OJ Asian Americans

While reading this article I immediately thought about my good friend who is Korean. His real name is Suk-Wu Lee and was given the Americanized name of Brian when his parents sent him and his brother to the United States. My point is that having an Asian freind has truly shown me that they are one of the most stereotyped races in the United STates. So to hear about the stereotypes during the Oj Simspon case was nothing new. I think the fact that Asians are easy visible by their apperance along with the history of Pearl Harbor has made them an easy target. WHen I saw OJ's sketchings I was stunned. His derogatory pictures were ridiculous and I have no idea how they actually got published. Simpson was a black male who faces many stereotypes himself, so it was interesting to see him turn the tables on another race, when he should have felt their pain.

This huge trial brought out so many issues to the general public and yet the Asian American racism should have been a bigger issue. The judge was Asian. One of the lead forensics scientists who is one fo the best was Asian. Asians have a hgie population in the world and ane ver growing population in the United States and yet they were left out at first and just ignored. This article was extremely revealing and interesting as it helped to bring that issue to the forefront of the public. The fact that D'Amato went on a radio show as a politician and was disgustingly racist is a huge deal. No politician or person has the right to do that. He made fun of an honorable judge, a whole race and thought itwas funny. In his apology he gave a Goffman esque disclaimer which was just unacceptable. He didn't think he did anything wrong, but possibly offended a couple people.

THe attack on Asians brought back the history of Pearl Harbor and internment camps. THis reminds me of 9/11 and how Muslims were automatically looked down upon, as everyone was scared of them and thought they were terrorists. This shows how our country is based on race and people's differences. Whether its an accent thats' made fun of or someone's ethnic appearance, something has to be said. Simpsons sketches may be funny, but they can hurt just as the Dancing Itos or skits that involve race. People may claim it doesn't matter, but you should know better and realize that race is a very sensitive subject.

As we can see from the defense' teams many mistakes involving race and gender, this is a big issue. Cochran and SHapiro both poked fun at Asians too, while the Dream Team didn't even have any women. They were hitting rock bottom with criticism and couldn't seem to do anything right, except take care of OJ. That was their concern as race and gender were thrown under the bus. As Cochran made racism towards Oj a major issue of the case, his team and lawyers were racist themselves. It's ridiculous.

TV News Hyper Coverage

It is evident that this article compeltely focuses on the point I was trying to make about this murder trial in the first place. As ALderman explores the fact that news and entertainment are very related and real in this society. More people were viewing this case, more money was spent covering this case and millions of Americans enjoyed it. EVery day you would check in the OJ case and see what the new piece of the trial was evident.

In my opinion this is just like a soap opera. A sitcom. The news stations were longer trying to report the news. They wanted more viewers. They wanted to make money. SO this race battle was exploited in every single way. Millions of dollars were spent and more anchors and shows covered these mid 90s events than anybody could ahve guessed. This was the most popular issue in a long time and everyone took advantage of it.

Is this what our society has come to? This shouldn't have been a race issue, yet it was turned into one. The different opinions different races had were exploited as well. People were made to think they were outcasts if they didn't back up their race. There was turmoil between whites in blacks, as described in both articles. That's again why I wished I was older during the time. I want to really understand the impact and these articles help with that.

The "way" that these pieces of information were shared is what fuedl the fire. ALderman says that it is also a matter of what is not said. As he points out the data of course is important, but the way it was manipulated is even more important. The media coverage is more important. The geography is important. This is what everyone forgets. Depending on where you were, what station you were watching and what your background was the media could paint a complete different picture for you.

Reaffirming Race

After reading this article I wish I was a college student in the mid 1990s during this trial and event. From everything I have heard about it reveals that it was a much bigger deal than anyone could have thought. When the record tv audiences were being discussed by Hunt in this article I could remember seeing the black reaction of people on tv. All media outlets took advantage of this race war and fueled it in a very negative way. Whether it was when Time blackened OJ's face on the cover, NBC covering the white bronco police chase or CNN showing black women jumping all over the place when SImpson was delcared innocent, it was a raucous.

I found the facts about the opinion polls interesting too, as I knew it would lean that way. The framework of the poll, the deception and jolt of the media and even the lawyers and defendants turned this into more than just a murder trial. It was a race war. EVery single news outlet had their own poll and own reuslts and something new to try to get more viewers. It is kind of disgusting. Here are people mourning over the death of murder victims and the whole scenario was turned into a circus.

The contemporary events int he article where each defintiion is given of parts of the trial was extrmemely insightful. It proved to me that this trial did have everything that you could imagine mixed in between. It turned into a money making scheme for the networks and a fight between races in the real world. The impact of this trial was bigger than anything of the 90s. That really shouldn't be the case.

The fire that was lit under this trial and the misconceptions that came with it are ridiculous. This raced way of thinking Hunt explores should have never been available. But it is. THis article proves the differences of how people thought, but that's about it. There may have been a clear dividing line like Hunt states, but in my opinion it was forced. The UNited States of America turned into a battleground.

Core Values, Value Conflict and Citizens' Ambivalence...

This article was a lot more interesting and relevant in my eyes. It explores a telephone survey done in Florida on how people feel about homosexuals and their rights. Whether its numbers about what people think is wrong about being gay and how they would feel about their children being gay, there is a lot in this article about people's responses.

I continue to think about seeing the Sport, Sexuality and Culture conference at IC a couple weeks ago featuring John Amaechi. He spoke of how there has been progress, but not change. He talked about all the martyrs who have died because they were gay. He went on to say that enough people have died and still people have the same responses. His message was that people need to be aware and change their views. This article links the point of view question and how we really need to figure out how people feel, to attack accordingly for gay rights.

THis survey was both enlightening, full of stigma and disheartening at the same time. I was surprised at some statistics for what people really thought and confused with others. There were things that I thought would be higher like discomfort in having gay teachers or people being ashamed of their children for being gay. Then there were things that were really upsetting on how many people are just ignorant. This article really showed me how stupid some people are and that gay rights still needs prgression. I would have liked to see how my home state or other states would have reacted as well.

Experiences of Family Law Attorneys....

Although this article was kind of dry for me, I still got a couple of concepts from it that I found somewhat interesting. This article tackles family law issues from child relocations to attorney behaavior and including gender bias in the court system. Now these issues might seem intriguing, but the study and way the National COuncil on Family Relations framed their views were not "new, interesting and provocative." In all honesty the stats and numbers and graphs took away from the reading for me. This study was so small and full of discrepanices I wanted to stop reading. The captive audience was misleading as well.

One point I found interesting in this reading had to do with the lawyer behavior and influence section. I remembered watching cnn frontline about plea bargains and how much advantages the lawyers hold in court. They tell the plaintiff or defendant what to expect, how to think, react and what will come enxt. The lawyer is usually more important than any person or witness. THeir behavior towards the case and attitude about court features will directly relay right to their client. Just as the article says, thsi affects what deals and bargains will be made by the defendant. IF their lawyer advises them to take a money amount, settle or fight the battle usually the indivudal will listen. It has to do with how the court and power system is set up. The lawyers are repeat players and know the system, so not to listen in family court would be a mistake.

I can understand all the commotion over child relocation and the sensitive issue of divorce cases, due to the fact that its family. As Dr. Dre raps, "if you really wanna take it there we can, just remember that your fucking with a family man. i got a lot more to lose, remember that." What Dr. Dre realizes is that everyone becomes more serious and intent when family is involved. It triggers something in mothers, fathers and other fgamily members heads that they must protect.

As far as child relocation goes, i think that it deserves to be the kid's decision where to go. The study took random percentages of where the child would end up and with what parent, but that is irrelevant. As we realize, family law is even more difficult than normal law. Everyone has something at stake, even if they aren't involved in the case. Children become bystanders in court wars behind parents and it can get ugly.

The Locker rRoom and the Dorm Room...

This was another great article, that I really enjoyed reading. A lot of the issues brought up by Delliner and Williams were addressed the other week at the Sport, Sexuality and Culture Conference. This reading gave a great insight into different situations that look at sex and sexual harrassment completely different.

At the beginning of the article I was a little upset with how it took shape. There was a lot of information that continued to say that women got harrassed way more than men all the time, and that they are only the victim. Although I do agree that women are sexually harrassed a lot more, some of it has to do with how they behave individually. GIrls these days wear the most ridiculous outfits, make up and styles. Of course men are going to be more attracted and sexual when they witness that. It is human nature to be sexual and horny and I think goes for both genders.

The article then went on to describe how many women enjoy the sexual aspect of their job just as much as men. GIrls who work at Hooters, strip clubs, sex shows and as prostitutes really have a more confusing sexual harrassment line. When is it too much for them? Can women of these statuses actually be considered legit when their whole job is meant to take money from horny men. I just find it hard to be responsible for one thing and not the other.

Another concept that relates to this article has to do witht he idea of institutionalization. How can we blame the girls that copy movie stars and commercials or the guys that just behave like their idols? Both genders have to be included in this talk and then race comes up too. There becomes even thinner lines for race and sexuality and from male to female discrimination. The television tells kids how to act, while advertisements even have a subconscious effect ona dults. It just has to do with how our society is.

The compariosns of Womyn vs. Gentleman's Sohpistication were astounding as well. I had no diea some work environments were so open and fre.e. I think those companies have a good start of taking away much of the stigma attached with sexuality. Of course one is a porn mag and the other is a feminist magazine, but I really think it's a step in the right direction. The desensitization is much like how Europe looks at seuxlaity. If more people could embrace it, then take advanatge of it, we'd all be much better off.

The Influence of Race and Gender on Student Self Reports of Sexual Harrassment by College Professors

This was my first article I read and I was most excited to read about. I had heard of incidents of college professors witht heir students, saw these kind of related stories in movies and on television but had never seen any hard data whichw as supplied in this article.

The problem I had with this article was that I felt like the asnwers may not completely honest within the study. I thought of a movie we watched in Definition of Normality where children were coerced into their witness accounts. Friedman was being investigated for child molestation and many of the children's stories were differing, because of the police and community influence on their answers. In this article, I felt that the study was being forced into college students in a way that made them come with exaggerated answers and classifications of sexual harrassment. If someone kept asking and interviewing you about a topic, couldn't you concede and give an answer that they wanted?

I found the points about the men and women very intersting and agreed with the assessment that these answers may not completley accurate. SOme men may brush off instances, while others may lie and some women could exagerate or misremember some accounts. The study did its beast to find percentages of race and gender who have been harrassed by college professors, but it isn't foolproof.

The enxt part of the article that was very ifnroming spoke about the stereotypes associated with sexual harrassment. If someone is not only attacked about their sexuality, but their specific race related features, then their accounts may be misrepresented as well. The extremity of the situation could be doubled, just by having a racist comment be woven into a sexist one.

The last point I have about the article is closer to the end, but still seen throughout the body of the article. I felt that there were way too many numbers for such a objective study. A lot of opinion and bias goes into the answers for both men and women. There are so many factors, some which were represented int he article. I thought of the knicks sexual harrassment case where a women was awarded millions of dollars for claiming the organization was at fault and disgusting and a slum. If I remember correctly there was no hard evidence that Isiah Thomas, Stephon Marbury or the Knicks did anything wrong, yet they still settled to make the woman be quiet. The publicity was already bad enough and the token word "sexual" made this even more complicated. Sexual harrassment is no doubt a huge problem in our society, whether it is taken advantage of or a legit concern.

The Hollow Hope

This article brings up the biggest dilemma I encountered while reading. It asks you whether the violence, teasing and sacrifices endured by black students trying to integrate into school systems is worth attaining the law that all schools must be "desegregated with all deliberate speed"? When I began this article I wasn't sure that it would have been such a big problem. Then I remembered watching movies like Remember the Titans of how bad black students were treated. It might be cheesy that I connected to a sports movie, but this was the closest connection I had with the 1960s.

I cannot give an opinion about whether Cooper vs. Aaron should have been rejected or not, because it's not my place. I can sit here and say the United States laws are meant to be followed no matter what, but its not that simple. If there's one thing we learned in Law and Society, its that law is much more complicated than anyone thought. The law goes beyond just right and wrong, but rather what right and what wrong. My point is that every decision by a court, rejection or law that is passed is different and the outside factors are extremely important.

We see that with Brown vs. the Board of Education that people even black people were upset with the decision. And this decision was supposed to help those black people. So what does that say? The Civil Rights movement and the Brown case were both trying to move in the same direction far more quickly than anyone had thought. Forcing black people into all white schools might not have been the right move to make at first. I just have to wonder.

The truth is that something needs to be done. We have come a far way from the 1960s but the fact is, there still needs to be work done. The desegrgation techniques haven't failed completely, but haven't succeeded completely either. That's one of the opinions I formed from learning about this. Rosenberg goes into some detail about other cases in the 60s and 70s and their effects. I found his statistics interesting about the Southern states and their desegreation rates. Obviously there was not a quick and concise social movement that took place. It took a long time and with much effort.

The WHole United States is Southern

This article really clarified some questions I had after reading Bell's Brown vs. Board of Article. Thsi focuses more on facts and I enjoyed it. I found out how the South vs. North issue has impacted the Brown vs. Board of Education decision. Forcing people to go to school together and live together who don't like each other might not always work. That's one of the main themes I extracted from Payne's article.

This article also clarified some things I had about how the decision affected everyone. It shows how in the South, everyone didn't think the same as where the Supreme Court was decided. Not everyone was pleased to be putting their black children in the middle of a social movement. I think that it had to happen at one point and the children in the 50s and 60s during the Civil Rights Movement got that job.

We still have a long way to go and this article claims that. Just as slavery took a long time to overcome, complete integration will as well. It obviously can take longer in some well segregated areas and it will definitely more difficult. The Brown vs. Board of Education may not have compeltely taken into account that notion. Although they passing down the law as what schools must do and get of rid, it wasn't that easy.

There still needs to be a strategic way of continuing this social change. It isn't about sterotypes and who did what. It's about everyone thinking about racial eqaulity together. No law can change how a society was directed to think for years and years. This article emphasizes that both sides to meet halfway. It can't just be somethign declared by a court or state. The attitudes have to both be there and the stats have to change. 53 percent of southern blacks agreeing with Brown vs. Board of Education in 1955 won't cut it.

Brown vs. Board of Education and Interest-Conversgence Dilema

I found this article extremely interesting to read. Yet I didn't agree with much of it. When I first started reading it I got the feeling that it absolutely a proganda article that focused on numbers, stats and different theories that continued to not be proven.

I remember my grandpa telling me about the Brown vs. Board of Education in 1954 and how important it was for everyone. This article says that it's not that simple. It says that once again whites are behind a goal to control the United States and racial equality. I don't buy it. I found stereotype after sterotype concerning Professor Herbert Wechsler, and ultimately Professor Charles Black. There were theories talked about how integration hurts blacks more than whites, or whites just won't accept social equality. I think we need to give it a chance and not focus on just negative aspects from Brown vs. Board of Ed.

After seeing how some people viewed this Supreme Court case, I formed my own opinion. I thought of how this article only talks about how the desegregation would hurt blacks from an educational standpoint. I think that integration teaches more than just book smarts. For someone to say the United States goal of desegregation is controversial and meant to keep blacks at a disadvantage is hard for me to take. I found this article somewhat confusing so I hope I understood it right.

In all of these generalizations and small target group that was looked at I formed another question. If people are unhappy with the techniques used after Brown vs. Board, what are some alternatives? This article gave a lot of information on the courts, theories and issues, but not how to necesarily solve them. That's my problem. This issue doesn't seem like such an issue inretrospect. I realize my opinion is completely biased, but I just don't like seeing the race card get pulled. Instead of that approach I would love to see ways to work on it and make changes if they need to be made.

The Sentencing Decision of Black and White Judges...

Since my responses to my other two articles were connected I'm going to connect this one too. The idea behind judges being black and white and critiqueing their sentencing is connected to the same themes I already have seen.

The first has to do with the humanity factor that black judges were obviously going to have. They have been discriminated themselves, as they were minorities for their job and class. This ultimately opens up the can of worms having to do with subconscious decision making in gender issues and whether or not someone should be put on death row. The sensitivity of these issues make all of them connected in another way.

The big idea from this connection is that people are indivudals. No matter what their job title, duties or strict regulations are in place for a part of law, the inner self will always prevail. Decisions in court will always have law and society side by side like ine very instance I discussed.

The numbers portrayed in these articles are very misleading. In this specific article the finidngs stated that their were only slight differences from black to white sentencing. It also said that black judges are still less likely to sentence to jail, but discrepancies for gender and race still were evident in the numbers. This small subsection of analysis during this study is meaningless. Detroit or wherever it was taken place is once again not a big enough determining group. The stats and numbers again were not enough for me in any article.

Structure and Practice of Familial Based...

I think that this article has a lot to do with the first one I read about juries deciding who should be killed or not. I spoke about how jurors have such a hard decision deciding which capital punishment inmates deserve to die for their crimes. I spoke about how prejudice and racism could have an affect on who votes for death for who. It's the same way with this issue.

Many people argue whether jurors seeing a woman in the defendant's seat will help or hurt her chances. I look it at it the same way as before, as any juror has the capacity to be racist, prejudist or subsconciously make a poor decison. That's just how it goes. The same can happen when a woman happens to be sitting in the court room. Some jurors make take it easy. And others might get upset and be more harsh. My point is that noone can tell and there are no pattern.s The court is just too sensitve and the jurors even more.

I do agree with the notion that woman with children or woman with disabilities or disease will be favored more. This has to do with the part of compassion and emotion that is relevant in any court room no matter what. Judges take this sensitivity on that I was speaking about now and make their biased decisions from that. That is no different than a juror deciding an outcome as well.

In this article I was upset with all the numbers and responses to interviews. That wasn't the information I was looking for again. The study done here looked at these gender issues and stayed completely inside the box. I was a little bored with that and needed to make my own conclusions and think about my own ideas.

The Role of the Jury in the Killing State

This article was extremeky interesting for me, talking about the difficult decisions that juries have to make in capital punishment crimes. I for one, support the death penalty so certain things stood out for me. I believe that the scum of our country who commit horrendous crimes do not deserve to live. Why should our tax money be used to support a criminal, who shouldn't even be living?

This article dives into specificalyy how jurors shouldn't be asked to do this job. Racism, prejudice, behavior and good looks can be determinant factors in how a juror subsconciously thinks. I always don't think that a group of 10 -15 people is a true representation fo an entire state. Most of the time jurors might not even know what they are deciding and the true pressure of their decision. In the COnnors example from this article the jurors aren't given pictures of where the criminal would be killed, just the victim. Photos are thrown in these peoples faces, but only from one side. That doesn't seem like a fair honest decision for me.

Other outside factors like I mentioned before can heavily affect the decision and outcome as well. How do we know jurors aren't really deciding to kill someone for the wrong reasons. It could be the color of their skin. It could be the way their eyes look. It could even be that someone looks like the ex of one of the members of the jury. So then that criminal is just unlucky that day?

I also found the part of the article where it questions how the jury members would change their decisions if it was more hands on. These members just have to vote or say a word, rather than doing the capital punishment themselves. I really do share this belief of wondering how the stats would change if deciding someone's death or life was more driectly from your decision. The role of the jury hides that dehumanization a little bit, while forcing jurors to make decisions in a confusing state with only some evidence from one side.

Convictability and Discordant Locales

I wasn't that into Frohamn's article, but still saw connections to our class and what I understand. This shows how race class and gender are once again huge in determining sexual assault cases and the outcome of the case. The discordant locales arguemtn is quite compllicated, but what I got from it was simple. The stereotyping that is aligned with legal work and decisions is getting out of hand.

The study that Frohman did involving the black and latino community of Center Heights was very interesting. I wasn't sure exactly what she wanted to find and had trouble following along,b ut tried my best. I didn't like that she only used observations and interviews to obtain information. The consitutive ethnography may have been sueful to obtain information on prosecutors and plaintiffs alike, but it wasn;t enough for me.

Prosecutorial Discretion: Crack Cocaine...

This article immediately brought me back to the days of Drugs and Society of last semester. Hartley examines the racist laws involving drugs from a different vantage point, but concludes the same things. I remember learning how possessing crack cocaine as opposed to cocaine differs in years in jail b y almost 5 times. That is ironic because the government placed crack in Los ANgeles in the 90s during the Contra turmoil. Blacks and minorities have access to crack, while white kids in the suburbs have access to cocaine. Just a coincidence?

The lawmakers and politicians are from these suburbs and their kids could be the ones purchasing the cocaine. Crack is a cheaper drug to make, distibute and it usually associatred with very low classes. Another coincidence? This article connects directly to that when talking about plea bargains and recuced sentences.

Hartley explains how Puerto Ricans and blacks were much less likely ot be offered deals than whites. They could ahve the exact same crime and yet go to jail for longer or pay more money in fees. Race sex and age play way too much of a part in the legal system and undoubtedly affects every outcome. Hartley insists that the perceptual shorthand plays intot his and can be viewed as a form of racism. The judges, prosecutors and jury all add to the legal system and its discrepancies.

The Impact of Legal Counsel....NYC

I was astonished while reading this article about the numbers while showing the landlords vs. tenants in New York City. The landlords have an immense advantage being able to afford and supply lawyers for their cases against tenants who don't pay and need to be evicted. 78 percent of landlords have lawyers while onyl 21 percent of the tenants had lawyers in one the studies in Seron's article.

Before reading this article I understood that of course poor people would use lawyers less. It's just a known fact. The group of people Seron researched were from the Housing Court of NYC so they are obviously less advabtaged. I felt like I was being told something I already knew was obvious and true for parts of the article. That's what upset me. New York is an expensive place to live so of course the rate of people being studied can't afford to live, so how would they be able to afford lawyers.

That's where shows its biased and racist roots. The majority of these poverty stricken tenants were minorities and had to represent themselves in course. SO there's the two huge disadvantages they have to voercome. Not being white in court is one. And not being rich and having a lawyer is the second. So how can they stand a chance?

The Oven Bird's Song

I liked how the title of this article refers to Robert Frost's poem and draws a direct connection to personal injury suits. The response to the perception of disintegration and decay parallels between the deep poem and subject of Engel's paper. It was hard for me to understand exactly how it connected, but I felt this article tried to keep the reader involved.
I found this article connected to the other one I read about why people sue. Engel examines a small rural community of Sander County in Illinios and their experiences with personal injury. In May and Stengel's article they do exactly the same thing for a diiferent community in Wisconsin. I just don't understand how those subjects would be a good group to prove anything. The subjects need to be varied, diverse and then the study would be a lot more relevant to Law and Society and the nation for that matter. Wisconsin and Illinois are not in my eyes a good representation.
That being said, this article was still interesting. The people of Sander County are described as sue happy and everyone goes to court all the time. Personal injury plaintiffs were viewed as trouble makers int he country, because wherever you looked someone was suing for something. They continued to try to make a quick buck and take advantage of the legal system. That's why I didn't disregard this article. Their goal may have been to take a look at this specific county where everyone sues, so the absence of variety can be overlooked.
I really don't agree with Engel's argument that the social change of Sander County made them more likely to sue. He says that the uncomfortable that the county felt as it started changing in the 1970s attributes to their sue happy nature and actions. I think there might have been some influence, but I also see someone trying to force a pattern and common theme. The community's reaction to "outsiders" coming into the county can't be connected to the notion of everyone going to court excessively.
This farm town once viewed personal injury as something that just happened...fate. That was in the 70s and 80s. Engel says that the ideas behind money and hard work were strict as well in that time. People were known to be "level headed" and "realistic" in these times, but then it just changed due to community pressures? I don't buy that.

Who syes their doctors?

I read this article too to get a connection with my first reading about medical malpractice. I thought that it would be good to see two different sources examine the same idea of who and why people sue their doctors and what exactly is medical malpractice. This article also uses the Felstiner, Abel and Sarat article from past weeks to analyze concepts.

This article first states the idea behind someone suing their doctor. When an instance occurs the patient always has a choice for their grievance. They can do nothing, avoid the problem and change doctors, make the claim against their doctor trying to gain some sort of remedy, engage is disputing with help or go to a lawyer for help, but end up not suing. These choices are explored in this article and shows the potential influences of why they would occur. I found it very interesting to see the different characteristics and styles of people and why they decide to sue or not.

Although I felt like the way the infromation was collected was not optimal. The surveying could have many discrepancies in it and may not as accurate because of the similar audience. I realize the limitation of this concept and its research, but I believe this article can only be relevant to specifics. It is in two cities in Wisconsin and may not incorporate a full understanding of a whole opulation. That's why I was very curious and careful in reading this article. It's a good study but only a small level and only gives some hypotheses at a small starting point in this issue. It was very detailed, which helped to give me some hope and gave the study a chance.

One thing I found interesting was how the article explained the doctor relationship with the patient. I have a great realtionship with my family physician at home and can safely say I don't beleive my family would ever file a complaint against him. I believe that the relationship status is very important. Most people are hesitant to file complaints against people they think highly of or has helped them in the past. My doctor has helped me and my famiy so much, developing a strong foundation of a relationship with the Cohen-Shikora family. Dr. Robert Rothernbergy is safe is my eyes. The effects that May and Stengel used to decipher the quality of the relationship was intersting as well. I think it has to do with more than just if the doctor rushes them, showed concern or always informed them as a patient. These are undoubtedly important, but doesn't tell the whole story except for this sole study. The only way to completely figure out the real relationship of patients and doctors is advanced studying of each individual. Each person is so different that a survey cannot hope to fully explore this topic.

The true factor I thought that had a direct correlation with whether patients sue or not has to do with the patient's knowldege level. This was shown in the article of whether the patient has knowledge of the medical practice, doctors and lawyers. Someone who realizes that they were seriously hurt and the doctors didn't follow procedures well would absolutely be more likely to file a grievance. If you are educated about this and can spot when the doctor is at wrong and you have a suit, then you will go ahead with it. It's the same for money. If you realize that you can make all this money by suing your doctor for something they did wrong, then chances are you will go ahead with it too. Patients who aren't informed or realize they have a clear problem with their medical care and doctor's actions, just won't even think of it.

Medical Malpractice, Social Structure, and Social Control

While reading this article I immediately thought of my Hebrew school principal. She was a large woman named Diane Berg and thus everyone called her Iceberg. Anyway, we were young at the time and didn't understand her situation. She took a leave of absence and noone knew where she went. It ended up that she went to get surgery to lose weight, whatever that is called. While getting surgery a doctor left an operating towel in her stomach. She got sick and ended up losing even more weight. After she recovered, she was at a normal weight, in the middle of winning millions of dollars and was on her way to being much healthier than before the ultimate operation.

I found this memory very comical while reading this article. Mullis talks of howthe malpractice plaintiff must show that the a duty of care was owed by the defendant, that they were negligent and thus caused an injury that affected the defendant. This of course happened in this case, but Iceberg ended up in better shape and lost more weight because of the negligence. Of course if someone left a towel in me I would be pissed and sue too, but this woman got a win win situatio
n. I'm not sure about how much she won, but she definitely lost a person from her weight.

This has to do with the current age that Mullis talks about. "The rate of litigation, the amount of damages awarded, the level of malpractice insurance premiums all reached new heights during this recent period." At one end Mullis is completely right that this has become ridiculous. Doctors are always at risk even doing intesne and advanced procedures. There's always the initial risk of doing something wrong, but the added pressure of the loss of reputation and money makes this occupation even harder.

I think of Kanye West, a multi millionaire suing doctors for the loss of his mother. She went in to get an unneccesary surgery of tummy tuck or something like that. There were complications and she died. Now, I'm not sure of the details, but suing is not going to bring Kanye's mom back. He is already loaded. So I feel as he is jsut following this stupid pattern Mullis is aware of. The concerns of this pattern are reaching an all time high and will just continue to grow. I think that these malpractices need to be taken seriously, but sensitively. There is no deviant behavior involved in one isolated accident, but repeated accounts can be targeted heavier. I think there should be a distinct difference set out in doctors just getting unlucky or severely doing something to hurt of kill or their patient.

The sociological questions that Mullis asks have to do witht he background of the case. He says that social control is a huge factor in the medical grievance. How does the person react? What's their first instinct after the fact? These are important because it can tell how legit the claim is. It will differentiate the person who si really harmed and the one just wanting to get money. The negligence must be proved well in my eyes. We can't continue to have sue happy people looking for a quick buck from any avenue.

Gender, Race, Social Class, and Law

This article completely brought me back into one of my previous classes with Professor Baker from last semester. The class Drugs and Society, which is my favorite class of all time exmamined how the drug laws were completely gendered, racist and biased for the lawmakers. Learning about how the sentence for crack possession was so many times longer than coke possesion and that the drug war and related laws attacks foreign countries and their assets or harmless pot users sparked my interest.

Now this article explains to me how there are so many more factors and can be applied to more than just drug law. There are so many aspects of law today that make no sense or specifically help a single group more than others. It is just ridiculous.

This article shows evidence that the laws were structured to be racist and bias from the very beginning. Women were meant to be inferior, anyone who wasn't white wasn't equal and the first laws reflected that. There are still huge sections of law that are outdated and still prosecute these classes.

Critical Traditions in Law and Society Research
Susan S. Silbey;Austin Sarat

In this journal article the idea that "we have not done very well at promoting a sociology of the sociology of law" stood out the most for me. Since my father is a lawyer, I have seen first hand the ideas and morals that connect closely to law and how a lawyer must behave. The lawyers who have to defend druglords and rapists and murderers have to seperate themselves from their work. If the ideas from law and society were available to these lawyers during the time when they learn about law, they might second guess their work.

I also agree with this article in the sense that something has to be done. I mentioned to dad about this class Law and Society and he had no idea what that was. He explained to me how he never had that option in high school, college or law school when he was pursuing a degree in environmental law. All the classes were formal and designed around strict law and the "is what it is" mentality. I spoke to my dad about how this class was going to examine law from a completely different aspect. This article made me realize just that.

The lawyers of the old generation like my father need to be re taught how to look at law. The new generation and new thinking behind law should come up in more than just sociology standpoints. I find it imperative that the law and society movement needs to become more than critics, as Bloch suggested is where sociologists began.