Webcast sponsored by the Irving K. Barber Learning Centre and hosted by the Department of Sociology at UBC.

On the Run: Fugitive Life in an American City

The War on Crime didn’t just send millions of Black young men to prison and return them home with felony convictions. It created a little known surveillance state in America’s most disadvantaged neighborhoods.

Goffman moved into one such neighborhood in college and spent the next six years documenting the routine stops, searches, raids, and beatings that young men negotiate as they come of age. In what she calls “the fugitive life”, the fear of capture and confinement has come to permeate everyday activities, not just for young men on probation or running from a low level warrant, but for their partners, families, and law-abiding neighbors.

This fugitive life is the hidden counterpoint to mass incarceration, and the vivid picture Goffman paints is a grim one. But for the first time in four decades, policy analysts believe we have entered a unique reform moment where real change in drug laws and sentencing guidelines may be possible. How can we transform the criminal justice system from an occupying force into a source of public safety? How can we repair the damage the War on Crime has wrought in poor Black communities, and help people heal? What could an alternative system look like?

More on this topic:
Goffman, A. (2014). On the run: Fugitive life in an American city. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [Available at UBC Library]

Webcast sponsored by the Irving K. Barber Learning Centre and hosted by the UBC Faculty of Law. When lawyers advise clients they help the law to accomplish both its function as a system of social settlement, and the respect for the governed reflected in its processes and structure – i.e. the rule of law. A lawyer can only do so, however, if his/her advice provides an objectively reasonable assessment of the law, while also facilitating the accomplishment of the client’s goals and objectives. The lawyer as advisor is neither an advocate for the client’s goals, nor an adjudicator of the legality of those goals. Rather, the lawyer’s advising role has an irreducible duality, requiring good faith respect for both the law and the client – not unlike the attitude taken by a friend when offering advice.Unfortunately, the law governing Canadian lawyers does not provide sufficient guidance to lawyers as to their obligations when advising clients.

About the speaker:
Alice Woolley is a Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Calgary. Prior to joining the Faculty in 2004 Professor Woolley practiced law in Calgary, working in the areas of utility regulation and civil litigation. As an academic, she specializes in legal ethics and professional regulation, with a particular interest in the intersection between professional regulation, moral philosophy and moral psychology. Professor Woolley is the author of Understanding Lawyers’ Ethics in Canada and co-editor and co-author of Lawyers’ Ethics and Professional Regulation (2d ed.). She has published articles on topics such as the good character requirement for law society admission, the independence of the bar, civility, legal ethics teaching and the normative conception of the lawyer’s role. Professor Woolley has her LLM from Yale Law School and her BA and LLB from the University of Toronto, where she graduated with the gold medal. In 1995-1996 she was a law clerk to then Chief Justice of Canada, the Rt. Hon. Antonio Lamer.

Webcast sponsored by the Irving K. Barber Learning Centre and hosted by the UBC Faculty of Law. Until the late seventies/early eighties, women who were separating from their spouses had no right to claim property acquired during marriage unless it was registered in their names. The SCC decision of Murdoch v. Murdoch rendered in 1975 exposed the inequalities of the law. Beginning in the late seventies provincial governments began passing matrimonial property legislation which allowed for equal division of marital property. The legislation only applied to married persons and unmarried persons were left to apply for division of property under the equitable rules of trust, a complicated and costly process. In 2001 a challenge by Susan Welsh to the NS Matrimonial Property Act came before the SCC. In a surprising decision, the SCC held that excluding unmarried cohabitants from Matrimonial Legislation did not contravene section 15 of the Charter. Despite that ruling several provinces have revised their property legislation to include unmarried persons but the vast majority of unmarried Canadians are not protected. This exclusion has a gendered perspective and affects women and children to a much larger extent.

Speaker Bio: Renee R. Cochard, a family law lawyer from Alberta, has practiced exclusively Family Law since being admitted to the bar in 1979. She has an LLM from York U in Alternative Dispute Resolution (2003) and is presently a PHD Candidate in Law at UBC.

Webcast sponsored by the Irving K. Barber Learning Centre and hosted by the Faculty of Law’s Centre for Feminist Legal Studies as part of the Marlee Kline Lecture in Social Justice. Bonnie Sherr Klein is a documentary filmmaker and long-time activist in the feminist and disability movements. In this lecture she shares her lived experience of disability as documented in her journal entries and film. She points out that disability inevitably touches us all, and proposes that human rights for people living with disabilities is not `merely’ a justice issue but an opportunity for all of us to be our most human.

This lecture honours the memory of Marlee Gayle Kline, a member of the Faculty of Law from 1989. Professor Kline died in 2001 after a lengthy and determined struggle with leukemia. Her work on feminist legal theory and critical race theory, child welfare law and policy, law’s continued colonialism, and restructuring of the social welfare state is internationally acclaimed. This lectureship not only recognizes Marlee’s rich contribution to the law school community but also reflects her belief in the central role social justice concerns must play in legal education and law.

Webcast sponsored by the Irving K. Barber Learning Centre and hosted by the Faculty of Law. It has become part of the accepted corporate governance wisdom in the U.S., as well as in numerous other countries, that boards of directors of publicly-traded corporations should include some, and perhaps a majority of “independent” directors. Yet to-date there has been no consistent evidence that adding independent directors to boards improves corporate performance. Many problems in corporations require a complex balancing act, a weighing of competing interests. Because such problems, by their nature, involve trade-offs and huge uncertainties, we should expect that the calls that directors make will deviate from some hypothetically optimal values in a more-or-less random way, sometimes leading to higher sales growth sometimes not, sometimes producing higher share value, and sometimes not. Research on the role of directors almost universally starts from the premise that corporate boards are supposed to be the “agents” of shareholders, whose job is to maximize the share value of the companies. This principal-agent approach, however, leaves out because no one can be certain they will get what they want if the decision gets bumped “upstairs.”

Professor Deibert is Director of the Canada Centre for Global Security Studies and the Citizen Lab at the Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto. The Citizen Lab is an interdisciplinary research and development hothouse working at the intersection of the Internet, global security, and human rights. He was one of the authors of the Tracking Ghostnet report that documented an alleged cyber-espionage network affecting over 1200 computers in 103 countries, and the Shadows in the Cloud report, which analyzed a cloud-based espionage network. He is the author of the forthcoming book Black Code: the battle for the future of cyberspace (McClelland & Stewart, 2013). He has been a consultant and advisor to governments, international organizations, and civil society/NGOs on issues relating to cyber security, cyber crime, online free expression, and access to information.


Ron Deibert, (OOnt, PhD, University of British Columbia) is Professor of Political Science, and Director of the Canada Centre for Global Security Studies and theCitizen Lab at the Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto. The Citizen Lab is an interdisciplinary research and development hothouse working at the intersection of the Internet, global security, and human rights. He is a co-founder and a principal investigator of the OpenNet Initiative and Information Warfare Monitor (2003-2012) projects.  Deibert was one of the founders and (former) VP of global policy and outreach for Psiphon Inc.

Webcast sponsored by the Irving K. Barber Learning Centre and hosted by the Faculty of Law. Stephen Lewis is a Co-Director of AIDS-Free World, a Distinguished Visiting Professor at Ryerson University in Toronto, and the board chair of the Stephen Lewis Foundation. He is also a member of the Board of Directors of the Clinton Health Access Initiative and Emeritus Board Member of the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, as well as the author of the best-selling book, Race Against Time. Furthermore, he has worked with the United Nations for over two decades and holds more than 35 honorary degrees.

With recent changes to the law, this panel discusses: general purpose and structure of tax treaties; domestic tax systems in Hong Kong and China; key features of the treaty; and opportunities for investment to and from Hong Kong and China.


Wei Cui, David Duff, Barry MacDonald (Partner, Tax Services, PwC), Lori Mathison (Managing Partner, Dentons)

Webcast sponsored by the Irving K. Barber Learning Centre and hosted by the Faculty of Law.

This talk revisits the issue of including lesbians and gay men as spouses for tax purposes. It highlights existing concerns about this policy, including the fact that it results in a privatization of economic security within relationships. The lecture also considers the impact of changes to the income tax system that permit spouses to split income and concludes that these changes exacerbate existing inequalities and reinforce heteronormativity by rewarding the traditional family in which one spouse is the breadwinner and the other remains at home. The recommendation is that all tax rules that take spousal status into account be abolished and we return to the individual as the unit of taxation.

About the Speaker:

Claire Young
Professor, UBC Faculty of Law

Prior to joining the Faculty of Law in 1992, Claire Young practiced law with the Alberta Attorney-General’s department for several years and taught law at the University of Western Ontario from 1984-1992.She is the co-author of two books and the author of numerous articles on tax law and policy. Her research interests include feminist legal theory and sexuality and the law. She was awarded the Killam prize for excellence in teaching in 1998 and 2002. In 1999 she held the Dunhill Madden Butler Visiting Chair in Women and the Law at the University of Sydney, Australia. She has consulted with the Department of Finance and several international organizations on tax policy issues and is currently a member of the Joint Commonwealth Secretariat and the International Development Research Centre (IRDC) research team (based in London, U.K.) working on The Gender Responsive Budget Project. In 2003 Professor Young was awarded the Therese Casgrain Fellowship in recognition of her research on women and economic issues.

a place of mind, The University of British Columbia

UBC Library





Emergency Procedures | Accessibility | Contact UBC | © Copyright The University of British Columbia

Spam prevention powered by Akismet