Anna Kawalek

Anna Kawalek
Leeds Beckett University | LEEDS MET · Leeds Law School

BA (hons) GDL Ph.D

About

22
Publications
6,693
Reads
How we measure 'reads'
A 'read' is counted each time someone views a publication summary (such as the title, abstract, and list of authors), clicks on a figure, or views or downloads the full-text. Learn more
94
Citations
Introduction
Senior Lecturer from Leeds Law School. Research Interests: Drug Courts, Justice Innovation, Criminal Justice, Comprehensive Law Approaches (Restorative Justice, Therapeutic Jurisprudence, Preventive Law), and Social Justice amongst Marginalised Groups. Trustee of the International Society of Therapeutic Jurisprudence and co-founder of the UK Centre for Therapeutic Jurisprudence.
Additional affiliations
September 2016 - present
Sheffield Hallam University
Position
  • Lecturer
October 2015 - February 2017
Sheffield Hallam University
Position
  • Lecturer
September 2015 - September 2018
Sheffield Hallam University
Position
  • PhD Student
Education
September 2011 - September 2012
September 2008 - September 2011
Newcastle University
Field of study
  • Philosophy

Publications

Publications (22)
Article
Full-text available
Although therapeutic jurisprudence ("TJ") is increasingly well-established internationally, particularly within the United States of America ("US"), to date it remains relatively unacknowledged within the United Kingdom ("UK"). This article will explore the opportunities presented within contemporary UK society for the greater promotion, and eventu...
Article
In late 2015, the British Red Cross approached the lead author. It was increasingly evident that given the austerity-driven political agenda of the UK government in cutting public funding to advisory services, coupled with the developing refugee crisis and its impact on countries and regions, refugees in many parts of the UK were in need of legal a...
Article
Full-text available
Over the last 25 years problem solving courts have developed internationally to provide a response to entrenched criminal justice related issues including addiction and mental health problems. These courts operate in adherence with the concept of Therapeutic Jurisprudence, which recognises the court and its officials as therapeutic agents, who work...
Article
Since its inception in the 1980s, the growing body of Therapeutic Jurisprudence scholarship has continued to challenge and optimise not only our understanding of what the law “is”, but also how we can leverage its agency to improve the ways in which we apply, observe and evaluate the law. By focusing on the emotional, human and psychological conseq...
Presentation
Since its inception in the 1980s, the growing body of Therapeutic Jurisprudence scholarship has continued to challenge and optimise not only our understanding of what the law “is”, but also how we can leverage its agency to improve the ways in which we apply, observe and evaluate the law. By focusing on the emotional, human and psychological conseq...
Article
Neo-Liberal Governmentality and Babies in Prison. Helen explains that, in the summer (2020), the UK government produced a policy document that recommends changes for mother and baby units, including an extension of separation between baby and mothers from 18 months to 2 years. A notable exclusion from this review was the Howard League that provid...
Article
Full-text available
This paper aims to highlight some of the key issues surrounding the development and application of immigration law as it applies in the United Kingdom (UK) to refugees attempting to be reunited with their families living abroad. The right for refugees to be reunited with their families is enshrined in international law, but this is frequently frust...
Article
Background: The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with concurrent illicit drug use of opiates and crack/cocaine use among individuals receiving of opioid medication-assisted treatment (MAT) in one English rural/urban County Council area. Methods: 776 opiate users in treatment were assessed using the Addiction Dimensions for Asses...
Conference Paper
This paper explored the downfall of the English and Welsh Drug Courts whilst proposing a fidelity matrix for future attempts to ensure successes.
Conference Paper
Since its inception in the 1980s, the growing body of Therapeutic Jurisprudence (“TJ”) scholarship has continued to challenge and optimise not only our understanding of what the law “is”, but also how we can leverage its therapeutic agency to improve the ways in which we design, apply, observe and evaluate the law. By focusing on the emotional, hum...
Article
The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with concurrent illicit drug use of opiates and crack/cocaine use among individuals receiving of opioid medication-assisted treatment (MAT) in one English rural/urban County Council area. Practitioner assessments with self-report data offer unique perspectives on service users’ holistic needs...
Chapter
Full-text available
Theories underpinning restorative justice (RJ) overlap significantly with work around addiction recovery, in particular, the concept of “recovery capital”. Whilst both movements are relatively new, RJ has a longer-standing history and a greater application in practice settings, yet both are inherently 'relational theories' and should be evaluated a...
Thesis
Full-text available
Whilst the Therapeutic Jurisprudence ("TJ") paradigm and related movements have proliferated across jurisdictions worldwide, England and Wales has significantly lagged behind. This thesis examines the therapeutic quality of Manchester Review Court ("MRC") using TJ lenses. MRC is a specialist court in England and Wales, which possesses a problem-sol...

Questions

Questions (3)
Question
The age old question about theory - the I have put forward a proposition below (which I dont neccessarily agree with) - hope it generates a lively discussion and I am interested to hear from you on this facinating topic ;)
Dr Anna Kawalek
When we talk about theory in academia, any scholarly body has two main (interconnected) theoretical strands. To understand the core academic positions of any legal (or non-legal) school is to consider both aspects. The first is methodology (comprising primarily of ontological and epistemological assumptions about the law, latterly engaging relevant methods of discovering the law). This is general research philosophy applied more precisely to the subject of law (we might discuss the same paradigms in different fields, for instance, maths, physics, or sociology). This branch considers the mechanics behind making knowledge claims pertaining to whatlaw is (ontology), how we can know law (epistemology), and how these theoretical understandings create channels into relevant methods to construct knowledge. For further information, Stobbs provides an accessible overview of the academic terminology ontology, epistemology, methodology, and methods.[1]His articulation is particularly useful because it demonstrates the link between these key pillars of knowledge acquisition (ontology, epistemology, methods), each layer creating a building block for the next, and together creating rigorous methodology.[2]
The second strand concerns substantive, prescriptive, or content-drive claims about the law or what the law ought to do.[3] The focus is subject matter, content, and causal links that discusses the law, practice, and the courts. Generating substantive knowledge claims rest on a (implicitly or explicitly acknowledged) series of complementary methodological assumptions from the first strand. This makes both strands interconnected. For example, commitment to a subjectivist ontology and sociological epistemology would project a substantive theory of psycho-social variety; it is unlikely (and potentially impossible) for this type of methodology to generate a substantive claim of a natural science genre. In the alternative, an objectivist ontology and empiricist epistemology may generate substantive theory of biomedical variety. This means that every juncture of a methodological process opens up a prism of potential substantive claims, whilst closing off others. Usually, when comparing any two schools, the bigger the adjustment to methodological assumptions (what reality is and how we know it), the greater the difference in substantive claim (seeking to explain and discuss these realities). Taken together, if a methodological underpinning offers a (limited) spectrum of substantive claims, this means that literature ascribing to a similar series of methodological assumptions are likely to provoke similar genres of substantive theory. Alternatively, literature ascribing to different methodologies but examining the same phenomenon will project opposing substantive theories about that given phenomenon because they make very different theoretical commitments about the world.
In law, this point is exemplified by legal realism and formalism, two schools that are typically understood as scholarly opponents. Their ontological and epistemological beliefs mean that the realists and the formalists each respectively construct knowledge of the law and legal processes in a very different way to one-another, mobilising a very different sets of methodological benchmarks. However, at the same time, they examine similar substantive content – namely, the courts, advocacy, and juristic methods,[4] and how political standards influence adjudication.[5] The formalist position takes a normatively-infused political angle; it considers judicial decisions and how judges do and ought to decide cases, seeking to persuade practitioners to justify preferences to objective standards.[6] However, the realists reject ought questions and look at social facts and effects as they manifest in reality.[7] At risk of venturing too far into the terrains of their respective substantive claims, the key point is that they examine similar phenomena using very different methodologies. As a result, despite examining the same “thing”, they derive substantive conclusions on opposite ends of the spectrum. This serves to highlight the significance of methodological assumptions for generating substantive claims.
Are there in fact two stands when we generate theory? Discuss.
[1] Nigel Stobbs, ‘therapeutic jurisprudence as theoretical and applied research’ (chapter 3) in Stobbs, et al. [n 14] [48].
[2] Ibid.
[3] Edward L. Rubin, The Concept of Law and the New Public Law Scholarship, 89 Mich. L. Rev. 792 (1991) Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol89/iss4/3
[4] Karl N Llewellyn, ‘The Normative, the Legal, and the Law-Jobs: The Problem of Juristic Method.’ The Yale Law Journal, vol. 49, no. 8, 1940, pp. 1355–400. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/792545. Accessed 29 Jun. 2022.
[5] Jeremy Telman, ‘International legal positivism and legal realism’, in Jörg Kammerhofer & Jean D'Aspremont (Eds.) International Legal Positivism in a Post-Modern World (pp. 241-263) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014). doi:10.1017/CBO9781139094245.012
[6] Ibid; Michael Freeman, and Dennis Lloyd of Hampstead. 2001. Lloyd's introduction to jurisprudence (chapter 9). (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2001).
[7] Oliver Jütersonke, ‘Realist Approaches to International Law’ in Anne Orford and Florian Hoffmann The Oxford Handbook of the Theory of International Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016) DOI: 10.1093/law/9780198701958.003.0017
Question
HI All
I wanted to ask a question about Kruskal Wallis non-parametric test with added post-hoc pairwise comparisons. I am testing 10 groups on three dependent variables (so there will be many comparisons)!
I have found a statistically significant difference between at least one group and each of the DVs. However, because there are so many comparisons, they have all clumped together on SPSS and so I am struggling to interpret them. See image. I don't seem to be able to stretch it out.
Please let me know if you can help me out.
Many thanks
Anna Kawalek

Network

Cited By

Projects

Project (1)
Archived project
Borrowing from the restorative model and the ideas of Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) the aim is to suggest a circle approach for supporting complex lives for those in AOD recovery.