English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Researchers have created a diverse toolbox of literature reporting that same sex cohabitating relationships are strikingly similar to heterosexual marriages in amicus curiae briefs submitted to the courts. However, judges are trained to fit information into legal frameworks and to ignore data that does not fit the rhetoric of a case. The following article aims to fit existing data on same sex relationships into the framework judges will use to decide whether same sex marriage can be prohibited. The primary precedent used to support same sex marriage is based on the analogy of a case prohibiting marriage discrimination based on race. The legal framework created by this case requires social work policy practitioners to frame research in terms of the evolution that has occurred in scientific understanding of same sex attraction and public opinion. A simple shift in the discourse used to frame the data can significantly impact whether judges listen.

Let’s Talk About Same Sex: How Social Workers Can Make Judges Listen