’ experiences of living with children with hydrocephalus, the authors of this paper argue that over-adherence to, and deliberations about, the philosophical origins of qualitative methods is undermining the contributions qualitative research could make to evidence-based health care and suggest qualitative methods should stand alone

\u3cem\u3eThe ICC Prosecutor v. President Medema\u3c/em\u3e: Simulated Proceedings Before the International Criminal Court

On July 18, 2000, as part of the Annual Meeting of the American Bar Association, an all star cast of American and English lawyers gathered in the Common Room of the Law Society of England and Wales in London to simulate oral argument before the International Criminal Court ( ICC ). The fictitious proceedings involved a head of state, President Luis Medema, charged with genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The prosecutors and defense counsel engaged in lively oral argument before the Trial Chamber in the context of three critical issues: (1) jurisdiction of the ICC over citizens of non-state parties; (2) testimony of anonymous witness; and (3) the national security exception. Following vigorous debate, which followed the procedures set forth in the Rome Statute, the Trial Chamber deliberated and rendered its judgment. This transcript is a largely unedited record of these proceedings