Taking a constructionist approach, the article presents the results of two studies (a review of the scientific and clinical literature as well as analysis of mediation as treatment) on violence within conjugal and family life. It concludes that violence which affects these milieux, as has been recognised socially after several decades in several western countries, is conceptualised in a way which is marked by the subjective views of the people concerned, especially in the scientific and clinical spheres and for mediation. This violence is no more hidden than it has been, but it is far from being perceived, defined or socially represented in an « objective » manner.

No abstract

No abstract

Limited Print and Electronic Distribution RightsThis document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest.RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/TL224Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication.ISBN: 978-0-8330-9614-2 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2016 RAND CorporationR® is a registered trademark. Cover photo by Ellepistock/iStock.iii PrefaceThe Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process used by the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) is time-tested and effective, but it is also complex and challenging for new personnel. Furthermore, the process changes in detail relatively frequently, which means that the contextual materials and instruction provided to new action officers become quickly out of date unless they remain at fairly high levels of abstraction. This guidebook responds to a request from the U.S. Navy to produce a reference guide that documents key but enduring aspects of how the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations implements the PPBE process so that action officers, as well as flag officers and senior executives, can successfully navigate and effectively contribute to the process. This guide particularly emphasizes the planning and programming phases because these usually involve the greatest levels of effort and uncertainty, and because they are central to the principal annual deliverable-a coherent, balanced Program Objective Memorandum (POM) in alignment with leadership's guidance. As this report was being prepared for publication, the RAND research team became aware that the Navy is planning some changes to its POM process. This guide is accurate as of December 2015.The guidebook is aimed at action officers, branch heads, newly assigned flag officers and executives in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, and outside stakeholder organizations with an interest in the PPBE process and how the Navy executes it.This research was sponsored by the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, Programming Division (N80) and was co...

Du milieu des années 1970 jusqu’au début des années 1990, le ton des débats sur le rôle social de l’État était pessimiste (décennies de la « crise de l’État-providence »). S’appuyant sur les connaissances scientifiques pertinentes (principalement issues de la recherche évaluative), la thèse soutenue dans cet article est que le rôle de l’État est maintenant envisagé de manière plus positive, voire volontariste. Certains affirment que nous vivons présentement dans une « société active ». Il est suggéré ici que cette façon de concevoir le rôle de l’État dans les pays industrialisés correspond à l’émergence d’une « nouvelle légitimité » pour les politiques et les pratiques sociales. Le lien entre cette légitimité et le « bien-être » de la population est examiné dans quatre secteurs importants de l’intervention étatique : l’emploi, le revenu, l’éducation et le logement.From the mid 1970s to the beginning of the 1990s, the tone of the debates about the social role of the state was pessimistic (« welfare state crisis » decades). Using the relevant scientific knowledge (especially evaluation research), the argument of this paper is that the role of the state is now discussed in more positive and voluntarist terms. Some say that we now live in an « active society ». It is suggested here that this way of viewing the social role of the state in industrialized countries corresponds to the emergence of a « new legitimacy » for social policies and practices. The relation between this legitimacy and the « well-being » of the population is studied in four important areas of state intervention, i.e., employment, income, education and housing conditions