Explore the vast range of titles available.

This book explores the moral lives of mental health clinicians serving the most marginalized individuals in the US healthcare system. Drawing on years of fieldwork in a community psychiatry outreach team, Brodwin traces the ethical dilemmas and everyday struggles of front line providers. On the street, in staff room debates, or in private confessions, these psychiatrists and social workers confront ongoing challenges to their self-image as competent and compassionate advocates. At times they openly question the coercion and forced-dependency built into the current system of care. At other times they justify their use of extreme power in the face of loud opposition from clients. This in-depth study exposes the fault lines in today's community psychiatry. It shows how people working deep inside the system struggle to maintain their ideals and manage a chronic sense of futility. Their commentaries about the obligatory and the forbidden also suggest ways to bridge formal bioethics and the realities of mental health practice. The experiences of these clinicians pose a single overarching question: how should we bear responsibility for the most vulnerable among us?

The language, themes and imagery of the Bible have been rewritten into texts across time. In the Revelation of John, the Hebrew Bible echoes and is reinvented, just as in James Hogg's The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner (1824) many explicit and implicit readings and interpretations of the Bible are offered. In Texts Reading Texts, these readings of the Bible, and the ways in which Revelation and Hogg's Confessions have themselves been read, are considered from the two postmodern perspectives of marginalization and deconstruction. By reading the two seemingly unrelated texts side by side from these perspectives, traditional readings of them both are disturbed and challenged.

The language, themes and imagery of the Bible have been rewritten into texts across time. In the Revelation of John, the Hebrew Bible echoes and is reinvented, just as in James Hogg's The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner (1824) many explicit and implicit readings and interpretations of the Bible are offered. In Texts Reading Texts, these readings of the Bible, and the ways in which Revelation and Hogg's Confessions have themselves been read, are considered from the two postmodern perspectives of marginalization and deconstruction. By reading the two seemingly unrelated texts side by side from these perspectives, traditional readings of them both are disturbed and challenged.

Produced in a society that considered itself deeply Christian, William Shakespeare's The Rape of Lucrece poses an intriguing dilemma for those moralists who would evoke the Roman wife Lucretia as an emblem of feminine chastity. This chapter considers the politics of the narrative in light of two concerns: the first is the tradition of reading Lucrece's suicide as a reflection of Christian ideologies on sexuality and on suicide, specifically as articulated in the writing of St. Augustine. Through a reading of Lucrece's actions and speech leading up to and resulting in her death, it argues that her behavior is consistent with the two competing early modern Christian discourses about the nature of private confession. The second concern that guides this reading is the place of race in Shakespeare's narrative poem. Race is intertwined with Shakespeare's use of the confessional mode to represent female subjectivity.

Legendary director Ingmar Bergman and actress-turned-director Liv Ullmann have had some remarkable collaborations in the past-- \"Persona,\" \"Cries and Whispers,\" \"An Autumn Sonata,\" etc. Now Ullmann has directed \"Private Confessions\" from Bergman's script drawn from events in the lives of his own parents, whose unhappy marriage he also dissected in his script for \"The Best Intentions\" (1989), directed by Bille August. The film opens in 1925, when August's Anna, after some hesitance, confesses to her beloved Uncle Jacob (Max Von Sydow), a man of the cloth, that she has been unfaithful to Henrik ([Samuel] Froler), a zealous theologian whose superior is none other than her uncle. She tells him that she has plunged into a passionate affair with a young theology student, Tomas Egerman (Thomas Hanzon). Jacob is wise, compassionate and nonjudgmental but advises that the only valid course for his niece to take is to tell her husband the truth.

Italy’s 1998 Immigration Law 40 includes Article 18, which allows foreign “victims of human trafficking” the right to temporary residence permits on the condition that they participate in a rehabilitation program. The first step of this program, the act of denuncia, is to file criminal charges against exploiters at the police station. However, the resulting testimony cannot be understood through the victim/agent trope of the bureaucratic state, which uses these categories to make the other understandable through a process of what I call “confessional recognition.” In this article, I show how, despite the proliferation of biometric technologies to identify foreign others and so control migration flows at borders, confessional practices continue to play a central role in deciding who is admitted legally. Moreover, I illustrate how the question of redemption and expiation is not only a crucial issue for Catholic groups involved in aid programs for foreigners but is also central to Italian state integration policies, thus revealing how juridical norms are deeply influenced by the vocabulary of religious morality and vice versa.

Private security forces such as campus police, security guards, loss prevention officers, and the like are not state actors covered by the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures nor the Fifth Amendment's Miranda protections. As members of the umbrella category of \"private police,\" these private law enforcement agents often obtain evidence, detain individuals, and elicit confessions in a manner that government actors cannot, which can then be lawfully turned over to the government. Though the same statutory law governing private citizens (assault, false imprisonment, trespass, etc.) also regulates private police conduct, private police conduct is not bound by constitutional protections like the exclusionary rule, which requires that evidence obtained in violation of a criminal defendant's rights be excluded from their prosecution. As a result of this disparity, evidence that would have been suppressed if government actors had procured it is often deemed admissible when procured by private police. Because private actors make up a significant and growing sector of law enforcement, the absence of robust constitutional regulation means that citizens whose rights are violated have little recourse because the default remedy of suppression is unavailable. This Comment examines how states' exclusionary rules impose higher standards on searches and seizures than the federal exclusionary rule by encompassing private actors. It also urges Washington State to adopt an exclusionary rule that recognizes suppression of illegally obtained evidence from both public and private actors.

The Prima facie view regarding the admissibility of admissions, as evidence, in criminal matters is that, to admit admissions as evidence, the court requires a single consideration as to whether the admission was made freely and voluntarily. Without too much ado, the simple view to this understanding presupposes that admission of an admission as evidence against its maker is of a lesser danger compared to the admission of a confession. The admissibility of confessions against their makers does not come as easily as that of admissions. There are many prescribed requirements to satisfy before confessions are admitted as evidence. This comparison has led to a questionable conclusion that requirements for the admissibility of admissions are of a less complexity equated to the requirements for the admission of confessions. This paper answers the question whether an inference that the requirements for the admissibility of admissions are of a less complexity compared to the requirements for the admission of confessions is rational? It equates this approach to the now done away with commonwealth states rigid differentiation perspective. In the 1800s the commonwealth states, especially those vowing on the Wigmorian perspective on the law of evidence, developed from a rigid interpretation of confessions and admissions and adopted a relaxed and wide definitions of the word, “confession.” To this extent there was a relaxed divide between confessions and admissions hence their common classification and application of similar cautionary rules. The article recounts admissibility requirement in section 219A of the South African Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 (CPA) (Hereinafter CPA). It then analyses Section 219A of the CPA requirement in the light of the rationale encompassing precautions for the admission of confessions in terms of 217(1) of the CPA. It exposes the similarities of potential prejudices where confessions and admissions are admitted as evidence. It reckons that by the adherence to this rigid differentiation perspectives of confessions and admissions which used to be the practice in the commonwealth prior the 1800s developments, South African law of evidence remains prejudicial to accused persons. To do away with these prejudices this article, recommends that section 219A be amended to include additional admissibility requirements in section 217(1). In effect it recommends the merging of sections 217(1) and 219A of the CPA.

I consider a scenario where a social planner suspects that a crime has been committed. There are many suspects and at most one of them is guilty. I characterize the optimal mechanism for the social planner under different assumptions with respect to her commitment power. I find that the optimal mechanism is a \"confession inducing mechanism\": Before an investigation, each agent can confess to being guilty in exchange for a reduced punishment. I find that these mechanisms do better than the traditional trial mechanism because of information externalities: When an agent credibly confesses his guilt, he reveals everyone else's innocence.