Breathing Space Research Articles

Breathing Space for Cloud-Based Business Models – Exploring the Matrix of Copyright Limitations, Safe Harbours and Injunctions

Cloud-based services keep forming, changing and evaporating like clouds in the sky. They range from personal storage space for films and music to social media and user-generated content platforms. The copyright issues raised by these platforms seem as numerous as the liquid droplets and frozen crystals constituting clouds in the atmosphere of our planet. As providers of cloud-based services may seek to avoid dependence on creative industries and collecting societies, one of these questions concerns the breathing space that copyright law offers outside the realm of exclusive rights. Which limitations of protection can serve as a basis for the development of new business models? Which safe harbours may be invoked to avoid secondary liability for copyright infringement? Which obligations may result from injunctions sought by copyright owners? After outlining relevant cloud services (section 1) and identifying the competing interests involved (section 2), the inquiry will address these influence factors – limitations, safe harbours and injunctions (section 3). The analysis will yield the insight that the most effective protection of copyright in the cloud is likely to result from acceptance of a compromise solution that, instead of insisting on the power to prohibit unauthorized use, leaves room for the interests of users and the business models of platform providers (concluding section 4).

Creating a ‘breathing space’

Matthew Hodson addressed a need for end of life care

Nurse of the Year offers hope to COPD patients

The breathing space clinic was set up by Matthew Hodson in 2011, bringing end of life care to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. As nurse of the year he hopes to raise the profile of the condition and awareness of care options.

13A. Integrative Cancer Care: The Life over Cancer Model

Focus Areas: Integrative Algorithms of CareIntegrative cancer treatment fully blends conventional cancer treatment with integrative therapies such as diet, supplements, exercise and biobehavioral approaches. The Life Over Cancer model comprises three spheres of intervention: improving lifestyle, improving biochemical environment (terrain), and improving tolerance of conventional treatment. These levels are applied within the context of a life-affirming approach to cancer patients and treatment. Clinical staff involved include MDs, psychosocial, physical therapy, and dietetic professionals, all located in a single private clinic, the Block Center for Integrative Cancer Treatment.This session will describe the rationale and operation of the clinical model. An outpatient chemotherapy unit is incorporated in the clinic. Chronomodulated chemotherapy is used for selected chemotherapy drugs. Physical care includes massage, exercise and other therapies as directed by the center's physical therapy staff. Notably, cancer patients who are physically active have lower mortality and recurrence risks. Behavioral approaches are being shown increasingly to affect physiological parameters and expression of genes potentially related to cancer. Thus, biobehavioral approaches such as relaxed abdominal breathing and comfort space imagery are taught to patients by a staff including a clinical psychologist and other practitioners. Nutrition is also emerging as a relevant area of intervention in cancer, with recent guidelines from the American Cancer Society. A team of registered dietitians counsels patients individually and conducts cooking classes. Finally, the Life Over Cancer model includes analysis of multiple biological parameters relevant to cancer and general health, with standard laboratory tests. Inflammation, glycemic variables, immune functioning and other variables are regularly monitored. Dietary changes and where necessary supplements are suggested when laboratory results are abnormal. Interaction of supplements with cancer treatment drugs is monitored. The session will highlight the roles played by both conventional and integrative therapies in the treatment of cancer patients.

It's Time for the Direct Election of a European President

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments.When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions—the Commission, the Council and the Parliament—collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany.Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent “town hall” gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers—such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together—as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future.The peace‐building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era.To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the “debt trap” it is in—and which austerity alone will only deepen—and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe.The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001—ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe.Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then‐chancellor Gerhard Schröder.Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development.Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president.Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace‐making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions.

Europe is Divided Again: This Time Between Creditors and Debtors

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments.When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions—the Commission, the Council and the Parliament—collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany.Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent “town hall” gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers—such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together—as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future.The peace‐building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era.To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the “debt trap” it is in—and which austerity alone will only deepen—and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe.The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001—ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe.Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then‐chancellor Gerhard Schröder.Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development.Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president.Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace‐making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions.

The Politics of Fear

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments.When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions—the Commission, the Council and the Parliament—collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany.Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent “town hall” gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers—such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together—as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future.The peace‐building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era.To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the “debt trap” it is in—and which austerity alone will only deepen—and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe.The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001—ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe.Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then‐chancellor Gerhard Schröder.Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development.Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president.Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace‐making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions.

If You Want a Middle Class Keep Your Industrial Base

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments.When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions—the Commission, the Council and the Parliament—collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany.Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent “town hall” gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers—such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together—as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future.The peace‐building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era.To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the “debt trap” it is in—and which austerity alone will only deepen—and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe.The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001—ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe.Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then‐chancellor Gerhard Schröder.Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development.Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president.Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace‐making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions.

Turkey Fit EU Entry Criteria

The future of the European Union has never been more in doubt than at the very moment it has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for its historical accomplishments.When the heads of Europe's weakest institutions—the Commission, the Council and the Parliament—collected the prize in Oslo on December 10, 2012 they spotlighted the nub of the problem. Unless these institutions can garner the legitimacy of European citizens and transform into a real federal union with common fiscal and economic policies to complement the single currency, Europe will remain at the mercy of global financial markets and the fiscally authoritarian dictates of its strongest state, Germany.Moving beyond this state of affairs was the focus of a recent “town hall” gathering in Berlin sponsored by the Berggruen Institute on Governance. The meeting brought together current power brokers—such as the contending voices of German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and French Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici, who rarely appear in public together—as well as Europe's top former leaders, key thinkers and young people who will govern in the future.The peace‐building project of the European Union was born out of the ashes of World War II and the anguish of the Cold War. Yet, as George Soros points out, its current inability to resolve the eurocrisis by forging greater union is dividing Europe once again, this time between creditors and debtors. Former Greek premier George Papandreou has warned that this division is fomenting a new politics of fear that is giving rise to the same kind of xenophobic movements that fueled the extreme politics of the Nazi era.To avoid a repeat of the last calamitous century, Europe first of all needs a growth strategy both to escape the “debt trap” it is in—and which austerity alone will only deepen—and to create breathing space for the tough structural reforms that can make Europe as a whole competitive again in a globalized world. To sustain reform, it needs a clear path to legitimacy for the institutions that must govern a federal Europe.The proof that Europe can escape its crisis through a combination of growth, fiscal discipline and structural reform comes from the one country so many want to keep out of the union: Turkey.Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan rightfully boasts of Turkey's accomplishments that resulted from the difficult changes carried out after its crisis in 2001—ranging from quickly cleaning up the banks to liberalizing markets to trimming social benefits to make them more affordable in the long run. As a result, Turkey today is the fastest growing economy in the world alongside China with diminished deficit and debt levels that meet the eurozone criteria that many members states themselves cannot today meet. Turkey has even offered a 5 billion euro credit through the IMF for financial aid to Europe.Germany itself also provides some lessons for the rest of Europe. The obvious reason Germany rules today is because it is the most globally competitive country in the European Union. That is the result of a series of reforms that were implemented starting in 2003 under the leadership of then‐chancellor Gerhard Schröder.Aimed a bolstering Germany's industrial base and its collateral small and medium enterprises which are the foundation of its middle class society, those reforms introduced more labor flexibility and trimmed benefits to make them sustainably affordable while investing in training, maintaining skills and research and development.Even if Europe's individual nation states can shrink imbalances by following Turkey and Germany in getting their act together, the only ultimate way to save the euro, and thus Europe itself, is to build the complementary governing institutions at the European level. For those institutions to become effective, they must be empowered and legitimated by European citizens themselves. To this end, Tony Blair has suggested a bold move: the direct election of a European president.Symbolically, the Oslo ceremonies were a historical turning point for Europe. By recognizing the European Union's peace‐making past, the Nobel Prize challenged Europe to escape once and for all the destructive pull of narrow national interests and passions.

Creating a Breathing Space: An Online Teachers’ Writing Group

A mentoring relationship that began as part of teacher preparation can evolve into a professional community that stays connected through several means of communication.

President’s note to IBS members

editorial ISSN 1948-6596 President’s note to IBS members The International Biogeography Society operates on a two-year cycle, for both our primary confer- ences and for the terms of office for our officers. Thus, my term as IBS President will end simultane- ously with the end of the upcoming IBS conference at Florida International University in Miami. As is always the case, the two years have gone by re- markably quickly, and IBS has grown in many ways. As a young organization – the Miami IBS Con- ference will be only our sixth – we struggle to main- tain a positive financial balance while expanding services and activities for our members. The news about our finances is generally good; after a decade of very nearly reaching the end of our bank ac- counts on a frequent basis, through pinching pen- nies, some generous support from members, and growing membership, we have created a reserve fund that gives us a small cushion against un- forseen changes in exchange rates, political events that affect our income, etc., allowing us to be just a bit more adventuresome in our activities. We have also been able to deal more quickly and smoothly with membership issues, through the efforts of Karen Faller, our part-time IBS jack-of-all-trades who not only has helped to serve and expand our membership, but also has helped to organize meet- ings. This expansion has included the first official “off-year” conference, the Early Investigators Con- ference held at Oxford University in October 2011. With attendance by over 70 people, we clearly achieved our goal of giving encouragement to our young colleagues to pursue some of the most excit- ing aspects of biogeography. The conference in Miami is shaping up exceptionally well, with over 420 people currently registered. With great sup- port from many individuals and organizations, many of the students who attend will be given some financial aid, allowing many to attend who could not afford it otherwise. Our society maga- zine, Frontiers of Biogeography, has expanded and continued to grow in quality of content, with rising numbers of downloads and citations. Other evi- dence of a progressively rising IBS profile in the sci- entific world includes an invitation to me, as IBS President, to be interviewed about the current im- portance of biogeography and the IBS in the maga- zine International Innovation, and the stated intent for several editors from prominent academic pub- lishers, including Science, to attend our conference in Miami. These improvements and successes give us some welcome breathing space to consider how we might further increase the impact of the IBS. One perennial topic is again much on the minds of the IBS officers: how to increase the “International” aspect of the IBS. Although we seem to be near the limit of the amount of work that our small group of Board members can manage, and our finances re- main quite modest, we are giving serious thought to how best to expand the geographic reach of the society - perhaps through the existing (though small and irregular) network of country coordinators, or perhaps through IBS-sponsored off-year meetings in locations that are too distant for most of our members to reach. How might we finance such meetings, and who will do the extensive necessary organizational work? For any such “off-year” meet- ings, and for our regular biennial conferences, what meeting format, number of participants, and loca- tion is optimal? To what extent should we concen- trate efforts on expanding our reach through our journal, Frontiers of Biogeography? Can we realisti- cally hope to develop a permanent endowment fund that will supplement our regular income and give us flexibility to support more students and in- ternational colleagues to attend our conferences? All of these issues, and many others, will be much on the minds of the IBS Board members at the meeting in Miami. We all urge you to approach us to offer your opinions and criticisms, as well as your help and solutions. The incoming President, Rosemary Gillespie, and I look forward to continu- ing our involvement with IBS, in what is clearly one of the most enjoyable and rewarding aspects of our lives. I thank you for the opportunity that you have given me. Larry Heaney IBS President frontiers of biogeography 4.4, 2012 — © 2012 the authors; journal compilation © 2012 The International Biogeography Society

Could Houseplants Improve Indoor air Quality in Schools?

Previous studies performed by the National Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) indicated that plants and associated soil microorganisms may be used to reduce indoor pollutant levels. This study investigated the ability of plants to improve indoor air quality in schools. A 9-wk intensive monitoring campaign of indoor and outdoor air pollution was carried out in 2011 in a primary school of Aveiro, Portugal. Measurements included temperature, carbon dioxide (CO2), carbon monoxide (CO), concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOC), carbonyls, and particulate matter (PM10) without and with plants in a classroom. PM10 samples were analyzed for the water-soluble inorganic ions, as well for carbonaceous fractions. After 6 potted plants were hung from the ceiling, the mean CO2 concentration decreased from 2004 to 1121 ppm. The total VOC average concentrations in the indoor air during periods of occupancy without and with the presence of potted plants were, respectively, 933 and 249 μg/m3. The daily PM10 levels in the classroom during the occupancy periods were always higher than those outdoors. The presence of potted plants likely favored a decrease of approximately 30% in PM10 concentrations. Our findings corroborate the results of NASA studies suggesting that plants might improve indoor air and make interior breathing spaces healthier.

De schuldvraag. Monetaire politiek, publieke schuld en wanbetaling in Holland, ca. 1466-1489

TSEG (Tijdschrift voor Sociale en Economische Geschiedenis) - The Low Countries Journal of Social and Economic History, is het Nederlands-Vlaamse vaktijdschrift op het gebied van de sociale en economische geschiedenis

CCGs swamped by red tape, warns NHS Clinical Commissioners

Nascent clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) are being swamped with so much red tape that they are being left with no time to shape the structure and delivery of the new commissioning arrangements, NHS Clinical Commissioners (NHSCC) has warned. NHSCC—a partnership of the National Association of Primary Care, NHS Alliance, and the NHS Confederation—is calling on the government to give CCGs some much needed breathing space and practical support to free up some thinking time. If real and innovative change to the way …

Obama and Iran

President Barack Obama's choice of toughened sanctions as the means to prevent Iran achieving nuclear weapons status is discussed. It is argued that that choice is explained less by any belief in their likely effectiveness than by the unattractive and risky nature of the alternatives. The use of force would not eliminate Iran's nuclear programme and risks pitching the region into even deeper turmoil; the ‘Grand Bargain’ with Iran advocated by others would alienate allies and domestic interests and undermine the administration's wider objectives in the Middle East. The attraction of sanctions, in contrast, is that though unlikely to work they pose little threat to US interests while allowing the Obama administration to stave off demands to adopt high risk alternatives and creating a breathing space for the administration to consider the future evolution of its Iran policy.

Zones of Practice: Embodiment and Creative Arts Research

This article presents the trans-disciplinary encounters with and perspectives on embodiment of three creative-arts practitioners within the Deakin University research project Flows & Catchments. The project explores how creative arts participate in community and the possibility of well-being. We discuss our preparations for creative work exhibited at the 2012 Lake Bolac Festival un regional Western Victoria, Australia

Democracy’s Long March Through the Institutions of a People’s Republic

Abstract Poland’s struggle for freedom following the Second World War culminated in the Contract Sejm and the Eastern Bloc’s first non-communist government. This paper recognizes that this victory was the result of the strength of the public in fighting totalitarian communism as well as the Polska Zjednoczona Partía Robotnicza’s (PZPR) weakness. However, I argue that political pressure from the Allies post-Yalta gave space to groupings from the pre-war Polska Stronnictwo Ludowe (PSL), Stronnictwo Pracy (SP) and Polska Partía Socjalistyczna (PPS) to create facts on the ground and a bottom-up democratic element which was, against all odds, able to transition into the PRL’s official coalition parties. Over time, that element developed to the point where by the 1980s the satellite parties had created enough autonomy from the PZPR that allowed them to push their own agendas, as noted by, for example, Frederic Zalewski. Ultimately, that ’autonomization" led these parties to leave the Front Jednosci Narodowej (FJN) and join the Solidarity-led National Unity government of Tadeusz Mazowiecki. We consider four loose periods of post-war political history of Poland’s official political factions (Stronnictwa): the 1945-50 period of "Developing Opposition Breathing Space"; 1951-56 of "Fighting for Independent Political Lives"; 1956-84 "Top Down Cooperation with the PZPR, Bottom Up Agitation for Political Freedom"; 1984-89 "Increasingly Autonomous in a People’s Democracy." We consider the role of pre-war leaders in developing Poland’s political institutions, the role of London party members in the newly created Communist political parties, and the experience that members of Solidarity, the Round Table and the Mazowiecki government took from the official parties. We conclude that what is sometimes known as the "Polska droga do socjalizmu" in fact reflected a surprising democratic element even within the ranks of the official political structure.

On dead dogs and unwritten jokes: Life in the university today

What does it mean to work and write in a UK university today? While many seem concerned about the heavy pressures that academics face in terms of producing articles for research assessment purposes, we wonder whether it might not make more sense to turn our attention inward for a moment to raise some uncomfortable questions about our own complicity. What is our usual response to this system so many of us seem to regard as absurd? One response is to shrug our shoulders and crack a joke. This might elicit knowing guffaws from our colleagues, and a momentary breathing space, before it is time to return to the grind of daily academic work. Another response might be to openly bemoan the strictures on our alleged academic freedom. If so, ‘doth the academic protest too much?’ – are we perhaps guilty of paradoxically clinging to the very thing we claim to abhor? As two relatively recently appointed lecturers in a UK business school, we explore these questions through our own impressions and experiences.

Moving on from clinical practice

Non-vocational degrees are broad enough for graduates to ponder on which way their careers might develop as they meander through undergraduate life. English, maths, and the humanities, to name a few, allow graduates breathing space to consider their options. Some would see this as a benefit: there is no burden of expectation; things remain flexible. And some would view this as a disadvantage with no clear career path or likelihood of employment in a definite sector. Medicine, on the other hand, leads graduates down a structured path into their chosen career, on the basis of a choice that was usually made—in most of Europe, Asia, and Australia—at around age 17. Medical graduates are signposted through the next steps of training to full qualification. Although there are choices to be made within medicine, the broad direction is set. Should medical graduates feel obliged to follow this set path? If medical school and the reality of practising as a doctor don’t match up to expectations, should medical students go off piste? What are the alternatives, and how feasible and realistic is it to look outside the clinical sphere? In the US, medical school is at postgraduate level, after completion of a general undergraduate degree—typically four years at each stage, taking the average age for starting medical school to 24.1 Is this a more sensible age to make a decision about a lifelong career? A cohort study by the BMA followed the career paths of 545 UK medical graduates from the class of 1995. One of the main findings was that “while three quarters of cohort doctors are currently satisfied with practising medicine, a fifth report a lukewarm desire to practise medicine and the remainder have little or no desire to practise medicine.”⇓2 Reason for leaving medicine as a career: …

A pilot study to evaluate an outpatient service for people with advanced lung cancer

Many patients with lung cancer are symptomatic from diagnosis, and quality of life (QoL) may be maximised through the use of specialist palliative care in parallel with other treatments. This study explored anxiety, depression, and QoL in five patients, predominantly male (n=4) and with mean age 74 years, using a 'Breathing Space' clinic over a 4-week period. Breathing Space is a nurse-led multidisciplinary outpatient clinic using integrative care with lung cancer patients. The patients received weekly interventions to improve their wellbeing. Qualitative data were collected to explore their expectations and experiences of the clinic, and quantitative data were captured using the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status Rating (ECOG-PSR), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the EQ-VAS, and the EQ-5D. These data were analysed using thematic content analysis and SPSS respectively. It was found that preconceived ideas about clinic attendance were replaced with positive impressions. Anxiety and EQ-VAS scores improved for all patients, and depression scores improved for four of the five patients, although no tests of significance were made. The qualitative data indicated that there were psychosocial benefits to attending the clinic.