男男性服务群体的性、性网络、艾滋风险——以东北地区为例

男男性服务者是近些年来地下性产业中的新兴群体,其在性身份认同、服务分层、组织类别等方面呈现出比女性性服务者更为复杂的生存样态。同时,艾滋病在男男性接触群体的迅猛传播,也使男男性服务者成为艾滋病防治工作的重点干预对象。文章采用参与观察、个案深入访谈和专题小组讨论的定性研究方法,对我国东北地区男男性服务网络进行调研和分析,对商业性网络的隐秘特征和运行机制、男男性服务者的多元性存在状态进行文化阐释,并在此基础上分析不同性取向群体、不同场所、不同服务种类的艾滋病风险因素并给予社会科学的干预建议。     

Why don't women want to be social workers anymore? New managerialism,postfeminism and the shortage of social workers in social services departments in England and Wales

Since its origins as a philanthropic activity, the practice of social work in the UK has, numerically at least, been dominated by women. This continues to be the case, though fewer women are presenting themselves as candidates for training courses, and men do not appear to be taking their place. In addition, social workers are leaving their posts for alternative career opportunities. As a consequence there is a staffing shortage, which in some parts of London and the south-east of England, is said to have reached crisis proportions. Whilst there are a number of reasons as to why this situation has evolved, this paper gives particular attention to the way in which new managerialism is contributing to the difficulties in retaining staff. The difficulties in recruiting staff are attributed not only to the low status that is afforded caring work in late modernity, but also the postfeminist context that provides women with new opportunities for paid work in the public sphere.     

Obstacles to gaining ethical approval for a multi-centre study of family support

The NHS has emphasised the need for rigorous evaluations of preventative home-visiting support (Bull and others, 2004) in building a public health evidence base. Interdisciplinary studies involving the NHS in any capacity are subject to ethical review by NHS Research Ethics Committees. However, the current process of ethical review does not respond flexibly to research conducted by non-NHS organisations. Through documentary analysis, this paper describes the experience of a non-clinical research evaluation of a family support service offered during pregnancy and the difficulties encountered in gaining ethical approval. Implications for social science research with minimal NHS involvement are discussed and recommendations for improvements suggested.     

Belief in Public Efficacy, Trust, and Attitudes Toward Modern Genetic Science

Government and policymakers want to engage the public in a dialogue about the conduct and consequences of science and increasingly seek to actively involve citizens in decision-making processes. Implicit in this thinking is that greater transparency and public inclusion will help dispel fears associated with new scientific advancements, foster greater public trust in those accountable, and ultimately increase the acceptability of new technologies. Less understood, however, are public perceptions about such high-level involvement in science and how these map onto public trust and attitudes within a diverse population. This article uses the concept of public efficacy -- the extent to which people believe that the public might be able to affect the course of decision making -- to explore differences in trust, attentiveness, and attitudes toward modern genetic science. Using nationally representative data from the 2003 British Social Attitudes Survey, we begin by examining the characteristics of those who have a positive belief about public involvement in this area of scientific inquiry. We then focus on how this belief maps on to indicators of public trust in key stakeholder groups, including the government and genetic scientists. Finally, we consider the relationship between public efficacy and trust and attitudes toward different applications of genetic technology. Our findings run contrary to assumptions that public involvement in science will foster greater trust and lead to a climate of greater acceptance for genetic technology. A belief in public efficacy does not uniformly equate with more trusting attitudes toward stakeholders but is associated with less trust in government rules. Whereas trust is positively correlated with more permissive attitudes about technologies such as cloning and gene therapy, people who believe in high-level public involvement are less likely to think that these technologies should be allowed than those who do not.