Language Diversity in the Classroom - ymerleksi - home

92 Language Diversity in the Classroomcourse) may form judgments on the basis of (say) the popularity orstrangeness of names, or of those that immediately suggest a particularethnic or social group. Recent work by Anderson-Clark et al. (2008) and Fryerand Levitt (2004b), for instance, has demonstrated the negative perceptions ofwhite teachers that can be elicited when contemporary African Americannames are the ‘triggers’; see also Christenfeld and Larsen (2008).3. Prior to the Supreme Court decision of 2002, provisions existed at the statelevel for exempting mentally retarded people from execution. At the time ofthe earlier (1989) ruling, only two states had such legislation, but the numberhad grown to 18 by 2002 (Mossman, 2005; Talbot, 2003). It is something of anirony that, after lengthy judicial procedures, the defendant in the landmarkcase discussed here (formally designated as Atkins v Virginia, 2002) wasfound not to be mentally retarded, after all.4. In fact, a very recent publication (Cosgrove et al., 2006) suggests the need foreven further caution. The authors examined the financial links betweenpharmaceutical companies and members of the APA panels responsible forthe fourth edition of the association’s influential Diagnostic and StatisticalManual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Theydiscovered that 95 of the 170 scientists had at least one such ‘financialassociation’. The ties took the form of research funding and consultancy orspeaking fees. Cosgrove and her colleagues note that the connections werestrongest in diagnostic domains in which drug treatment is primary; in two ofthe panels (those dealing with mood disorders and schizophrenia), everymember was financially linked with a drug company. The authors do notclaim to have proved the existence of inappropriate influence, but they doargue for a full-disclosure policy, which seems a modest enough recommendationin the circumstances.In newspaper interviews, representatives of the APA have denied anypharmaceutical industry influence on DSM revisions, have regretted the‘innuendo’ of the Cosgrove study, but have also agreed that transparencywould be the watchword in future editions of the manual (Carey, 2006).