This paper examines the vexed issue of conscientious objection and abortion. It begins by outlining the increasing claims to conscientious objection invoked by physicians in reproductive health services. After an examination of developments overseas, the paper turns to the acrimonious debate in Victoria concerning the conscience clause and the 'obligation to refer' contained in the Abortion Law Reform Act 2008 (Vic) ('ALRA'). This paper questions the interpretation by the Catholic Church that the clause breaches its right to freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. We argue that the unregulated use of conscientious objection impedes women's rights to access safe lawful medical procedures. As such, we contend that a physician's withdrawal from patient care on the basis of conscience must be limited to certain circumstances. The paper then examines international and national guidelines, international treaties and recommendations of treaty monitoring bodies, laws in other jurisdictions, and trends in case law. The purpose of this examination is to show that the conscientious objection clause and the 'obligation to refer' in ALRA is consistent with international practice and laws in other jurisdictions. Finally, the paper turns to the problematic interpretation of conscience and moral responsibility in the context of abortion. We believe that narrow interpretations of conscience must be challenged, in order to incorporate patients' rights to include the choice of abortion and other lawful treatments according to their conscience. We conclude that the conscientious objection provisions in ALRA have achieved the right balance and that there is no justifiable legal reason upon which opponents can challenge the law.
{"title":"Abortion and Conscientious Objection: The New Battleground","authors":"A. O'Rourke, L. Crespigny, A. Pyman","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2262139","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2262139","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the vexed issue of conscientious objection and abortion. It begins by outlining the increasing claims to conscientious objection invoked by physicians in reproductive health services. After an examination of developments overseas, the paper turns to the acrimonious debate in Victoria concerning the conscience clause and the 'obligation to refer' contained in the Abortion Law Reform Act 2008 (Vic) ('ALRA'). This paper questions the interpretation by the Catholic Church that the clause breaches its right to freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. We argue that the unregulated use of conscientious objection impedes women's rights to access safe lawful medical procedures. As such, we contend that a physician's withdrawal from patient care on the basis of conscience must be limited to certain circumstances. The paper then examines international and national guidelines, international treaties and recommendations of treaty monitoring bodies, laws in other jurisdictions, and trends in case law. The purpose of this examination is to show that the conscientious objection clause and the 'obligation to refer' in ALRA is consistent with international practice and laws in other jurisdictions. Finally, the paper turns to the problematic interpretation of conscience and moral responsibility in the context of abortion. We believe that narrow interpretations of conscience must be challenged, in order to incorporate patients' rights to include the choice of abortion and other lawful treatments according to their conscience. We conclude that the conscientious objection provisions in ALRA have achieved the right balance and that there is no justifiable legal reason upon which opponents can challenge the law.","PeriodicalId":44672,"journal":{"name":"Monash University Law Review","volume":"120 1","pages":"87-119"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77432713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The majority of current first year university students belong to Generation Y. Consequently, research suggests that, in order to more effectively engage them, their particular learning preferences should be acknowledged in the organisation of their learning environments and in the support provided. These preferences are refl ected in the Torts Student Peer Mentor Program (‘Program’), which, as part of the undergraduate law degree at the Queensland University of Technology (‘QUT’), utilises active learning, structured sessions and teamwork so as to supplement student understanding of the substantive law of Torts with the development of life-long skills. This article outlines the Program and its relevance to the learning styles and experiences of Generation Y fi rst year law students transitioning to university, in order to investigate student perceptions of its effectiveness — both generally and, more specifi cally, in terms of the Program’s capacity to assist students to develop academic and workrelated skills.
{"title":"Peer assisted learning, skills development and Generation Y : a case study of a first year undergraduate law unit","authors":"T. Carver","doi":"10.26180/5DB80006ED9F8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26180/5DB80006ED9F8","url":null,"abstract":"The majority of current first year university students belong to Generation Y. Consequently, research suggests that, in order to more effectively engage them, their particular learning preferences should be acknowledged in the organisation of their learning environments and in the support provided. These preferences are refl ected in the Torts Student Peer Mentor Program (‘Program’), which, as part of the undergraduate law degree at the Queensland University of Technology (‘QUT’), utilises active learning, structured sessions and teamwork so as to supplement student understanding of the substantive law of Torts with the development of life-long skills. This article outlines the Program and its relevance to the learning styles and experiences of Generation Y fi rst year law students transitioning to university, in order to investigate student perceptions of its effectiveness — both generally and, more specifi cally, in terms of the Program’s capacity to assist students to develop academic and workrelated skills.","PeriodicalId":44672,"journal":{"name":"Monash University Law Review","volume":"2 1","pages":"203"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83191960","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Outcomes in child protection cases impact substantially on children and families. Decisions in child protection matters must, therefore, be made with due caution and sensitivity. In order for the best outcomes to be achieved for children and their families, research suggests that decisions should be made collaboratively, and proceedings should be less adversarial in nature. At the same time procedural rules should be rigorously adhered to when decisions of a serious nature are being made, particularly where State interference in individuals.' lives has occurred or is being contemplated. Thus, there is a tension in the child protection context between the use of informal dispute resolution methods, and the need to safeguard the rights of children and families. This tension is explored in this paper, with particular reference to the principles of natural justice and the rules of evidence. The discussion is informed by empirical research undertaken with child protection lawyers in Queensland. The authors conclude with some suggestions for reform which reflect the ideal of collaboration without compromising the need for procedural fairness.
{"title":"Lawyers' Views of Decision-Making in Child Protection Matters: The Tension between Adversarialism and Collaborative Approaches","authors":"T. Walsh, H. Douglas","doi":"10.26180/5DB8010FEE888","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26180/5DB8010FEE888","url":null,"abstract":"Outcomes in child protection cases impact substantially on children and families. Decisions in child protection matters must, therefore, be made with due caution and sensitivity. In order for the best outcomes to be achieved for children and their families, research suggests that decisions should be made collaboratively, and proceedings should be less adversarial in nature. At the same time procedural rules should be rigorously adhered to when decisions of a serious nature are being made, particularly where State interference in individuals.' lives has occurred or is being contemplated. Thus, there is a tension in the child protection context between the use of informal dispute resolution methods, and the need to safeguard the rights of children and families. This tension is explored in this paper, with particular reference to the principles of natural justice and the rules of evidence. The discussion is informed by empirical research undertaken with child protection lawyers in Queensland. The authors conclude with some suggestions for reform which reflect the ideal of collaboration without compromising the need for procedural fairness.","PeriodicalId":44672,"journal":{"name":"Monash University Law Review","volume":"5 1","pages":"181-211"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80096473","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Commonwealth has legislative power with respect to 'trading or financial corporations' under s 51(xx) of the Constitution. An important question is thus how to identify a trading or financial corporation. For around 30 years, the accepted doctrine has been that a court looks at a corporation's activities. This article examines the justifications for and application of this activities test in the High Court and in recent lower court decisions. It argues that the activities test should be replaced by a multifactorial approach. Such an approach is more transparent and informative, and also better reflects what the courts actually do when deciding cases in this area.
{"title":"'Trading or financial corporations' under section 51(xx) of the constitution: A multifactorial approach","authors":"Christopher Tran","doi":"10.26180/5DB7FFA55D8A0","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26180/5DB7FFA55D8A0","url":null,"abstract":"The Commonwealth has legislative power with respect to 'trading or financial corporations' under s 51(xx) of the Constitution. An important question is thus how to identify a trading or financial corporation. For around 30 years, the accepted doctrine has been that a court looks at a corporation's activities. This article examines the justifications for and application of this activities test in the High Court and in recent lower court decisions. It argues that the activities test should be replaced by a multifactorial approach. Such an approach is more transparent and informative, and also better reflects what the courts actually do when deciding cases in this area.","PeriodicalId":44672,"journal":{"name":"Monash University Law Review","volume":"55 1","pages":"12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75916426","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The power of Victorian government agencies to refuse to process voluminous Freedom of Information (‘FOI’) requests is contained in s 25A(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic). During the initial years of operation, it was claimed that this power would not be ‘antidemocratic’, ‘anti-open government’ or ‘otherwise contrary to the spirit of FOI’, given the existence of adequate safeguards and so long as agencies upheld their duties in practice. This article examines whether that has proven to be the case nearly two decades on from the provision’s introduction in 1993. It concludes that despite several conceptual difficulties, s 25A(1) has its rightful place in the FOI statutory regime.
{"title":"Refusing to Process Voluminous Requests: Contrary to the Spirit of Freedom of Information?","authors":"Bruce Chen","doi":"10.26180/5DB7FFDD3DB16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26180/5DB7FFDD3DB16","url":null,"abstract":"The power of Victorian government agencies to refuse to process voluminous Freedom of Information (‘FOI’) requests is contained in s 25A(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic). During the initial years of operation, it was claimed that this power would not be ‘antidemocratic’, ‘anti-open government’ or ‘otherwise contrary to the spirit of FOI’, given the existence of adequate safeguards and so long as agencies upheld their duties in practice. This article examines whether that has proven to be the case nearly two decades on from the provision’s introduction in 1993. It concludes that despite several conceptual difficulties, s 25A(1) has its rightful place in the FOI statutory regime.","PeriodicalId":44672,"journal":{"name":"Monash University Law Review","volume":"12 1","pages":"132-154"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82022284","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Victorian Guardianship and Administration Act 1986 (Vic) is currently under review by the Victorian Law Reform Commission. This article investigates the criteria that need to be established before a guardian can be appointed under the current Act, and draws on developments in other jurisdictions and in international law, as well as on expertise at Victoria's Office of the Public Advocate, to argue that these criteria should be amended. In particular, the article argues that the criteria should be more narrowly confined to those situations where an impairment renders an individual unable to make a specific decision, or when the failure to appoint a guardian to make a particular decision would place an individual at an unacceptable risk of harm.
{"title":"Capacity in Victorian Guardianship Law: Options for Reform","authors":"J. Chesterman","doi":"10.26180/5DB7FDDA56E6D","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26180/5DB7FDDA56E6D","url":null,"abstract":"The Victorian Guardianship and Administration Act 1986 (Vic) is currently under review by the Victorian Law Reform Commission. This article investigates the criteria that need to be established before a guardian can be appointed under the current Act, and draws on developments in other jurisdictions and in international law, as well as on expertise at Victoria's Office of the Public Advocate, to argue that these criteria should be amended. In particular, the article argues that the criteria should be more narrowly confined to those situations where an impairment renders an individual unable to make a specific decision, or when the failure to appoint a guardian to make a particular decision would place an individual at an unacceptable risk of harm.","PeriodicalId":44672,"journal":{"name":"Monash University Law Review","volume":"30 1","pages":"84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80542316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper examines what makes for good complaints management in legal practice, how law firms are faring at complaints management, and the role of a regulator in encouraging implementation of effective complaints management. The first part of the paper argues that it can be important from the point of view of clients, legal practices and regulators for legal practices to implement internal complaints management practices. The second part of the paper considers the potential possibilities and problems when regulators attempt to mandate internal complaints management by legal practices. We examine a recent initiative by the Queensland regulator to ask lawyers to complete a survey on complaints management systems. We argue that this approach - of promoting awareness of, discussion about, and commitment to good complaints management inside legal practices, but without mandating any particular system - is a promising model that other jurisdictions should consider closely. The third part of the paper examines what good complaints management involves in principle, and the perceptions, attitudes and practices of legal and non-legal staff in relation to complaints management, using the results from the Queensland survey.
{"title":"Inside running: Internal complaints management practice and regulation in the legal profession","authors":"C. Parker, L. Haller","doi":"10.26180/5DB7FE1FF3435","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26180/5DB7FE1FF3435","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines what makes for good complaints management in legal practice, how law firms are faring at complaints management, and the role of a regulator in encouraging implementation of effective complaints management. The first part of the paper argues that it can be important from the point of view of clients, legal practices and regulators for legal practices to implement internal complaints management practices. The second part of the paper considers the potential possibilities and problems when regulators attempt to mandate internal complaints management by legal practices. We examine a recent initiative by the Queensland regulator to ask lawyers to complete a survey on complaints management systems. We argue that this approach - of promoting awareness of, discussion about, and commitment to good complaints management inside legal practices, but without mandating any particular system - is a promising model that other jurisdictions should consider closely. The third part of the paper examines what good complaints management involves in principle, and the perceptions, attitudes and practices of legal and non-legal staff in relation to complaints management, using the results from the Queensland survey.","PeriodicalId":44672,"journal":{"name":"Monash University Law Review","volume":"137 1","pages":"217-249"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82624252","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In Australia, magistrates and their courts have undertaken steps to make the disposition of cases more appropriate and more sensitive to the varied needs of defendants. One development is more engaged approaches to judging, which entails direct judicial interaction with court users, requiring judicial communication skills and perhaps greater emotional capacities such as empathy. Careful analysis of empirical evidence of judicial attitudes and practices in court identifies important links between conventional judging values, skills and actions and some elements of the newer forms of judging. This research identifies magistrates’ commitment to core judicial values such as impartiality, their views about skills and practices associated with more engaged judging, such as listening and empathy and their orientation to the social value of their work. The article then examines in-court behaviours, including the demeanours magistrates display towards defendants and the circumstances in which they look at and speak directly to defendants. The findings suggest apparent tensions between legitimacy based on a conventional judicial role in an adversary process and the legitimacy of more engaged, active judging. This research finds ways in which values and practices of less-adversarial judging can be incorporated within a relatively conventional understanding and performance of the judicial role.
{"title":"Opportunities for New Approaches to Judging in a Conventional Context: Attitudes, Skills and Practices","authors":"K. Mack, S. Anleu","doi":"10.26180/5DB7FE5760A8F","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26180/5DB7FE5760A8F","url":null,"abstract":"In Australia, magistrates and their courts have undertaken steps to make the disposition of cases more appropriate and more sensitive to the varied needs of defendants. One development is more engaged approaches to judging, which entails direct judicial interaction with court users, requiring judicial communication skills and perhaps greater emotional capacities such as empathy. Careful analysis of empirical evidence of judicial attitudes and practices in court identifies important links between conventional judging values, skills and actions and some elements of the newer forms of judging. This research identifies magistrates’ commitment to core judicial values such as impartiality, their views about skills and practices associated with more engaged judging, such as listening and empathy and their orientation to the social value of their work. The article then examines in-court behaviours, including the demeanours magistrates display towards defendants and the circumstances in which they look at and speak directly to defendants. The findings suggest apparent tensions between legitimacy based on a conventional judicial role in an adversary process and the legitimacy of more engaged, active judging. This research finds ways in which values and practices of less-adversarial judging can be incorporated within a relatively conventional understanding and performance of the judicial role.","PeriodicalId":44672,"journal":{"name":"Monash University Law Review","volume":"2016 1","pages":"187"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73653522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Judges conduct settlement conferences in civil disputes in many parts of the world. This is an important feature of judicial work in many jurisdictions. In Australia, the role of judges and their relationship with Alternative or Appropriate Dispute Resolution ('ADR') processes and, in particular, their role in judicial settlement conferencing processes conducted within the civil justice setting, has been the subject of some discussion in recent years. This article explores the evolving nature of the relationship between courts and ADR and more specifically comments on the nature of the judicial function and its relationship with ADR, before discussing the role of judges in relation to judicial settlement conferences. The reasons why judges should conduct settlement conferences are considered in the context of changing court and societal trends and objectives, the skills and attributes of judges, the objectives of the civil justice system and the important role that judges can play in this form of court integrated ADR.
{"title":"Five Reasons Why Judges Should Conduct Settlement Conferences","authors":"Tania Sourdin","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2125727","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2125727","url":null,"abstract":"Judges conduct settlement conferences in civil disputes in many parts of the world. This is an important feature of judicial work in many jurisdictions. In Australia, the role of judges and their relationship with Alternative or Appropriate Dispute Resolution ('ADR') processes and, in particular, their role in judicial settlement conferencing processes conducted within the civil justice setting, has been the subject of some discussion in recent years. This article explores the evolving nature of the relationship between courts and ADR and more specifically comments on the nature of the judicial function and its relationship with ADR, before discussing the role of judges in relation to judicial settlement conferences. The reasons why judges should conduct settlement conferences are considered in the context of changing court and societal trends and objectives, the skills and attributes of judges, the objectives of the civil justice system and the important role that judges can play in this form of court integrated ADR.","PeriodicalId":44672,"journal":{"name":"Monash University Law Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"145-170"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84483178","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 2010, the NSW Youth Drug and Alcohol Court ('YDAC') Program celebrated its 10th year of continual operation, but despite a promising early evaluation of the Program, 1 it remains an indefinite pilot. In 2000, the year the YDAC program commenced as a pilot, Freiberg remarked that, '[o]n balance, Australia is right in experimenting with drug courts, providing that they are rigorously and carefully evaluated and carefully targeted at those who are most likely to benefit.' Notably, the 'NSW Drug Summit 1999 - Government Plan of Action', declared that '[a]s with the adult Drug Court program, the Youth Drug Court will be carefully evaluated.' However, to date there is only one published evaluation of the YDAC Program4 and very limited available information that describes or analyses its development and current structure and characteristics. This paper attempts to redress this gap in the literature somewhat, by providing a descriptive overview of the YDAC Program based on publicly available information about the program and the author's own experiences as the former manager of this program. This is then critically compared to research evidence about criminal justice programs and services that work to reduce young offenders' rates of recidivism and harmful substance misuse.
{"title":"The New South Wales youth drug and alcohol court program: A decade of development","authors":"S. Turner","doi":"10.26180/5DB7FE8F069CD","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.26180/5DB7FE8F069CD","url":null,"abstract":"In 2010, the NSW Youth Drug and Alcohol Court ('YDAC') Program celebrated its 10th year of continual operation, but despite a promising early evaluation of the Program, 1 it remains an indefinite pilot. In 2000, the year the YDAC program commenced as a pilot, Freiberg remarked that, '[o]n balance, Australia is right in experimenting with drug courts, providing that they are rigorously and carefully evaluated and carefully targeted at those who are most likely to benefit.' Notably, the 'NSW Drug Summit 1999 - Government Plan of Action', declared that '[a]s with the adult Drug Court program, the Youth Drug Court will be carefully evaluated.' However, to date there is only one published evaluation of the YDAC Program4 and very limited available information that describes or analyses its development and current structure and characteristics. This paper attempts to redress this gap in the literature somewhat, by providing a descriptive overview of the YDAC Program based on publicly available information about the program and the author's own experiences as the former manager of this program. This is then critically compared to research evidence about criminal justice programs and services that work to reduce young offenders' rates of recidivism and harmful substance misuse.","PeriodicalId":44672,"journal":{"name":"Monash University Law Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"280-297"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90037630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：