Reflections on Ferguson One Year Later

By Andrea S. Boyles, author of Race, Place, and Suburban Policing

This guest post is published in advance of the American Sociological Association conference in Chicago. This post by Andrea S. Boyles reflects on the shooting of Mike Brown before the one year anniversary of his death. Check back often for new posts. 


You begin the preface of Race, Place, and Suburban Policing with the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson (e.g., a St. Louis suburb). On the year anniversary of his death, what do you see that has changed?

A lot has happened since Mike Brown’s death, from increased social awareness and grassroots mobilization efforts to the grand jury’s decision to not indict Officer Darren Wilson and additional Black citizen-police conflicts.

More directly, in the wake of the Department of Justice (DOJ) report, the following changes occurred within Ferguson’s city government:

John Shaw, the city manager, resigned. The DOJ investigation found him encouraging the use of the municipal court in generating revenue for the suburb; Municipal Court Judge Ronald Brockmeyer resigned. Brockmeyer presided over the Ferguson municipal court, where DOJ found racially discriminate practices to be pervasive. He was replaced by a MO Supreme Court state appointed judge; Police Chief Thomas Jackson resigned. It was determined by the DOJ that his officers engaged in problematic policing tactics & used citizens to generate city revenue; the DOJ investigation also turned up racist emails, consequently, leading to the firing of two police officers and a court clerk in connection; a citizen review task force has been appointed to vet and make recommendations for establishing a Ferguson citizen review board; and following the first municipal election after Mike Brown’s death, Ferguson’s City Council now has three black council persons out of six. Previously, there had only been one.

Other occurrences included the use of body cameras by Ferguson police officers, the replacement of two makeshift Mike Brown memorials at the scene of his shooting with a bronze dove and plaque on what would have been his 19th birthday; modified practices with the municipal court and its response to citizens; increased community activities and partnerships such as volunteerism, activism, job fairs, and revitalization efforts for Ferguson schools, businesses, and neighborhoods. Furthermore, there is a push for reform in the entire St. Louis region, particularly as there are additional DOJ investigations underway and black citizens in the inner-city and suburbs face on-going bias treatment in a wide array of ways across the social spectrum.

In sum, there have been quite a few changes—subtle/overt, better/worse, immediate/forthcoming—throughout the year in Ferguson. Hence, it is important to note that “change” can be broadly interpreted, particularly when accounting for power and privilege or the lack thereof as experienced in everyday living among diverse populations. Nevertheless, the aftereffects from Mike Brown’s death and other cases alike are continuously evolving in Ferguson, the St. Louis region, nationally and internationally.

Why was important to you to focus your research on suburban communities?

9780520282391Ferguson is why it was important for me to focus my research on suburban communities. While my book targets Meacham Park—a black enclave, located in an affluent suburb roughly 15 miles away—it was the antecedent to black citizen-police conflict and civil unrest in Ferguson and other locations outside of city limits. In short, significant attention has been given to the differential policing of blacks and social injustice in urban settings; while, similar or worse experiences of blacks have largely been ignored as they reside in other settings. Consequently, my research in suburban communities provide a framework for understanding the everyday ambiguousness of policing, politics, and the overall social experiences of blacks as they live in the suburbs and yet often remain isolated and faced with persisting disenfranchisement.

Based on your research, how can we improve police-community relations?

While there are countless suggestions for improving police-community relations, my research first lends itself to broad solutions in three areas: political awareness and sensitivity, political inclusion, and political accountability. The police adhere to the policies and practices of its local government. Consequently, police departments and their day-to-day interactions often reflect the temperament of those most empowered. More directly, my research found black citizen-police relations improving through numerous actions ranging from simple gestures such as officers waving while out patrolling to police participation in community programs/activities and more tangible training.

 

Andrea_extra713Andrea S. Boyles is Associate Professor of Criminal Justice at Lindenwood University-Belleville. She has also taught inmates and correctional officers within the Missouri prison system.


A Drier Future: Lynn Ingram’s Q&A with Sunset

The West without Water: What Past Floods, Droughts, and Other Climatic Clues Tell Us about Tomorrow
The West without Water: What Past Floods, Droughts, and Other Climatic Clues Tell Us about Tomorrow

In the wake of California’s recent drought, Kathleen Brenzel of Sunset Magazine caught up with UC Press author Lynn Ingram for a question and answer session about water scarcity, our next steps, and other important points from The West Without Water. Merging climate and paleoclimate research from a wide variety of sources, the book documents the tumultuous climate of the American West over twenty millennia, telling tales of past droughts, deluges, and predictions about the impacts of future climate change on water resources.

“Q: Your book mentions 1976-77 as the driest single year in recorded history of the West, when precipitation levels dropped to less than half the average level throughout the state, when increased use of ground water for agriculture and cities caused a precipitous drop in the water table throughout the state, and when some of the highest regions of the Sierra Nevada lost three-fourths of their trees. How do you think the current drought stacks up?

A: “We’re calling 2015 the fourth year of drought. But the last 15 years have shown below average precipitation. Our snowpack is only at 6 per cent of normal; it was 25 per cent in 1976. We’re worse off now.”

B. Lynn Ingram and Frances Malamud-Roam, co-authors of The West without Water.
B. Lynn Ingram and Frances Malamud-Roam, co-authors of The West without Water.

“Q: In your book, you say that “humans have moved into the deserts, floodplains, and deltas of the West, exacting a high cost to the natural environment;” that “there is not enough water to reliably meet all desired uses and needs;” and that “a more sustainable water future in the West would include linking urban growth with water supply and availability.” What’s the most important lesson we can take from all of this?

A: “We took water for granted in the 20th century. We all need to think of water as an increasingly scarce and precious resource. There must be things that individuals and society can do to increase our resilience during future water shortages.”

To read more of this Q&A with Lynn Ingram, visit Sunset’s website.


Collabra Senior Editor Spotlight

Simine Vazire, PhD., Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis, CA, USA. (Photo credit: Washington University in St Louis.)

(This post was originally posted to the Collabra blog. Follow @CollabraOA on Medium here.)

Collabra is fortunate enough to have an impressive roster of senior editors in Life & Biomedical Sciences, Ecology & Environmental Science, and Social & Behavioral Sciences. We’ll be profiling each of the senior editors in the coming months to give you an idea of their work and research, as well as what inspired them to be part of Collabra. Next up: Simine Vazire, PhD, Senior Editor, Social and Behavioral Sciences.


Things are not always what they seem.

Take Senior Editor Simine Vazire, for instance, who studies this phenomenon as it relates to self-perception and how we’re perceived by others. In the academic world, the notion that “age equals wisdom” is professional currency, built up year after year via the standard benchmarks associated with being a research professor. Growing a reputational nest-egg simply takes time. But sometimes, careening out of left field, we get Gladwellian outliers. And Simine, though she might genuinely demur on this point, is one of them. At the age of 35, a time when many PhDs are considered academic fledglings, she already has an astounding number of accolades, professional honors, fellowships, invited talks, influential positions on a host of journals and editorial boards (beyond Collabra), and a rich cache of breakthrough research to bolster her prestige and credibility. The CV goes on. But outwardly, in appearance and demeanor, she is indiscernible from the grad students who populate her Personality and Self-Knowledge Lab at the University of California, Davis, right down to her dressed-down style and furry sidekick, Bear the dog. As she puts it, and simply, “Things are not always black and white.”

Simine and her furry BFF, Bear, rockin’ it at one of their favorite getaways, Lake Tahoe. (Photo credit: Natalia Amari.)

Swing this lens in a wide arc away from her, across her field of study, and you’ll find her scientific vantage point, the thing that absolutely fascinates her: the grey areas — the schisms that occur in research reporting and methodology, in human bias, and how it all plays out in actions taken, especially when it comes to producing replicable research. She is so interested in this issue, in fact, that she writes a regular blog about it, and while she might not consider her posts poetic, she writes in an e.e. cummings style. just much wittier.

Collabra caught up with Simine recently on the heels of new transparency and openness publishing guidelines that were recently introduced in Science,of which she was one of 30 coauthors, focusing on these questions of reproducibility. Though the guidelines have been in development since 2014, the timing is uncanny, given several recent high-profile retractions in the journals publishing world due to this very issue.

Our Q&A starts with her beginnings:

  1. What inspired you to pursue a career in Social Psychology?

“I’ve always been fascinated by people. I’m a bit of a wallflower, so I like to watch people, and I’ve basically figured out how to make a living out of it. I especially like observing people and forming my own impression of them and then finding out how they see themselves. The discrepancies can be fascinating. There are people who have much more glowing views of themselves than others have of them, and there are also people who don’t seem to have a clue how great they are. Both of these phenomena fascinate me, and the goal of my research is to try to measure what people are actually like, how they see themselves, how they’re seen by others, and why those three things don’t always line up.”

2. So, how would someone who knows you describe you, and do you agree with them?

“Haha, I knew you were going to ask that! Well, my favorite item on any personality questionnaire also happens to be the one I identify with most: ‘Is critical, skeptical, not easily impressed,’ and I think my friends would agree that this describes me pretty well. I think they would also say that I’m quiet, calm, and perhaps a little too reasonable, so I should probably start doing more unreasonable things in life!”

3. What drives you to engage in the work you do every day as a scientist and teacher?

Simine with grad students and colleagues from UC Davis. Left to right: Olivia Atherton, Simine, faculty members Rick Robins and Wiebke Bleidorn, and grad student Joanne Chung. (Photo credit: Unknown — please contact us if you were the photographer.)

“I’m pretty passionate about the questions I study, especially trying to understand why people sometimes have blind spots in their self-views, but I think I’m even more passionate about research methods. Maybe it’s because psychology is relatively young, but I’m amazed at the speed of progress I’ve seen in my fifteen-year career already. Both the development of new tools to collect data — like web questionnaires, smartphones, big data — and new tools (or the rediscovery of old tools) to analyze data have been amazing to witness. Things like multilevel modeling, structural equation modeling, Bayesian statistics, R . . . I also love teaching research methods, because it’s teaching people how to collect and evaluate empirical evidence. I think being able to take burning questions people have about human behavior, emotions, and relationships, and study those questions empirically, is an incredible development in human innovation.”

4. Can you share a particularly memorable experience or breakthrough in your research?

“I remember when my graduate school friend and colleague, Matthias Mehl, was developing the Electronically Activated Recorder (EAR) to study people’s naturalistic language use, and I realized it would be an excellent tool to study self-knowledge. You could use the EAR to ‘spy’ on people (with their consent, of course) and compare what they say they’re like to how they actually behave in their real life, not just in an artificial lab environment. Seeing how the right methodological innovation could open the door to studying questions that were almost impossible to study before was exhilarating, and it fueled my interest not only in self-knowledge, but especially in research methods. It made me realize how much the quality of our answers to research questions depends on the quality of the methods we have available.”

5. What do you think is the greatest challenge or concern in your field today?

“Replicability. That’s a broad word, and it encompasses all kinds of things, but mainly I’m concerned that the research methods we’ve been using lead to a much higher rate of false positive findings and inflated effect sizes than we would like. We can address this by running more rigorous studies (with more statistical power/precision) and doing our data analyses in a more thoughtful manner — avoiding p-hacking, preregistering when possible, more honestly reporting what analyses we ran and all the results we found.”


“We wanted to come up with a more universal set of standards that are both flexible and rigorous.”


6. How do these concerns play into the new Guidelines for Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) that you helped coauthor for journal publishing, that were introduced in Science this past June?

“First, these are recommendations for best practices, not mandates. Each society and/or journal has their own set of guidelines, but we thought there must be common ground. We wanted to come up with a more universal set of standards that are both flexible and rigorous. As an editor at several journals in the field, I had experience with many of the issues that we tackled in the TOP guidelines. A big issue in the field of psychology research is disclosing flexibility in these analyses. More often than not, researchers aren’t intentionally skewing results. The problem is that sometimes, well-meaning people, because of the pressure to publish and sometimes even direct pressure from editors and reviewers, gloss over things that are inconsistent with their findings and focus only on what’s consistent. This becomes even more of an issue in biomedical research because the incentives are so high. It’s a pretty big problem in psychology, too. And probably other social sciences. Ultimately, how much is at stake for finding what you want to find? It’s often a subconscious bias. Plus, especially in psychology, you’re often dealing with small samples, so results bounce around a lot. That makes replication more challenging, even when we try to correct against some of these biases. Then there’s the media. If they find the research sexy, there’s the tendency to simplify, to turn the findings into something more definitive than they really are. It’s challenging!”

7. You write quite a bit about these things in your blog. What was the inspiration for the title, “Sometimes I’m Wrong: Truth and Error in Research and In Life”?

“I like playing with things that are ambiguous and nuanced, especially countering the idea that things are black and white. Really, the number one reason I began writing it is because of the lack of women’s voices in the discussion about replicability. I didn’t know many other women who were visible, writing about it. But I’m not an expert, no more than the next person. Hence the title. I don’t have anything original to say. But the stuff we’re all reading and thinking about is worth discussing, so I write about it. That said, my worst nightmare is that someone will think I’m an expert, and I’m not.”

8. Okay, on a lighter note, do you otherwise have a secret super power or talent you’re willing to share?

“Haha! Not really. I am remarkably untalented. I like to dabble. I’ve been mediocre (or worse) at the following sports/hobbies: basketball, tennis, badminton, wrestling, volleyball, track, ultimate frisbee, trumpet, french horn, baritone, banjo, and pottery. Wait, actually, I’ve perfected the art of microwaving a Trader Joe’s burrito — wrap it in a paper towel, place it on a plate, microwave for a minute on each side, and voila. Dinner. I hate cooking more than almost anything else on earth. The whole time I’m cooking, I’m thinking, ‘You know, you could have something 80 percent as good in less than 5 minutes, so what’s the point of cooking.’”

9. And what attracted you to Collabra? Other than no cooking skills required?

“I like the fact that it’s run by a university press rather than a for-profit publisher. I also really like the team of people at UC Press who are running it — their vision for the journal and their genuine interest in science. I like the fact that it’s open access, but I also have some questions about how well that will work in my field — many of us don’t have large grants that can cover APCs. I like that the people behind Collabra acknowledge that we don’t yet have all the answers about how to make this format work for everyone, and they’re trying out different solutions, such as having a fund to cover APCs for authors who lack other resources.”

10. This brings us to our last question: what kind of impact do you hope to have as a Senior Editor for Collabra?

“Mostly, I hope to spread the word to other researchers and get them involved in Collabra. Researchers give away so much of their time and expertise to journals (both by choosing where to publish our work and by reviewing for free), and I think it would be good for us to reflect on who we want to give that time to, and what kind of journal/publishing model we want to support. I think Collabra is a great candidate for that. There’s flexibility. It’s not black and white.”


— Merrik Bush-Pirkle, Collabra


Three UCP authors shortlisted for the Roederer Awards

Native Wine Grapes of Italy by Ian D'Agata
Native Wine Grapes of Italy by Ian D’Agata

Two UC Press titles were shortlisted for the prestigious Louis Roederer International Wine Writers’ Awards 2015: Barolo & Barbaresco by Kerin O’Keefe and Native Grapes of Italy by Ian D’Agata. UC Press author Jamie Goode was also shortlisted for his contributions to wine writing online.

Barolo and Barbaresco: The King and Queen of Italian Wine by Kerin O'Keefe
Barolo and Barbaresco: The King and Queen of Italian Wine by Kerin O’Keefe

The Louis Roederer International Wine Writers Awards were founded in 2004 to celebrate all those who put down in words or images the magic of the wine world in order to educate and entertain.

As part of Champagne Louis Roederer’s ongoing commitment to pursuing excellence, the Awards encourage journalists, authors, bloggers, artists and photographers from all over the world to be judged by some of the greatest names in the wine trade today, hoping to be named the winner of their respective category.

The competition attracts entries from the world over – from Switzerland to Spain, Chile to China – all communicating through their preferred medium about topics and opinions as varied as the entrants themselves.

Jamie Goode, author of The Science of Wine and Authentic Wine.
Jamie Goode, author of The Science of Wine and Authentic Wine.

With no entry cost, the Awards attract candidates ranging from established trade communicators alongside new aspiring talent, all of whom are judged as peers by our highly skilled team of judges. Winners of each category will be awarded a magnum (or larger) from their sponsor of their respective category, a generous financial gift, as well as the greatest accolade in the world of wine communication – the title of a Louis Roederer Wine Writer of the Year Award.

Visit the Roederer Awards’ website for more information. Congratulations to our authors!


2015 Ecological Society of America

Cast your academic fishing nets into the Chesapeake Bay with University of California Press during the 2015 Ecological Society of America meeting! This year’s ESA meeting convenes August 9-14 in Baltimore, MD.

Visit us at Baltimore Convention Center booths 307 and 309 to purchase our latest ecology and environment publications for the following offers:

  • 30% off conference discount and free worldwide shipping
  • Request exam copy requests for course adoption for your upcoming classes
  • Win $100 worth of books! Join our eNews subscription list for contest eligibility.

This year’s ESA meeting theme is “Ecological Science at the Frontier.” Our booth will feature groundbreaking and award winning titles exploring topics within ecology, conservation, marine biology, and environmental history.

Please see our conference program ad for our latest offerings. Acquisitions and marketing staff will be available for your publishing questions.

Follow ESA’s Twitter @esa_org and hashtag #ESA2015 for current meeting news.


“Haven’t we been here before?”: Erica Kohl-Arenas on Philanthropy, Poverty, and the Ford Foundation

The Self-Help Myth: How Philanthropy Fails to Alleviate Poverty
The Self-Help Myth: How Philanthropy Fails to Alleviate Poverty

Erica Kohl-Arenas, author of the forthcoming The Self-Help Myth: How Philanthropy Fails to Alleviate Poverty, places the Ford Foundation under the microscope on this recent article on OpenDemocracy.

“Past philanthropic efforts to address inequality have favored individualistic approaches over programs that directly confront entrenched systems of power, failing to advance any real structural change as a result,” she says of the Foundation’s new mission– to attack inequality at its roots. “Why should Ford’s new mission be any different?”

Through the lens of a provocative set of case studies, The Self-Help Myth reveals how philanthropy maintains systems of inequality by attracting attention to the “behavior” of poor people while shifting the focus away from structural inequities and relationships of power that produce poverty.

"Along with many other American foundations, they have failed to deliver on their promises at many previous points in recent history."
“Along with many other American foundations, they have failed to deliver on their promises at many previous points in recent history.”

Kohl-Arenas uses that very same method of scrutiny in her article, applying it to not only the Ford Foundation, but to other philanthropists, as examples of this phenomenon:

“American philanthropists from Andrew Carnegie to Paul Ylvisaker have promoted the tradition of individualized ‘racial uplift’ or ‘self-help’ that calls for assimilation, upward mobility, and ‘social responsibility’ among poor families and neighborhoods that are often pathologized.” In short, according to her research, the moral tenets upheld in modern philanthropy grow fuzzy; they promote professional and institutional behaviors that leave deeper relationships of poverty and inequality untouched. She closes with a challenge: “Can the Ford Foundation attack its own power and privilege in order to put people back in the driving seat of social change? … Are foundations brave enough to accept this task?”

Erica Kohl-Arenas is Assistant Professor at the Milano School of International Affairs, Management, and Urban Policy at The New School in New York. The Self-Help Myth will be available later this year.


Decoding Albanian Organized Crime wins the DIC / ASC 2015 Outstanding Book Award

We’re pleased to announce that Jana Arsovska’s book, Decoding Albanian Organized Crime: Culture, Politics, and Globalization, is the winner of the 2015 Outstanding Book Award from the Division on International Criminology of the American Society of Criminology.

Decoding Albanian Organized Crime: Culture, Politics, and Globalization
Decoding Albanian Organized Crime: Culture, Politics, and Globalization

The Outstanding Book Award is awarded based upon the criteria of quality of writing, use of theory and prior literature, research and methodology, and a book’s  contribution and originality in international or comparative crime or justice. Based on more than a decade of research, including interviews with victims, offenders, and law enforcement across ten countries, as well as court files and confidential intelligence reports, Decoding Albanian Organized Crime presents a comprehensive overview of the causes, codes of conduct, activities, migration, and structure of Albanian organized crime groups in the Balkans, Western Europe, and the United States.

The award will be presented at the ASC Meetings, which will be held in Washington, DC, this November.

Congratulations, Jana!


Award-Winning UC Press Authors at the AFHVS/ASFS Annual Meeting

Last month, two UC Press authors received major prizes at the annual joint meeting of the Association for the Study of Food and Society (ASFS) and the Agriculture, Food and Human Values Society (AFHVS). (Learn more about this year’s ASFS/AFHVS Conference on the official website.)

Julie Guthman (right) receives the AFHVS Excellence in Research Award.
Julie Guthman (right) receives the AFHVS Excellence in Research Award.

Julie Guthman, author of Weighing In: Obesity, Food Justice, and the Limits of Capitalism and Agrarian Dreams: The Paradox of Organic Farming in California, received the 2015 Excellence in Research Award from AFHVS.

This prize recognizes members of the AFHVS who have made outstanding contributions to research in the fields of agriculture, food, and human values. Guthman’s work, analyzing of both the American “obesity epidemic” and the realities of organic farming, is groundbreaking: truly deserving of this honor.

Amy Bentley with husband Brett Gary at the James Beard Awards.
Amy Bentley with husband Brett Gary at the James Beard Awards.
Inventing Baby Food: Taste, Health, and the Industrialization of the American Diet
Inventing Baby Food: Taste, Health, and the Industrialization of the American Diet

Amy Bentley’s Inventing Baby Food also received the 2015 ASFS Book Award. This award recognizes exemplary research, insightful theory, and the most significant and novel contributions to food scholarship, particularly books which suggest new questions and avenues of research for the scholarship of food.

Bentley joins other UC Press authors in this honor: since 2010, five UC Press titles have received the award, including Margaret Gray’s Labor and the Locavore in 2014. Bentley’s book is certainly worthy of this recognition: her history of baby food and American consumption is fresh, innovative, and informative. Inventing Baby Food was also a 2015 James Beard Award finalist in the scholarship and reference category.

It’s a pleasure to share this wonderful news, and we are proud to have published with both authors! Congratulations!


Book Signing: Norman Girardot’s Envisioning Howard Finster

 Envisioning Howard Finster: The Religion and Art of a Stranger from Another World
Envisioning Howard Finster: The Religion and Art of a Stranger from Another World

Join Norman Girardot next month for a reading, discussion, and signing of his new book, Envisioning Howard Finster: The Religion and Art of a Stranger from Another World, held in Chicago’s Intuit: The Center for Intuitive and Outsider Art!

Finster received a revelation from God to make sacred art at the age of 60. He then spent the final years of his life feverishly creating almost fifty thousand pieces of “bad and nasty” artwork: pieces filled with apocalyptic, biblical, and fantastic imagery. Girardot, a personal friend to Howard Finster in his later years, explores the life and significance of an artist and cult celebrity described as a “backwoods William Blake” and the “Andy Warhol of the South”. Envisioning Howard Finster is the first book to examine the entwined religious and artistic significance of Finster’s work within the context of the American “outsider art” tradition.

The Intuit Center, established in 1991, is a non-profit organization dedicated to self-taught and intuitive “outsider” art. Intuit features a permanent collection with over 1,100 works of art and educational programming for patrons from all levels of education and interest.

This event is open to the public and will be held on August 8 from 1 to 2:30 PM. For more information, see Intuit’s website.


“The Best I Have Read”: A Mental Health Professional on Listening to Killers

James Garbarino’s Listening to Killers grants readers an inside look into two decades of murder suspects, and his in-depth account, rather than showing these individuals as singular cases, paints a more complicated picture that mental health professionals are keen for the public to recognize.

In a recent review, Joshua Eudowe praised Garbarino’s work: “[Garbarino’s] knowledge, compassion, insight, and unmatched experience provide us with an amazing opportunity to learn the path that lead children to violence. Listening to Killers, his most recent book, is the best I have read.”

9780520282872

Joshua Eudowe has served in emergency services for over 16 years, having provided psychotherapy to young victims and witnesses of extreme violence and psychoanalytic/behavioral therapy to young adult patients in Connecticut’s State psychiatric hospital Young Adult Services unit. He is completing his doctoral studies in clinical and forensic psychology at the Illinois School of Professional Psychology, with an emphasis in forensics, particularly in mental disorders induced organically or through trauma. He also specializes in the behavioral precursors to violent action.

Like Garbarino, Eudowe notes that broader social and cultural issues can create toxic environments and mentalities for children, especially young victims of trauma. Sometimes, this is enough to drive a youth from innocence to violence.

“For those of us in the field of mental health, law enforcement, and education,” says Eudowe, “it is our role to understand where these behaviors originate in order to be more effective in the delivery of our respective services. But society has a tremendous responsibility that often gets overlooked or ignored. . . society must learn to identify its own contribution to the emotional damage and effect on how these children become killers.”

See the full text on the eA Risk Management Group’s blog.