Suchergebnisse

Although much debate and research have been centered on the relative importance of familial structure (for example, presence of parents) and functions (for example, relationship with parents) for delinquency, the discipline has failed to come to terms, both theoretically and empirically, with the inherent complexity of the issues. Recognizing that structure necessitates some functional consequences, the complexity of the issues is explored. Utilizing a city‐wide representative sample of black youths and a somewhat systematic sample of white youths, an Automatic Interaction Detection (AID) analysis is used to uncover unsuspected interaction patterns of six independent variables. Interaction with the father emerged as the single most important variable for blacks. However, AID did uncover for blacks important interactions with family size, presence of father, and social class. A somewhat different and more tenuous pattern was found for whites, with social class being the most important variable and father–son interaction showing very little relationship with delinquency. It seems evident, therefore, that structure and function, especially for blacks, are both of importance for delinquency.

The excavation of Indian burial sites poses serious ethical problems. Many American Indians regard the excavation of such sites as an affront to their actual and spiritual ancestors, while many archaeologists believe that scientific investigation should take absolute priority. This paper explores the judicial and legislative aspects of this practice in the United States and discusses attempts by professional associations to resolve the conflict. The paper suggests specific guidelines that could be followed by courts and legislators depending on whether the burial site is on reservation or nonreservation property, or whether the physical remains are recent or ancient. [archaeology, applied anthropology, ethics, anthropology and law, anthropology and public policy]

It is one of the central paradoxes of any legal system that it should appear at once so central to the imposition of decisive pronouncements aimed at the very structure of social relationships yet remain dependent on forces beyond its direct control for the acceptance and implementation of these strictures. This peculiar status of laws and legal institutions gives rise both to exaggerated claims for its impact on social change and equally unrealistic assertions that all legal systems merely follow and support processes whose fundamental operations are carried out in the broader spheres of social and political life. Like other institutions, a legal system performs distinctive tasks in accord with its own internal history and logic. But in its very design and operation it is deeply influenced by the struggles for control and influence that occur among its own personnel, and between them and other sectors of society. Being neither self-executing nor independently defined, statutory propositions and judicial opinions have impacts which are as difficult to trace in detail as they are wide-ranging and interconnected at large. Even in societies with elaborated and sharply delineated legal institutions, the role of the legal system in shaping or reflecting social and political patterns partakes of this confusion of distinctiveness and derivativeness.

Anthropologists representing each of the subfields of the discipline have appeared as expert witnesses in a wide range of legal cases. Their appearance raises a number of significant questions about the appropriateness of anthropological knowledge to adversary proceedings, and poses difficult ethical problems for the participant and the profession. The present article reviews a series of cases in which anthropologists have served as expert witnesses and proposes a set of recommended standards and reforms for this activity. [ethics, expert testimony, legal anthropology, American society, applied anthropology]