Suchergebnisse

Leaders are generally viewed in a positive frame as having the ability to influence and motivate others (Tierney, 2005). They are frequently required to make choices in order to lead their organizations. Those choices are often influenced by the opinions of followers and public opinion in general (McIntosh, Cacciola, Clermont & Keniry, 2001). Understanding the opinion formation process, how leaders formulate opinions and how they make choices in leading their organizations is still at issue (Burns, 1978; Gardner, 1990). One of the goals of higher education is to create student leaders who are contributing members of society and who are able to generate informed opinions. The purpose of this study was to explore the influence of student-student interactions on change of opinion among student leaders (SLs) and non-student leaders (NSLs). This study compared differences between student leaders and non-student leaders, and sought to examine which types of discussions with students different from oneself, best predict change in opinion. Data from the 2004 College Student Experience Questionnaire (CSEQ) (Pace, 1984) were used in the study. The CSEQ asks respondents about their involvement with leadership experiences and the degree to which they have influenced others' opinions and been influenced by others' opinions. Participants also report how often they have become acquainted with or had discussions with other students who are different from themselves based on several characteristics. These characteristics referred to individuals who had different interests, philosophies of life or personal values, political opinions, religious beliefs, race or ethnic backgrounds, family backgrounds or were from different countries. Data were analyzed via logistic regression and t-tests. Findings revealed that discussions with other students who are different from oneself in regards to political values and country of origin lead to higher levels of opinion change. Opinion change, then, is influenced by specific types of discussions, and these discussions have an even greater influence on SLs than NSLs. In addition, highly involved SLs engage in discussions with others different from oneself significantly more often than less involved SLs for each of the seven types of discussions. ; Ph. D.

1. Rights and powers during public health emergencies / Belinda Bennett and Ian Freckelton -- 2. Pandemics will happen : how have we minimised and managed COVID-19? / Mary-Lousie McLaws -- 3. COVID-19 in historical context : Australian legal and regulatory responses to past influenza pandemics / Gabrielle Wolf -- 4. Federal and state powers to deal with pandemics : cooperation, conflict and confusion / Anne Twomey -- 5. Public health emergencies in Australia / Peta Stephenson, Ian Freckelton and Belinda Bennett -- 6. Government inquiries, investigations and reports during the COVID-19 pandemic / Ian Freckelton -- 7. Obtaining COVID-19 vaccines : how the government sold the parachutes / Justin Malbon -- 8. Human rights in a pandemic / George Williams and Sophie Rigney -- 9. Facemasks for public use during the COVID-19 pandemic : an examination of responses in Australia and England / Fiona McDonald and Claire J Horwell -- 10. The Australian COVIDSafe app and privacy : lessons for the future of privacy regulation / Norman Witzleb and Moira Paterson -- 11. Economic hardship payments in health emergencies / Terry Carney -- 12. Work health and safety : regulating for safe and sustainable work practices in a post-pandemic world / Joellen Riley Munton -- 13. Contract in the time of COVID-19 / Katy Barnett and Matthew Harding -- 14. Post-separation parenting during COVID-19 / Donna Cooper -- 15. The administration of justice during public health emergencies / Nigel Stobbs and Ian Freckelton -- 16. Patient rights and practitioner responsibilities during a pandemic / Marie Bismark, Ron Paterson and Owen Bradfield -- 17. Gender and COVID-19 : an Australian perspective / Belinda Bennett and Claire E Brolan -- 18. First Nations health during COVID-19 pandemic : reversing the gap / Fiona Stanley, Marcia Langton, Sandra Eades and James Ward -- 19. The COVID-19 pandemic and the impact of legislative requirements on residential aged care / Melinda Martin-Khan and Elizabeth Beattie -- 20. Health research and COVID-19 / Margaret Otlowski and Ian Freckelton -- 21. End of life decision-making, advance care planning and estate planning during a pandemic / Kelly Purser, Lindy Willmott, Ben White, Eliana Close and Tina Cockburn.

Globally gender remains a key factor in differing health outcomes for men and women. This article analyses the particular relevance of gender for debates about global health and the role for international human rights law in supporting improved health outcomes during public health emergencies. Looking specifically at the recent Ebola and Zika outbreaks, what we find particularly troubling in both cases is the paucity of engagement with human rights language and the diverse backgrounds of women in these locations of crisis, when women-specific advice was being issued. We find the lessons that should have been learnt from the Ebola experience have not been applied in the Zika outbreak and there remains a disconnect between the international public health advice being issued and the experience of pervasive structural gender inequalities among those experiencing the crises. In both cases we find that responses at the outbreak of the crisis presume that women have economic, social or regulatory options to exercise the autonomy contained in international advice. The problem in the case of both Ebola and Zika has been that leaving structural gender inequalities out of the crisis response has further compounded those inequalities. The article argues for a contextual human rights analysis that takes into account gender as a social and economic determinant of health. (International Affairs (Oxford) / SWP)