What matters to you.
Sign Out
Play Live Radio
0:00
0:00
NEXT UP:
 
Top

Forum Network

Free online lectures: Explore a world of ideas

Funding provided by:
formallogo-blue.png

Case Western Reserve University

Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, improves people’s lives through preeminent research, education and creative endeavor: innovation and discovery in scholarship that capitalizes on the power of collaboration; learning that is active, creative and continuous; and promotion of an inclusive culture of global citizenship.

http://www.case.edu

  • Divided Loyalties: Professional Standards and Military Duty (Part 3)

    Fri, Feb 11, 2011
    Topic: Ethical, Legal, and Professional Obligations of Medical/Mental Health There has always been some tension between the ethical, legal, and professional obligations of professionals and the requirements of military service. This tension has been increased by the War on Terror. Physicians, mental health professionals, lawyers, and law enforcement/corrections officers serving in the military have been placed in situations in which their professional ethics, obligations, and legal duties may contradict military necessity or directives, or even place the role of professional in direct conflict with the role of military personnel. As the management of armed conflict, the law of war, and the professionalization of the military has increased, this tension has similarly increased. Military professionals have been asked to bring their expertise, skills, and professional talents to the prosecution of military action not just as military personnel but as doctors, mental health professionals, lawyers, and law enforcement/corrections officers. Doctors and mental health professionals are charged with supervising and controlling interrogations, lawyers are asked to provide legal opinions and advise on the treatment of prisoners, and law enforcement and corrections officers must guard and control prisoners. While performing these duties military necessity can impose conflicting duties and concerns. The need for information, validation, or security may require different loyalties and focus than the professional duty. The need for information about an upcoming attack that could save the lives of comrades may directly contradict the need for care or treatment of a prisoner. This symposium brought together professionals, ethicists, theorists and practitioners from medicine, mental health care, the law, law enforcement, and the military to explore these complicated and timely issues in an open and frank discussion.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Divided Loyalties: Professional Standards and Military Duty (Part 5)

    Fri, Feb 11, 2011
    Topic: Ethical, Legal, and Professional Obligations of Police/Correction Officers Serving in the Military There has always been some tension between the ethical, legal, and professional obligations of professionals and the requirements of military service. This tension has been increased by the War on Terror. Physicians, mental health professionals, lawyers, and law enforcement/corrections officers serving in the military have been placed in situations in which their professional ethics, obligations, and legal duties may contradict military necessity or directives, or even place the role of professional in direct conflict with the role of military personnel. As the management of armed conflict, the law of war, and the professionalization of the military has increased, this tension has similarly increased. Military professionals have been asked to bring their expertise, skills, and professional talents to the prosecution of military action not just as military personnel but as doctors, mental health professionals, lawyers, and law enforcement/corrections officers. Doctors and mental health professionals are charged with supervising and controlling interrogations, lawyers are asked to provide legal opinions and advise on the treatment of prisoners, and law enforcement and corrections officers must guard and control prisoners. While performing these duties military necessity can impose conflicting duties and concerns. The need for information, validation, or security may require different loyalties and focus than the professional duty. The need for information about an upcoming attack that could save the lives of comrades may directly contradict the need for care or treatment of a prisoner. This symposium brought together professionals, ethicists, theorists and practitioners from medicine, mental health care, the law, law enforcement, and the military to explore these complicated and timely issues in an open and frank discussion.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • 2010 Midterm Elections: Ohio and the Nation

    Fri, Sep 24, 2010
    The Center for Policy Studies at Case Western Reserve University presents a forum on the critical races, inside and outside Ohio, that will be decided in the crucial 2010 midterm elections. Two prominent campaign strategists, Jerry Austin and Mark Weaver, provide their expert analysis and observations on some of the more competitive electoral races occurring in the November elections. Alexander P. Lamis, Case Western Reserve University associate professor of political science, moderates the discussion.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University
  • dean_baker_hi-res.jpg

    The Budget Deficit: How Big An Issue And What Should Be Done About It?

    Sat, Sep 25, 2010
    Two prominent budget experts, Dean Baker, Ph.D. and Joshua B. Gordon, Ph.D., provide their expert analysis and observations on some of the the big issues surrounding the debate over the federal budget deficit. The Center for Policy Studies presents this forum, which is moderated by Case Western Reserve University Associate Professor of Economics Mark Votruba, Ph.D.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Good Friday Agreement: Dynamics of Conflict, Movements Towards Peace

    Fri, Oct 15, 2010
    Panelists focus on the dynamics of moving toward peace over time from various “points of view,” the (mostly Catholic) Irish Republican paramilitary opposition and the broader, Irish Nationalist community as well as the (mostly Protestant) Loyalist paramilitary along with the broader Unionist community, and, finally and hopefully – the Irish government perspective. The speakers discuss the unfolding dynamics of the conflict’s end and movement toward peace in light of their own experiences or analyses, the focus will account for how different groups’ goals, reasoning, and (in)ability to overcome any internal divisions affected the prospects of peace and of drawing violent parties into mainstream political institutions. Such a focus will help to reveal and highlight the dynamics of dissention within groups that have been conventionally treated as monolithic political actors, as well as how these internal divisions affected the broader conflict between groups that played out more openly over time. These divisions are particularly and acutely salient to both Northern Irish and Irish politics today, with the recent decomissioning of Loyalist groups, the first security force member killings in more than a decade (by Republican ‘dissidents’), the growing number of Republicans and Nationalists becoming disillusioned with Sinn Fein’s ability to effectively negotiate its agenda through Stormont, and the scandal that threatens First Minister Robinson’s position – and therefore the Executive itself. Finally, each speaker discusses how the case of the conflict in Northern Ireland can help us to understand conflict and the chances for peace elsewhere, with panel member(s) expanding on this issue. The aim of the event is to understand and learn from the end of a real-life conflict, including how various points of view were accommodated, while achieving peace and reconciliation. The goal of that understanding is to examine how lawyers might apply similar methods to the practice of law, including negotiations among individuals or groups, arbitration, mediation and other circumstances.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Conflict Resolution and the Good Friday Peace Agreements (Part 1)

    Fri, Oct 15, 2010
    Panelists focus on the dynamics of moving toward peace over time from various “points of view,” the (mostly Catholic) Irish Republican paramilitary opposition and the broader, Irish Nationalist community as well as the (mostly Protestant) Loyalist paramilitary along with the broader Unionist community, and, finally and hopefully – the Irish government perspective. The speakers discuss the unfolding dynamics of the conflict’s end and movement toward peace in light of their own experiences or analyses, the focus will account for how different groups’ goals, reasoning, and (in)ability to overcome any internal divisions affected the prospects of peace and of drawing violent parties into mainstream political institutions. Such a focus will help to reveal and highlight the dynamics of dissention within groups that have been conventionally treated as monolithic political actors, as well as how these internal divisions affected the broader conflict between groups that played out more openly over time. These divisions are particularly and acutely salient to both Northern Irish and Irish politics today, with the recent decomissioning of Loyalist groups, the first security force member killings in more than a decade (by Republican ‘dissidents’), the growing number of Republicans and Nationalists becoming disillusioned with Sinn Fein’s ability to effectively negotiate its agenda through Stormont, and the scandal that threatens First Minister Robinson’s position – and therefore the Executive itself. Finally, each speaker discusses how the case of the conflict in Northern Ireland can help us to understand conflict and the chances for peace elsewhere, with panel member(s) expanding on this issue. The aim of the event is to understand and learn from the end of a real-life conflict, including how various points of view were accommodated, while achieving peace and reconciliation. The goal of that understanding is to examine how lawyers might apply similar methods to the practice of law, including negotiations among individuals or groups, arbitration, mediation and other circumstances.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Can Government Compel Speech by Designating it as its Own? (Part 2)

    Fri, Nov 19, 2010
    The 2010-2011 Case Western Reserve University Law Review Symposium addresses limits on government speech and the government's ability to claim speech as its own in both restricting and compelling speech. Panel three examines the extent to which the government can compel speech by denominating the speech as its own. This is the third panel for Case Western Reserve University's conference, Government's Ability to Compel and Restrict Speech.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Can Government Compel Speech by Designating it as its Own? (Part 1)

    Fri, Nov 19, 2010
    The 2010-2011 Case Western Reserve University Law Review Symposium addresses limits on government speech and the government's ability to claim speech as its own in both restricting and compelling speech. Panel three examines the extent to which the government can compel speech by denominating the speech as its own. This is the third panel for Case Western Reserve University's conference, Government's Ability to Compel and Restrict Speech.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • The Memory of Justice: The Unexpected Place of Lviv, Ukraine

    Wed, Jan 12, 2011
    Philippe Sands discusses the unprecedented contributions of Hersch Lauterpacht, Rafael Lemkin, and Louis Sohn in helping to forge modern international law. Studying and working in eastern Europe in the early 1900s, these three great legal minds together drafted Nuremberg Statute Article 6, the Genocide Convention, and the International Court of Justice Statute.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University

  • Exploring the Current Debate Over Patenting Life (Part 2)

    Fri, Jan 28, 2011
    In part two of the Exploring the Current Debate Over Patenting Life symposium, panelists discuss the role of patents in the development of adult stem cell-based therapies. The symposium addresses the ongoing legal debate that surrounds patents on potentially therapeutic biomedical technologies, including gene patents. The symposium considers how other disciplines, including bioethics and economics, might help to inform the development of novel laws addressing the unique issues arising from the debate. The symposium includes a lecture discussing the role patents have played in spurring the innovation of adult stem cell-based therapies, as well as a presentation on genetic testing and the impact patents have had on patient access to new biomedical technologies.
    Forum Network
    Partner:
    Case Western Reserve University
Load More