Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Book Review

  • Published:
Criminal Law Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. E.g., World Health Organization,WHO Guidelines on HIV Infection and AIDS in Prisons (1993) [hereinafterWHO Guidelines]; World Health Organization,WHO Statement from the Consultation on Prevention and Control of AIDS in Prisons (1987) [hereinafterWHO Statement]; Council of Europe, Recommendation 1080 (1988) on a Co-ordinated European Health Policy to Prevent the Spread of AIDS in PrisonsI 14A(i)-(viii).

  2. Theodore M. Hammett et al.,1992 Update: AIDS in Correctional Facilities 36–43 (1993).

  3. Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report].

  4. U.S. Nat'l Comm'n on Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome,HIV Disease in Correctional Facilities 10 (1991) [hereinafter U.S. Nat'l Comm'n].

  5. Diane Riley,Drug Use in Prisons, in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Background Materials 152, 154 (1994) [hereinafterBackground Materials].

  6. Prisoners with AIDS/HIV Support Action Network (Toronto, Can.),HIV/AIDS in Prison Systems: A Comprehensive Strategy 15 (1992) [hereinafterPASAN Report].

  7. Peggy Millson, Evaluation of a Programme to Prevent HIV Transmission in Injection Drug Users in Toronto (Toronto, Can., Bd. of Health, 1991).

  8. Hans Heilpern & Sandra Egger,AIDS in Australian Prisons—Issues and Policy Options 38 (Canberra, Austl., Dep't of Commun. Serv. & Health, 1989).

  9. Alex Wodak,Behind Bars: HIV Risk-taking Behaviour of Sydney Male Drug Injectors while in Prison, inHIV/AIDS and Prisons 239, 240–41 (Jennifer Norberry et al. eds., 1991).

  10. Helen Pickering & Gerry V. Stimson,Syringe Sharing in Prison, 342 Lancet 621, 621–22 (1993); Philip A. Thomas,HIV/AIDS in Prisons, 29(1) How. J. Crim. Just. 1, 7–10 (1990).

  11. Hammett et al.,supra note 2. Theodore M. Hammett et al.,1992 Update: AIDS in Correctional Facilities 36–43 (1993), at 80.

  12. David Shewan et al.,Prison as a Modifier of Drug Using Behaviour, Addiction Res. (forthcoming 1995); Avril Taylor et al., Outbreak of HIV Infection in a Scottish Prison (paper presented at the Tenth International Conference on AIDS, Yokohama, Japan, Aug. 7–12, 1994); Paul J. Turnbull et al., Prison Decreases the Prevalence of Behaviours But Increases the Risks (poster abstract no. PoC 4321, Eighth International Conference on AIDS, Amsterdam, Netherlands, July 19–24 1992).

  13. Final Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], at 69.

  14. For more information, see Ralf Jürgens,Taking HIV Prevention Seriously: Provision of Needles in a Swiss Prison, 1 Can. HIV/AIDS Pol'y & L. Newsl. 1 (1994).

  15. Hammett et al.,supra note 2, Theodore M. Hammett et al.,1992 Update: AIDS in Correctional Facilities 36–43 (1993), at 80.

  16. Id. Hammett et al.,supra note 2, Theodore M. Hammett et al.,1992 Update: AIDS in Correctional Facilities 36–43 (1993), at 80.

  17. Heilpern & Egger,supra note 8, Hans Heilpern & Sandra Egger,AIDS in Australian Prisons—Issues and Policy Options 38 (Canberra, Austl., Dep't of Commun. Serv. & Health, 1989), at 40.

  18. Peter L. Nacci & Thomas R. Kane,Sex and Sexual Aggression in Federal Prisons (1982).

  19. U.S. Nat'l Comm'n,supra note 4, U.S. Nat'l Comm'n on Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome,HIV Disease in Correctional Facilities 10 (1991) [hereinafter U.S. Nat'l Comm'n], at 16.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Hammett et al.,supra note 2, Theodore M. Hammett et al.,1992 Update: AIDS in Correctional Facilities 36–43 (1993), at 78.

  21. Timothy W. Harding & Georgette Schaller,HIV/AIDS Policy for Prisons or for Prisoners?, inAIDS in the World 761, 767 (Jonathan M. Mann et al. eds., 1992).

  22. Hammett et al.,supra note 2, Theodore M. Hammett et al.,1992 Update: AIDS in Correctional Facilities 36–43 (1993), at 43. The following data are taken fromid. at 43–47.

  23. Id. Hammett et al.,supra note 2, Theodore M. Hammett et al.,1992 Update: AIDS in Correctional Facilities 36–43 (1993), at 47. The following data are taken fromid. at 43–47.

  24. Id. Hammett et al.,supra note 2, Theodore M. Hammett et al.,1992 Update: AIDS in Correctional Facilities 36–43 (1993), at 47. The following data are taken fromid. at 43–47, (citing R. Wikberg & W. Rideau,The Medusa Strain, 17 The Angolite 22 (1992)).

  25. Background Materials, supra note 5, Diane Riley,Drug Use in Prisons, in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Background Materials 152, 154 (1994) [hereinafterBackground Materials], at 60 (citation omitted).

  26. Taylor et al.,supra note 12, David Shewan et al.,Prison as a Modifier of Drug Using Behaviour, Addiction Res. (forthcoming 1995); Avril Taylor et al., Outbreak of HIV Infection in a Scottish Prison (paper presented at the Tenth International Conference on AIDS, Yokohama, Japan, Aug. 7–12, 1994); Paul J. Turnbull et al., Prison Decreases the Prevalence of Behaviours But Increases the Risks (poster abstract no. PoC 4321, Eighth International Conference on AIDS, Amsterdam, Netherlands, July 19–24 1992), at 11.

  27. Jürgens,supra note 14, For more information, see Ralf Jürgens,Taking HIV Prevention Seriously: Provision of Needles in a Swiss Prison, 1 Can. HIV/AIDS Pol'y & L. Newsl. 1 (1994), at 5 (citing Kate Dolan et al.,Evidence of HIV Transmission in an Australian Prison, 160 Med. J. Austl. 734 (1994)).

  28. Ronald Bayer et al.,The Dual Epidemics of Tuberculosis and AIDS: Ethical and Policy Issues in Screening and Treatment, 83(5) Am. J. Pub. Health 649, 649 (1993).

  29. Hammett et al.,supra note 2, Theodore M. Hammett et al.,1992 Update: AIDS in Correctional Facilities 36–43 (1993), at 11.

  30. Id. Hammett et al.,supra note 2, Theodore M. Hammett et al.,1992 Update: AIDS in Correctional Facilities 36–43 (1993), at 12.

  31. Ron St. John, Tuberculosis in Canada 3 (notes prepared for the National Workshop on Tuberculosis: HIV and Other Emerging Issues, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, May 3–5, 1993).

  32. Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: A Working Paper of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons (1993).

  33. See generally Background Materials, supra note 5, Diane Riley,Drug Use in Prisons, in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Background Materials 152, 154 (1994) [hereinafterBackground Materials] which also contains, among other things, the results of the questionnaire ECAP sent to inmate committees and staff in federal correctional institutions, and an in-depth legal and ethical analysis of disclosure of offender medical information.

  34. T. Fordham Brewer,HIV in Prisons: A Pragmatic Approach, 5 AIDS 897 (1991).

  35. WHO Guidelines, supra note 1,E.g., World Health Organization,WHO Guidelines on HIV Infection and AIDS in Prisons (1993) [hereinafterWHO Guidelines]; World Health Organization,WHO Statement from the Consultation on Prevention and Control of AIDS in Prisons (1987) [hereinafterWHO Statement]; Council of Europe, Recommendation 1080 (1988) on a Co-ordinated European Health Policy to Prevent the Spread of AIDS in PrisonsI 14A(i)-(viii).

  36. ECAP's recommendations appear throughoutFinal Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], and in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Summary Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS in Prisons 37–44 (1994) [hereinafterSummary Report].

  37. Final Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], at 26.

  38. Commissioner, Correctional Serv. of Can., Directive No. 835 (1987).

  39. PASAN Report, supra note 6, Prisoners with AIDS/HIV Support Action Network (Toronto, Can.),HIV/AIDS in Prison Systems: A Comprehensive Strategy 15 (1992) [hereinafterPASAN Report], at 21.

  40. Summary Report, supra note 36, ECAP's recommendations appear throughoutFinal Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], and in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Summary Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS in Prisons 37–44 (1994) [hereinafterSummary Report], at 8–9.

  41. Id. Summary Report, supra note 36, ECAP's recommendations appear throughoutFinal Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], and in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Summary Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS in Prisons 37–44 (1994) [hereinafterSummary Report], at 9.

  42. Id. Summary Report, supra note 36, ECAP's recommendations appear throughoutFinal Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], and in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Summary Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS in Prisons 37–44 (1994) [hereinafterSummary Report], at 18.

  43. Id. Summary Report, supra note 36, ECAP's recommendations appear throughoutFinal Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], and in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Summary Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS in Prisons 37–44 (1994) [hereinafterSummary Report], at 21.

  44. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, U.S. Dep't of Health & Hum. Serv., HIV/AIDS Prevention Bull., Apr. 19, 1993, at 1 (emphasis in original).

  45. Summary Report, supra note 36, ECAP's recommendations appear throughoutFinal Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], and in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Summary Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS in Prisons 37–44 (1994) [hereinafterSummary Report], at 20–21.

  46. Id. Summary Report, supra note 36, ECAP's recommendations appear throughoutFinal Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], and in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Summary Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS in Prisons 37–44 (1994) [hereinafterSummary Report], at 21.

  47. Id. Summary Report, supra note 36, ECAP's recommendations appear throughoutFinal Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], and in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Summary Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS in Prisons 37–44 (1994) [hereinafterSummary Report], at 21.

  48. Final Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], at 73 (quoting Brian Kearns, Acting Chief Executive Officer, Alberta, Can., Alcohol & Drug Abuse Comm'n).

  49. Shewan et al.,supra note 12, David Shewan et al.,Prison as a Modifier of Drug Using Behaviour, Addiction Res. (forthcoming 1995); Avril Taylor et al., Outbreak of HIV Infection in a Scottish Prison (paper presented at the Tenth International Conference on AIDS, Yokohama, Japan, Aug. 7–12, 1994); Paul J. Turnbull et al., Prison Decreases the Prevalence of Behaviours But Increases the Risks (poster abstract no. PoC 4321, Eighth International Conference on AIDS, Amsterdam, Netherlands, July 19–24 1992).

  50. Frank McLeod,Methadone, Prisons, and AIDS, inHIV/AIDS and Prisons, supra note 9, Alex Wodak,Behind Bars: HIV Risk-taking Behaviour of Sydney Male Drug Injectors while in Prison, inHIV/AIDS and Prisons 239, 240–41 (Jennifer Norberry et al. eds., 1991), at 245, 248.

  51. Heilpern & Egger,supra note 8, Hans Heilpern & Sandra Egger,AIDS in Australian Prisons—Issues and Policy Options 38 (Canberra, Austl., Dep't of Commun. Serv. & Health, 1989), at 94.

  52. Mary Buckstead,Health Care Services, 17(1) Let's Talk 8, 8–9 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Summary Report, supra note 36, ECAP's recommendations appear throughoutFinal Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], and in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Summary Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS in Prisons 37–44 (1994) [hereinafterSummary Report], at 35.

  54. Id. Summary Report, supra note 36, ECAP's recommendations appear throughoutFinal Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], and in Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Summary Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS in Prisons 37–44 (1994) [hereinafterSummary Report], at 35.

  55. See generally Health Care Serv. Branch, Correctional Serv. of Can., CSC Response to the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons (ECAP) (background paper Mar. 24, 1994).

  56. Correctional Serv. of Can., Correctional Service of Canada Announces Response to Final Recommendations Submitted by the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 2 (news release Mar. 24, 1994).

  57. Prisoners with HIV/AIDS Support Action Network, Prisoner HIV/AIDS Activists Challenge Correctional Service Canada's Inadequate Response to HIV/AIDS and Prisons (press release Mar. 25, 1994).

  58. Editorial,Prison System Guilty of AIDS Complacency, Vancouver Sun, Apr. 2, 1994, at A18,available in LEXIS, World Library, Allnws File.

  59. Final Report, supra note 3, Correctional Serv. of Can.,HIV/AIDS in Prisons: Final Report of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons 15–18 (1994) [hereinafterFinal Report], at 66.

  60. Michael Kirby,AIDS in Prisons in Australia, 59 Medico-Legal J. 252, 263 (1991).

  61. Nils Christie,Crime Control as Industry (2d ed. 1994).

  62. The Crisis in Correctional Health Care: The Impact of the National Drug Control Strategy on Correctional Health Services, 117(1) Annals Int. Med. 71, 76 (1992).

  63. Id. The Crisis in Correctional Health Care: The Impact of the National Drug Control Strategy on Correctional Health Services, 117(1) Annals Int. Med. 71, 76 (1992). at 76.

  64. Timothy W. Harding,HIV Infection and AIDS in the Prison Environment: A Test Case for the Respect of Human Rights, inAIDS and Drug Misuse 197 (John Strang & Gerry V. Stimson eds., 1990).

  65. WHO Statement, supra note 1E.g., World Health Organization,WHO Guidelines on HIV Infection and AIDS in Prisons (1993) [hereinafterWHO Guidelines]; World Health Organization,WHO Statement from the Consultation on Prevention and Control of AIDS in Prisons (1987) [hereinafterWHO Statement]; Council of Europe, Recommendation 1080 (1988) on a Co-ordinated European Health Policy to Prevent the Spread of AIDS in Prisons ¶ 14A(i)-(viii).

  66. The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report].

  67. Case Stated by the Director of Public Prosecutions (No. 1 of 1993), 66 A. Crim. R. 259, 260–61 (Austl. S. Austl. Crim. App. 1993) (Question of Law Reserved on Acquittal) [hereinafter 1993 Case Stated].

  68. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report], ¶¶ 1.19–1.21.

  69. R. v. Stanbrook, 65 A. Crim. R. 107, 110 (Austl. Vict. Crim. App. 1993).

  70. 1993 Case Stated, 66 A. Crim. R. at 279 (Perry, J.), 283 (Duggan, J.).

  71. Stanbrook, 65 A. Crim. R. 107.

  72. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report], ¶ 1.24.

  73. P.W. Young,Current Topics: Sex Education for Judges, 67 Austl. L.J. 323 (1993).

  74. See generally Regina Graycar & Jenny Morgan,The Hidden Gender of Law (1990). For further information, see sources citedinfra note 63See Lynn Hecht Schafran,Gender Bias in the Courts: Time Is Not the Cure, 22 Creighton L. Rev. 413 (1989). Women have made up close to 50 percent of the students in Australian law schools for many years, but these numbers have not been reflected in positions of influence open to male colleagues with similar backgrounds. Linda Kirk,Success on Our Terms: The Case for Women Lawyers, 17 Adel. L. Rev. (forthcoming 1995). Some U.S. research suggests that younger male lawyers may not have much better gender awareness than their older brethren. Gender Bias Task Force, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit,Final Report: The Effects of Gender in the Federal Courts 72–73 (1993). Many of the false myths and negative stereotypes about women and sexual assault are enshrined in judicial decisions and repeated in textbooks widely used by students. Nancy S. Erickson,Final Report: “Sex Bias in the Teaching of Criminal Law,” 42 Rutgers L. Rev. 309 (1990); Ngaire Naffine,Windows on the Legal Mind: The Evocation of Rape in Legal Writing, 18 Melb. U. L. Rev. 741 (1992).

  75. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report], ¶¶ 1.41–1.55.

  76. Id. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report], ¶ 125. In fairness to the Australian judiciary, it must be noted that the remarks described are not unique to Australia. Similarly insensitive remarks have been made by judges in England.Id. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report], ¶ 126. The task force reports issued by many U.S. states also describe improper remarks by judges. In a recent case from California, a trial court's decision in a divorce matter was overturned on appeal, in part on the basis of inappropriate remarks about the wife's appearance and a stereotypical double standard about the benefits of marriage, expressed in the demeaning observation “why...do you buy the cow when you get the milk free.”In re Iverson, 15 Cal. Rptr. 2d 70, 72 (Ct. App. 1992). More recently, a Maryland trial court judge imposed a 3-year sentence, with 18 months suspended, on a man who killed his wife after finding her in bed with another man. State v. Peacock, No. 94-CR-0943 (Baltimore Cty. Cir. Ct. Oct. 17, 1994). The judge remarked, “I seriously wonder how many [married] men would have the strength to walk away without inflicting some corporal punishment.” The Baltimore Women's Law Center has protested to the state appellate court, seeking disciplinary action against the judge. Editorial,Injustice in Maryland, Christian Sci. Monitor, Nov. 1, 1994, at 18,available in LEXIS, World Library, Allnws File; Anna Quindlen, Editorial,Public and Private: The Same Old Math, N.Y. Times, Oct. 22, 1994, § 1, at 23,available in LEXIS, World Library, NYT File.

  77. Supreme Court Task Force on Women in the Courts, N.J.,The First Year Report 1 (1984).

  78. 1 Gender Bias Comm., Law Soc'y of B.C., Can.,Gender Equality in the Justice System at 1:2 (1992);see also Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 54, Equality before the Law ¶ 3.33 (1993) [hereinafterALRC Discussion Paper].

  79. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report], ¶ 1.

  80. Id. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 3.22–3.34.

  81. Id. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'nDiscussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 14–16 (quoting a submission from the Victorian Bar Council).

  82. Id. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 19 (quoting a submission from the Victorian Bar Council).

  83. Id. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Lagal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 19 (quoting a submission from the Victorian Bar Council)

  84. Id. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 5.5–5.84. (quoting a submission from the Victorian Bar Council).

  85. ALRC Discussion Paper, supra note 13, 1 Gender Bias Comm., Law Soc'y of B.C., Can.,Gender Equality in the Justice System at 1:2 (1992);see also Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 54, Equality before the Law ¶ 3.33 (1993) [hereinafterALRC Discussion Paper], chs. 1, 3.

  86. ALRC Interim Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶ 2.2.

  87. Id. ALRC Interim Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶ 1.3.

  88. Id. ALRC Interim Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 4.15–4.21.

  89. Id. ALRC Interim Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report] ¶¶ 4.23–4.24.

  90. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part I, Equality before the Law: Justice for Women (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. I]. This report also recommends significant changes to the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act and addresses the problem of bias against women in areas such as family law, immigration law, and refugee law. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part II, Equality before the Law: Women's Equality (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. II], advocates the introduction of a constitutionally entrenched Equality Act, discusses the particular problems facing women in the courts, and recommends changes at all levels of legal education.

  91. ALRC Final Report Pt. I, supra note 25, Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part I, Equality before the Law: Justice for Women (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. I]. This report also recommends significant changes to the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act and addresses the problem of bias against women in areas such as family law, immigration law, and refugee law. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part II, Equality before the Law: Women's Equality (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. II], advocates the introduction of a constitutionally entrenched Equality Act, discusses the particular problems facing women in the courts, and recommends changes at all levels of legal education. ¶¶ 4.8–4.21.

  92. Id. ALRC Final Report Pt. I, supra note 25, Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part I, Equality before the Law: Justice for Women (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. I]. This report also recommends significant changes to the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act and addresses the problem of bias against women in areas such as family law, immigration law, and refugee law. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part II, Equality before the Law: Women's Equality (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. II], advocates the introduction of a constitutionally entrenched Equality Act, discusses the particular problems facing women in the courts, and recommends changes at all levels of legal education. recommendation 4.3.

  93. Id. ALRC Final Report Pt. I, supra note 25, Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part I, Equality before the Law: Justice for Women (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. I]. This report also recommends significant changes to the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act and addresses the problem of bias against women in areas such as family law, immigration law, and refugee law. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part II, Equality before the Law: Women's Equality (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. II], advocates the introduction of a constitutionally entrenched Equality Act, discusses the particular problems facing women in the courts, and recommends changes at all levels of legal education. recommendations 5.1–5.2.

  94. Id. ALRC Final Report Pt. I, supra note 25, Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part I, Equality before the Law: Justice for Women (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. I]. This report also recommends significant changes to the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act and addresses the problem of bias against women in areas such as family law, immigration law, and refugee law. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part II, Equality before the Law: Women's Equality (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. II], advocates the introduction of a constitutionally entrenched Equality Act, discusses the particular problems facing women in the courts, and recommends changes at all levels of legal education. ¶¶ 12.1–12.9. The Commission's terms of reference were concerned mainly with Commonwealth law. Because substantive criminal law is largely a matter of state law, many of the issues about bias against women in criminal law were not canvassed by the ALRC. On this topic generally, see Graycar & Morgan,supra note 9,See generally Regina Graycar & Jenny Morgan,The Hidden Gender of Law (1990). For further information, see sources citedinfra note 63See Lynn Hecht Schafran,Gender Bias in the Courts: Time Is Note the Cure, 22 Creighton L. Rev. 413 (1989). Women have made up close to 50 percent of the students in Australian law schools for many years, but these numbers have not been reflected in positions of influence open to male colleagues with similar backgrounds. Linda Kirk,Success on Our Terms: The Case for Women Lawyers, 17 Adel. L. Rev. (forthcoming 1995). Some U.S. research suggests that younger male lawyers may not have much better gender awareness than their older brethren. Gender Bias Task Force, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit,Final Report: The Effects of Gender in the Federal Courts 72–73 (1993). Many of the false myths and negative stereotypes about women and sexual assault are enshrined in judicial decisions and repeated in textbooks widely used by students. Nancy S. Erickson,Final Report: “Sex Bias in the Teaching of Criminal Law,” 42 Rutgers L. Rev. 309 (1990); Ngaire Naffine,Windows on the Legal Mind: The Evocation of Rape in Legal Writing, 18 Melb. U. L. Rev. 741 (1992). pt. 4.

  95. ALRC Final Report Pt. I, supra note 25, Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part I, Equality before the Law: Justice for Women (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. I]. This report also recommends significant changes to the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act and addresses the problem of bias against women in areas such as family law, immigration law, and refugee law. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part II, Equality before the Law: Women's Equality (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. II], advocates the introduction of a constitutionally entrenched Equality Act, discusses the particular problems facing women in the courts, and recommends changes at all levels of legal education. recommendations 5.1–5.2. ¶ 12.8.

  96. Id.; ALRC Final Report Pt. II, supra note 25, Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part I, Equality before the Law: Justice for Women (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. I]. This report also recommends significant changes to the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act and addresses the problem of bias against women in areas such as family law, immigration law, and refugee law. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part II, Equality before the Law: Women's Equality (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. II], advocates the introduction of a constitutionally entrenched Equality Act, discusses the particular problems facing women in the courts, and recommends changes at all levels of legal education. ¶¶ 8.44–8.46, 8.57–8.68;ALRC Discussion Paper, supra note 13, ¶¶ 7.22–7.25.

  97. Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice].

  98. Id. Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice]. ¶¶ 2.11–2.16.

  99. Id. Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice]. ¶¶ 2.36–2.39, 2.101–2.102.

  100. Id. Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice]. ¶ 9.42.

  101. Remarks of Ms. Liddle, Principal Legal Officer, Central Austl. Aboriginal Legal Aid Serv., Justice Forum at 81 (Attorney-General's Dep't, Canberra, A.C.T. Australia, Aug. 22, 1994).

  102. Access to Justice, supra note 32, Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice]. action 9.1.

  103. Id. Access to Justice, supra note 32, Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice]. action 2.4, 15.4.

  104. Id. Access to Justice, supra note 32, Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice]. action 9.6.

  105. Seesupra note 16Senate Report, supra note 1 The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSernate Report]. ¶¶ 14–16 (quoting a submission from the Victorian Bar Council). and accompanying text.

  106. ALRC Final Report Pt. I, supra note 25, Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part I, Equality before the Law: Justice for Women (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. I]. This report also recommends significant changes to the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act and addresses the problem of bias against women in areas such as family law, immigration law, and refugee law. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part II, Equality before the Law: Women's Equality (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. II], advocates the introduction of a constitutionally entrenched Equality Act, discusses the particular problems facing women in the courts, and recommends changes at all levels of legal education. ¶ 1.10.

  107. Report of the Chief Justice's Task Force on Gender Bias (1994).

  108. Id. Report of the Chief Justice's Task Force on Gender Bias (1994). ¶¶ 1.10–1.11;ALRC Discussion Paper, supra note 13, 1 Gender Bias Comm., Law Soc'y of B.C., Can.,Gender Equality in the Justice System at 1:2 (1992);see also Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 54, Equality before the Law ¶ 3.33 (1993) [hereinafterALRC Discussion Paper]. ¶ 7.24;ALRC Interim Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 1.16–1.23;Senate Report, supra note 1. The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 5.112–5.115;Access to Justice, supra note 32, Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice]. ¶¶ 15.85–15.188.

  109. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶ 5.14; Remarks of Justice Neil Buckley, Family Court, Austl., Justice Forum at 154 (Attorney-General's Dep't, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia, Aug. 22, 1994).

  110. ALRC Discussion Paper, supra note 13, 1 Gender Bias Comm., Law Soc'y of B.C., Can.,Gender Equality in the Justice System at 1:2 (1992);see also Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 54, Equality before the Law ¶ 3.33 (1993) [hereinafterALRC Discussion Paper]. ¶ 7.24. It is interesting to note that Professor Mahoney had visited Australia for several weeks during the previous year, but there was little response from any members of the judiciary, with a few notable exceptions.

  111. Buckley,supra note 44,Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶ 5.14; Remarks of Justice Neil Buckley, Family Court, Austl., Justice Forum at 154 (Attorney-General's Dep't, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia, Aug. 22, 1994). at 154–55.

  112. Id. Buckley,supra note 44Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶ 5.14; Remarks of Justice Neil Buckley, Family Court, Austl., Justice Forum at 154 (Attorney-General's Dep't, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia, Aug. 22, 1994) at 157–58.

  113. Id. Buckley,supra note 44Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶ 5.14; Remarks of Justice Neil Buckley, Family Court, Austl., Justice Forum at 154 (Attorney-General's Dep't, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia, Aug. 22, 1994) at 159.Access to Justice, supra note 32, Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice], ¶ 15.86.

  114. Funding for these programs has come largely from the Commonwealth, through the National Strategy on Violence against Women,ALRC Interim Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report], ¶ 1.17 nn.19-20, and the Attorney-General's Department, Buckley,supra note 44,Senate Report, supra note 1. The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶ 5.14; Remarks of Justice Neil Buckley, Family Court, Austl., Justice Forum at 154 (Attorney-General's Dep't, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia, Aug. 22, 1994), at 157. Providing additional programs, based on the information and methods developed so far, will require additional funding.Id. at 159.

  115. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report], ¶¶ 5.59–5.65;ALRC Discussion Paper, supra note 13 1 Gender Bias Comm., Law Soc'y of B.C., Can.,Gender Equality in the Justice System at 1∶2 (1992);see also Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 54, Equality before the Law ¶ 3.33 (1993) [hereinafterALRC Discussion Paper]. ¶¶ 7.27–7.35;see also Sean Cooney,Gender and Judicial Selection: Should There Be More Women on the Courts?, 19 Melb. U. L. Rev. 20 (1993).

  116. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 5.5–5.22.

  117. Id. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶ 5.47.

  118. Michael Lavarch, Attorney-General's Dep't, Austl.,Discussion Paper, Judicial Appointments: Procedure and Criteria (1993).

  119. Supreme and District Courts (Appointment of Judges) Amendment Bill, 1994 (S. Austl.).

  120. Parl. Deb. (Hansard), Legis. Council, at 278 (Sept. 7, 1994) (S. Austl.). The shadow Attorney-General is the opposition party member with responsibility for issues within the competence of the Attorney-General.

  121. Access to Justice, supra note 32 Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice]. ¶ 2.16;see also ALRC Interim Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶ 1.23.

  122. Access to Justice, supra note 32, Access to Justice Advisory Comm., Austl.,Access to Justice: An Action Paper at v (1994) [hereinafterAccess to Justice]. action 2.4;Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 5.116–5.118.

  123. Senate Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶¶ 5.85–5.90;ALRC Final Report Pt. I, supra note 25, This report also recommends significant changes to the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act and addresses the problem of bias against women in areas such as family law, immigration law, and refugee law. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part II, Equality before the Law: Women's Equality (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. II], advocates the introduction of a constitutionally entrenched Equality Act, discusses the particular problems facing women in the courts, and recommends changes at all levels of legal education. ¶ 8.4.

  124. Leading legal scholars throughout Australia have become involved in this project.ALRC Final Report Pt. I, supra note 25, This report also recommends significant changes to the Commonwealth Sex Discrimination Act and addresses the problem of bias against women in areas such as family law, immigration law, and refugee law. Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Report No. 69, Part II, Equality before the Law: Women's Equality (1994) [hereinafterALRC Final Report Pt. II], advocates the introduction of a constitutionally entrenched Equality Act, discusses the particular problems facing women in the courts, and recommends changes at all levles of legal education. ¶¶ 8.4.

  125. E.g., ALRC Interim Report, supra note 1, The public and media response to these remarks is described in Australian Law Reform Comm'n,Discussion Paper No. 67, Equality before the Law: Women's Access to the Legal System ¶¶ 1.16–1.23 (1994) [hereinafterALRC Interim Report]; Senate Standing Comm. on Legal & Constitutional Affairs, Austl.,Gender Bias and the Judiciary ch. 1 (1994) [hereinafterSenate Report]. ¶ 1.23.

  126. Remarks of Chief Justice Len King, S. Austl. Supreme Court, at 9 (Conference of Judges of the Family Court of Australia, Oct. 14, 1994, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia).

  127. Id. Remarks of Chief Justice Len King, S. Austl. Supreme Court, at 10 (Conference of Judges of the Family Court of Australia, Oct. 14, 1994, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia) at 10.

  128. See Lynn Hecht Schafran,Gender Bias in the Courts: Time Is Not the Cure, 22 Creighton L. Rev. 413 (1989); Women have made up close to 50 percent of the students in Australian law schools for many years, but these numbers have not been reflected in positions of influence open to male colleagues with similar backgrounds. Linda Kirk,Success on Our Terms: The Case for Women Lawyers, 17 Adel. L. Rev. (forthcoming 1995). Some U.S. research suggests that younger male lawyers may not have much better gender awareness than their older brethren. Gender Bias Task Force, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit,Final Report: The Effects of Gender in the Federal Courts 72–73 (1993). Many of the false myths and negative stereotypes about women and sexual assault are enshrined in judicial decisions and repeated in textbooks widely used by students. Nancy S. Erickson,Final Report: “Sex Bias in the Teaching of Criminal Law,” 42 Rutgers L. Rev. 309 (1990); Ngaire Naffine,Windows on the Legal Mind: The Evocation of Rape in Legal Writing, 18 Melb. U. L. Rev. 741 (1992).

Download references

Authors
  1. Ralf Jürgens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kathy Mack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

President, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, Montreal; Sessional Lecturer, Faculty of Law, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; B.C.L., University of Munich 1985; Ph.D., University of Munich 1990; LL.M., McGill University 1991. The author was formerly a Senior Research Associate at McGill University's Centre for Medicine, Ethics, and Law, and the Project Coordinator for the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons of the Correctional Service of Canada, in which capacity he prepared the Committee'sWorking Paper, infra note 32, andFinal Report, infra.

The Correctional Service's three-volume study,HIV/AIDS in Prisons, which encompasses theFinal Report, Summary Report, andBackground Materials (1994), can be obtained through the Health Care Services Branch, Correctional Service of Canada, 340 Laurier Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A OP9.

I would like to thank Garry Bowers, Jean Dussault, Dr. Norbert Gilmore, Chairman of the Expert Committee on AIDS and Prisons, and the other members of the Committee. This note is dedicated to Wayne Stryde. Any views expressed here are my own.

Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; B.A., Rice University 1972; J.D., Stanford University 1975; LL.M., University of Adelaide 1988. Special thanks to Jane Cox, legal research assistant at the University of Adelaide, and to Madeleine Sann, Director of Publication,Criminal Law Forum, for very helpful suggestions, comments, and editorial assistance.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jürgens, R., Mack, K. Book Review. Crim Law Forum 5, 763–802 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01683235

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01683235

Search

Navigation