RESUMO
Objectives: Many US law schools are now offering elective courses in mindfulness training to alleviate disproportionately high levels of anxiety, depression, stress, and disordered alcohol use among law students. To date, empirical evidence on the effectiveness of these courses has been lacking. The aim of this pilot study was to explore the feasibility and impact of a 13-week mindfulness course, "Mindful Lawyering," specifically tailored to law students. The primary hypothesis was that mindfulness training would be significantly correlated with improvements in well-being and mindfulness. Methods: The design was a non-randomized, quasi-experimental study involving 64 law students. The mindfulness group was 31 students taking Mindful Lawyering; the comparison group was 33 students taking other law school courses. Outcome measures were the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale; the Positive and Negative Affect Scale; the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test; and the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire. Results: Results provide promising evidence to support the hypothesis. The mindfulness group showed significantly greater improvement on measures of stress (p < .001, d = 1.15), anxiety (p < .001, d = . 90), depression (p = .012, d = .66), negative affect (p = .002, d = .81), disordered alcohol use (p = .011, d = .67), and mindfulness (p < .001, d = 1.32) from pre to post relative to the comparison group. The course was well accepted and feasible for law students. Conclusions: Findings from the current study suggest that mindfulness training may occasion improvements in the well-being of law students. More research is needed to replicate these findings in larger, randomized samples of law students. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12671-022-01965-w.
RESUMO
We review scientific research and legal authorities to argue that the immutability of sexual orientation should no longer be invoked as a foundation for the rights of individuals with same-sex attractions and relationships (i.e., sexual minorities). On the basis of scientific research as well as U.S. legal rulings regarding lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) rights, we make three claims: First, arguments based on the immutability of sexual orientation are unscientific, given what we now know from longitudinal, population-based studies of naturally occurring changes in the same-sex attractions of some individuals over time. Second, arguments based on the immutability of sexual orientation are unnecessary, in light of U.S. legal decisions in which courts have used grounds other than immutability to protect the rights of sexual minorities. Third, arguments about the immutability of sexual orientation are unjust, because they imply that same-sex attractions are inferior to other-sex attractions, and because they privilege sexual minorities who experience their sexuality as fixed over those who experience their sexuality as fluid. We conclude that the legal rights of individuals with same-sex attractions and relationships should not be framed as if they depend on a certain pattern of scientific findings regarding sexual orientation.
