• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
Too often, professors offer exemplar edits of student papers providing a single edit or identifying one or two instances of a problem. The expectation is that the students will respond to the general principle and use it themselves in editing the remainder of their own pieces. Independent learning theory suggests that students learn best if they learn the tools of self-assessment.

Editing checklists abound. Grammar dos and don'ts are not difficult to obtain; indeed, virtually every legal writing text has some variation. Students who take the time to review these lists find them quite helpful. Independent learners only need access to the information. Not all students, however, are independent learners. Many need more than a nudge to use information that is provided to them. Requiring self-editing certification enables the student to develop editing skills by focusing on discrete tasks rather than the often overwhelming instruction to proofread carefully. Although this same information is available in a myriad of sources, the certification directs the student to manageable tasks.

The following is a checklist for students to use in editing their own papers. It lists many of the most basic principles of good, clear writing and many of the most common flaws in students' papers. It requires the student to certify, by signing and noting the date and time, that the student has checked the paper for each of the points listed.

Law school paper, Notes, Comments, Editing, Self-editing, Checklist, Legal writing, Scholarly writing, Student papers, Grammar, Plagiarism, Law students, Students

Abstract:
"Be sure to bluebook this!" These very words often strike terror in the hearts of law students, clerks, and attorneys. An archaic book, unreadable and undecipherable, chock-full of rules that make the misplacement of a single space or period a capitol offense, The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation (herein after "the bluebook") has become the bible for legal citation. Written by law students (yes, law students) at four major East Coast law schools, the bluebook has been the citation standard for the legal community for too many years to count.

Every five years or so, a new edition is issued with a multitude of changes. The reasoning behind the changes is often obscure to the legal community at large. Some are made for politically correct reasons, such as including the first names of authors of legal periodical articles and treatises instead of mere initials to indicate the body of scholarship of female authors. Other changes appear on their face to have no real purpose, such as the change in the abbreviation for citing decisions of bankruptcy appellate panels.

Making the bluebook understandable to law students has plagued the legal writing teaching community for years. The bluebook is hard to understand, with one set of rules for law reviews and a different set of rules for briefs and legal memoranda. To confound the problem, the only examples given in the text are in law review style.

And so the new kid on the block was conceived. The ALWD CITATION MANUAL: A PROFESSIONAL SYSTEM OF CITATION (hereinafter "the manual") was published by Aspen Law & Business in the summer of 2000. Backed by the Association of Legal Writing Directors, Darby Dickerson of Stetson University College of Law has drafted a user-friendly citation guide that is taking the legal writing community by storm. In its first year, the manual was adopted "at more than ninety law schools, many paralegal programs, and several law reviews."

Quite simply, the ALWD manual has far exceeded the legal writing community's expectations. The manual is straightforward, full of explanations in plain English, and has an example for everything. Part I of this article will examine the design and organizational features of the manual. Part II will highlight the main rule differences between the manual and the bluebook. Part III will emphasize the benefits to Missouri lawyers of using the ALWD manual for its citation needs. Lastly, an appendix includes a chart summarizing the two citation manuals for selected rules.

bluebook, citation, citation manual, Uniform System of Citation, legal writing, ALWD, professional system of citation, plain English, AWLD citation

Abstract:
Today, the role of a child welfare agency is multi-faceted. An agency often provides adoption services, unwed parent services, and foster care services. As a result, agencies struggle to meet the often conflicting needs of three separate clients: the child, the adoptive parents, and the birth parents.

Each part of the adoption triangle presents its own unique problems. From the child needing placement in a permanent family to the adoptive parents wanting a child, to the birth parents not ready or not willing to become parents, an agency works to meet all needs. In doing so, the agency often takes on the role of intermediary, serving to place the child of the birth parents with adoptive parents.

As an intermediary, one role of the agency is as an information conduit. The birth parents relay information about their medical history, family background, and reasons for relinquishment. In turn, the agency passes non-identifying information on to the adoptive parents. As an adult, the child may return to the agency and receive this non-identifying information for him.

In modern adoptions, the birth parents also may receive information about the adoptive parents and the child. Indeed, post-placement information sharing is often heralded by agencies in their marketing efforts to recruit adoptable babies.

The law fully recognizes an agency's legal duty to disclose information to the child and adoptive parents. State statutes dictate what information must be shared. Indeed, adoptive parents may recover damages against an agency for failure to disclose pertinent medical or social history information.

The law, however, inadequately protects birth parents. While some states have recognized the need for disclosure of medical information, the vast majority do not. Medical information regarding the adopted child can be just as crucial to birth parents, however, in their later reproductive decisionmaking. Knowledge that an earlier child had a genetic illness may impact a birth parent's decision to have additional children, to undergo genetic counseling, and to undergo extensive prenatal testing. Birth parents seeking damages for an agency's failure to disclose medical information regarding the adopted child received post-adoption have, however, been turned away for lack of duty.

This essay will examine whether an agency owes a duty to birth parents to disclose information received post-placement. First, this essay will consider the changing practices of modern adoption and their potential ramifications for agency duties. Second, it will examine the birth parents' need for information and the nature of an agency's duty. Last, this essay will consider four theories under which a duty to disclose to birth parents could be established. This essay will conclude that changed adoption agency practices result in an agency's acquired duty to disclose medical information received to birth parents. As a result, agencies may be held liable for failure to disclose information received to birth parents.

adoption, adoption services, adoption agency, child welfare agency, medical information, disclosure of medical information, duty to disclose medical information, failure to disclose, post-placement, birth parents, adoptive parents