Pitfalls in the Evaluation of Argumentation in the Legislative Process

The quality of argumentation in parliamentary debates may play an important role in the evaluation of legislative decisions. In this contribution I will discuss shortcomings in the application of the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory for the analysis and evaluation of the argumentation in a parliamentary debate on the penalization of stalking. The case illustrates that institutional preconditions of a specific type of debate should be taken into account in order to be able to give an adequate analysis of these debates

Telling Examples. Strategic manoeuvring in plenary debates in the European Parliament

Members of Parliament may make use of argumentation from examples to justify policies and legislation. In this contribution I concentrate on how argumentation from example may be used to manoeuvre strategically in plenary legislative debates in the European parliament. As a framework for the analysis of the strategic use of examples in the institutional setting of the European parliament, I shall make use of van Eemeren and Houtlosser’s (1999, 2002) concept of strategic manoeuvring

Administrative Judicial Decisions as a Hybrid Argumentative Activity Type

This article focuses on strategic manoeuvring that takes place in Dutch administrative judi- cial decisions. These decisions may be seen as a distinct argumentative activity type. Starting from the char- acteristics that traditionally are per- tinent to this activity type, I will explore how implications of current discussions on the changing task of the administrative judge may be- come manifest in the judge’s strate- gic manoeuvring by means of the presentation of argumentation and the introduction of additional stand- points. The case study of Dutch administrative law serves to demon- strate what consequences changing institutional demands may have for the starting points of the analysis of argumentation in judicial decisions

UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Administrative Judicial Decisions as a Hybrid Argumentative Activity Type Administrative Judicial Decisions as a Hybrid Argumentative Activity Type

Abstract: This article focuses on strategic manoeuvring that takes place in Dutch administrative judicial decisions. These decisions may be seen as a distinct argumentative activity type. Starting from the characteristics that traditionally are pertinent to this activity type, I will explore how implications of current discussions on the changing task of the administrative judge may become manifest in the judge's strategic manoeuvring by means of the presentation of argumentation and the introduction of additional standpoints. The case study of Dutch administrative law serves to demonstrate what consequences changing institutional demands may have for the starting points of the analysis of argumentation in judicial decisions. Résumé: Cet article se concentre sur les manoeuvres stratégiques qui se déroulent dans les décisions judiciaires administratives néerlandaises. On peut considérer ces décisions comme un type d'activité argumentative distincte. A partir des caractéris-tiques qui sont traditionnellement pertinentes pour ce type d'activité, je vais explorer comment les implications des discussions courantes sur la tâche changeante du juge administratif peuvent se manifester dans la manoeuvre stratégique du juge au moyen de la présentation d'argumentation et d'introduction de points de vue supplémentaires. L'étude de cas du droit administratif néerlandais sert à démontrer les conséquences que l'évolution des exigences institutionnelles peut avoir sur les points de départ d'analyse d'argumentation dans les décisions judiciaires

Administrative Judicial Decisions as a Hybrid Argumentative Activity Type

This article focuses on strategic manoeuvring that takes place in Dutch administrative judi- cial decisions. These decisions may be seen as a distinct argumentative activity type. Starting from the char- acteristics that traditionally are per- tinent to this activity type, I will explore how implications of current discussions on the changing task of the administrative judge may be- come manifest in the judge’s strate- gic manoeuvring by means of the presentation of argumentation and the introduction of additional stand- points. The case study of Dutch administrative law serves to demon- strate what consequences changing institutional demands may have for the starting points of the analysis of argumentation in judicial decisions

Clinical Characteristics and Genetic Etiology of Children With Developmental Language Disorder

Objective: Developmental language delay (DLD) is one of the most common disabilities in childhood and can negatively affect a child's communication skills and academic and/or psychosocial development. To date, an increasing number of causative genes have been identified by diagnostic techniques like next generation sequencing. An early genetic diagnosis is important to properly prepare and counsel children and parents for possible future difficulties. Despite this, genetic assessment is usually not part of a standardized diagnostic set in children with developmental language delay. In this study, we aim to assess the diagnostic outcomes of children primarily assessed for speech and language delay who were subsequently referred for genetic etiological assessment. Methods: Medical records of children referred to the department of Otorhinolaryngology of the Wilhelmina Children's Hospital for diagnostic work-up for a suspected speech and language delay between June 2011 and December 2018 who were additionally referred to a geneticist were evaluated. Study parameters concerning medical history, behavioral problems, language development, intelligence, and hearing were recorded. Outcomes of genetic analysis were evaluated. Results: A total of 127 patients were diagnosed with a developmental language delay. Genetic analysis was conducted in 119 out of 127 patients with a language delay and eligible for this study. The median time between initial speech and language assessment and the first genetic consultation was 10 months (IQR 5.0–23.0). In 34 out of 127 patients a causative genetic diagnosis was found to explain their DLD. Conclusion: In approximately a quarter of the patients (26.8%) diagnosed with developmental language delay, a causative genetic diagnosis was confirmed. This demonstrates the opportunity to identify an underlying genetic etiology in children with developmental language delay. However, in order to optimize the diagnostic process and clinical care for these children, two important research gaps need to be addressed. First, research should focus on assessing the clinical impact and effect on treatment outcomes of a genetic diagnosis. Secondly, it is important to recognize for which children genetic testing is most beneficial