This article presents the first empirically-based and theoreticallyinformed investigation of the effectiveness of the 'self-declaration model' of legal gender recognition in Denmark, the first European state to adopt it. Drawing upon analysis of legislative materials, as well as interviews with stakeholders in the legislative process and trans and intersex legal subjects, it contends that self-declaration is not without its limitations. By conceptualising embodiment as an ontological and epistemological process of becoming, and emphasising the institutional dimensions and effects of such processes, it demonstrates that self-declaration may not address the complexities of legal embodiment, particularly concerning restrictions on trans and intersex people's access to health care. The article's empirical findings are directed towards the policymakers and activists tasked with shaping reforms of gender recognition legislation in the UK and elsewhere. The analytical agenda it develops may be adopted, and adapted, by scholars working in this area and other regulatory contexts.

Agents, participating in different kind of organizations, usually take different positions in some network structure. Two well-known network structures are hierarchies and communication networks. This paper aims at introducing a new type of network structure having both communication and hierarchical features. We describe a network by a collection of feasible sets, being the sets of network positions (nodes), that can organize themselves and act as a group. We introduce a new type of network structure, that has communication as well as hierarchical features. We compare these new network structures with other structures from the literature, and study its basis, i.e. the 'smallest' representation of the network. Finally, we apply these new network structures to cooperative games, where cooperation is restricted by some network structure, and provide an axiomatization of an extension of the Shapley value to this class of games.

This article utilizes a novel framework to analyse the contested boundaries between law and medicine. Bringing theoretical and empirical insights together, it expands recent socio‐legal scholarship on jurisdiction. Jurisdictional analysis is conducted in an under‐researched area of health law – namely, the accessibility of trans‐related health care. The article draws upon the first qualitative research project to assess the impact of self‐declaration of legal gender status in Denmark. This was adopted in 2014, at the same time as access to hormones and surgeries was centralized and restricted. The combined impact of these reforms disappointed the trans people interviewed, which demonstrates the importance of identifying how legal and medical norms interrelate. Jurisdictional analysis helps to illuminate how law was used to develop and protect professional competencies. Such insights will be valuable for researchers interested in the potential of self‐declaration, and for scholars of health law and socio‐legal studies more generally.

A version of the classical secretary problem is studied, in which one is interested in selecting one of the b best out of a group of n differently ranked persons who are presented one by one in a random order. It is assumed that b ≥ 1 is a preassigned number. It is known, already for a long time, that for the optimal policy one needs to compute b position thresholds, for instance via backwards induction. In this paper we study approximate policies, that use just a single or a double position threshold, albeit in conjunction with a level rank. We give exact and asymptotic (as n → ∞) results, which show that the double-level policy is an extremely accurate approximation.