Search

Research on calling reflects a shared value that work as a calling can be an ethical good, an integral part of a life well-lived. However, scholarship is unsettled on whether calling is primarily for the personal fulfillment of the worker who experiences it, or whether it must be socially valuable, serving the interests of others. This paper explores whether and how primarily self-oriented callings can be seen as having ethical value by studying third-person accounts of calling in the Portraits of Grief, memorials of 9/11 victims. We found that callings were attributed to people working in multiple occupations but were more likely for first responders than financiers. Further, we compared portraits in which callings were depicted as self-oriented with those that emphasized service to others across the same two occupations. We use ethical theory to confirm why other-oriented callings are seen to have ethical value but also to explain how self-oriented callings may be ethically valuable in the eyes of others. These insights advance research on calling and also have practical implications for workers' pursuit of careers. We also introduce other-reported, archival data as a rich source for inquiry into calling. • Scholarship is unsettled on whether calling is for self or others. • 9/11 victim data depict two forms of calling, self-oriented and other-oriented. • Our data show occupational variances in frequency of forms of calling. • Our findings suggest that both forms of callings are seen to have ethical value. • Our analysis grounds perceptions of self-oriented callings in ethical theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper argues that the model of ethical legitimacy of criminal law should be welcomed. Two types of legitimacy may be recognized - primary and secondary. Primary legitimacy derives its validity from its coherence with ethical principles of responsibility, thus together shaping a message about what is right and wrong. Under this interpretation, severing of the ties between law and ethics does not mean that criminal law ceases to bind in the formalistic sense. Clearly, however, in such a case it loses one of the fundamental rationales for its validity, and it becomes increasingly more difficult to enforce it. Secondary legitimacy, contemporarily often considered the only one, reposes the validity of criminal law in decisions of an authorized legislator, thus deciding upon the bindingness of normative determinations (however, other constructs may also perform this function). Justifiability of ethical legitimacy of criminal law, where the principle of dignity of the person is dominant, is shown by reference to the example of unconscious non-intentionality. Of course, ethical legitimacy of criminal law and the choice of a constitutional anthropological vision have implications not only for this institution. Others include the theory of a criminal act, attempt, assignment of liability for a consequence, defences and errors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is about justice and punishment and their compatibility or incompatibility. The author's topic is the future of punishment and, more specifically, the necessity of punishment in a just social order. In the first part of this paper, the author locates the topic within current debates in critical criminology and the sociology of criminal law. The author argues that it is important to turn to relevant discussions in moral and political philosophy for answers to questions such as whether punishment is necessary, just and, therefore, fully justified in a just social order in the next part of the paper, the author presents one particular theory of a just social order which is itself largely based on a specific theory of justice. Together they represent an extremely well developed case for how punishment can be justified rationally and integrated into a conception of a just social order. In the third part, the author discusses some of the assumptions underlying their assertion that punishment is necessary, even in a just social order.

Health data exchange is a major challenge due to the sensitive information and the privacy issues entailed. Considering the European context, in which health data must be exchanged between different European Union (EU) Member States, each having a different national regulatory framework as well as different national healthcare structures, the challenge appears even greater. Europe has tried to address this challenge via the epSOS ("Smart Open Services for European Patients") project in 2008, a European large-scale pilot on cross-border sharing of specific health data and services. The adoption of the framework is an ongoing activity, with most Member States planning its implementation by 2020. Yet, this framework is quite generic and leaves a wide space to each EU Member State regarding the definition of roles, processes, workflows and especially the specific integration with the National Infrastructures for eHealth. The aim of this paper is to present the current landscape of the evolving eHealth infrastructure for cross-border health data exchange in Europe, as a result of past and ongoing initiatives, and illustrate challenges, open issues and limitations through a specific case study describing how Italy is approaching its adoption and accommodates the identified barriers. To this end, the paper discusses ethical, regulatory and organizational issues, also focusing on technical aspects, such as interoperability and cybersecurity. Regarding cybersecurity aspects per se, we present the approach of the KONFIDO EU-funded project, which aims to reinforce trust and security in European cross-border health data exchange by leveraging novel approaches and cutting-edge technologies, such as homomorphic encryption, photonic Physical Unclonable Functions (p-PUF), a Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) system, and blockchain-based auditing. In particular, we explain how KONFIDO will test its outcomes through a dedicated pilot based on a realistic scenario, in which Italy is involved in health data exchange with other European countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on the incest as an offence under criminal law in Scotland where incest legislation of 1567 was only recently reformed in 1986. It is shown that the strong moral reaction to the topic of incest in Scotland has received a substantial basis in laws to regulate, first, the family and, second, the sexual victimization of children in families. It is also shown how the legal interpretation of incest changed to the question of child sexual abuse as a modern crime. There follows an analysis of the Scottish reformers proposed recommendations for changes to Scottish incest law which, in a final step, leads to an alternative interpretation of the recommendations. The aim of the paper is to study how reforms in the area of Scottish incest law have been organized to make changes that abide in accordance with doctrines which are, by definition, universal. The conceptualization of incest prohibition is rooted in the moral philosophy of the eighteenth century.

Several commentators have linked morality and law-and-order panic campaigns to politico-economic crises facing the state and the need on the part of powerful interest groups in society to assert collective consciousness. The core of this argument is that state and media response to minority group demands is not random but is calculated to neutralize and pre-empt any effective challenge to dominant groups in society. For example, in the North American and British context, it has been argued that the concern with crime in the streets and the high level of public support for harsh criminal actions may be viewed as reflections of antagonism toward or intolerance of non-white minorities and the political gains made by these minorities. A detailed examination of the applicability of this hypothesis to the treatment of the Palestinians in Israel is yet to be carried out. This paper contrasts Palestinian perception of the Intifadah and its impact upon them, to that offered by official spokespersons and the media.