A comparison of oregon versus elstad
Us v patane
Clinical Psychology Review, 35, Published online, Toral, F. Moreover, this could indicate that there was more room for high-resource parents to influence treatment content—and thus their children's outcomes—under the less structured health care conditions. The threshold question is this: What effect should an admission or confession of guilt obtained in violation of an accused's Miranda rights be presumed to have upon the voluntariness of subsequent confessions that are preceded by Miranda warnings? The Court appears ambivalent on the question whether there was any constitutional violation. The fact that a suspect chooses to speak after being informed of his rights is, of course, highly probative. Without advising Elstad of his Miranda rights, Officer Burke asked him whether he was aware of the officer's reason for wanting to talk with him, and whether he knew Mr. Moreover, because the Court expressly endorses the "bright-line rule of Miranda," which conclusively presumes that incriminating statements obtained from a suspect in custody without administering the required warnings are the product of compulsion, 1 and because the Court places so much emphasis on the special facts of this case, I am persuaded that the Court intends its holding to apply only to a narrow category of cases in which the initial questioning of the suspect was made in a totally uncoercive setting and in which the first confession obviously had no influence on the second.
Child development, 64 1 The Court's concessions are potentially significant, but its analysis is wholly at odds with established dissipation analysis. How well can a few questionnaire items indicate anxiety and depression?
Where an unwarned statement is preserved for use in situations that fall outside the sweep of the Miranda presumption, "the primary criterion of admissibility [ U. Derogatis, L. Waldfogel, J.
Thus, cumulative risk produced social gradients in treatment effects according to both the treatment conditions and the treatment intensity. We tested both a cubic parameterization of cumulative risk and threshold effects for families with between 2 and 5 cumulative risks.
Ethical Approval All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of an ethical review board; The Norwegian National Committee for Research Ethics, Region South; The Norwegian Social Science Data Services; and with the Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.
based on 10 review