Feminists have often been among the most outspoken critics of sociobiology, maintaining that sociobiology is inherently sexist and that it is used to uphold patriarchy. This article examines the latest research by scholars—many of them women—who have used a sociobiological approach to expand our understanding of female behavior. It shows that sociobiology recognizes complexity in human reproductive behavior and that members of both sexes employ a variety of reproductive strategies, depending upon their environments. Women are not necessarily sexually passive within the sociobiological paradigm, and they are not “naturally” parents; moreover, men clearly play a necessary and significant role in parenting. Women do have reproductive interests that are separate from those of men, and these interests clash. Despite these conflicts of reproductive interest, however, men and women can develop cooperative relationships to achieve their mutual goal of raising children to maturity. Patriarchy is not—within the sociobiological paradigm—a natural order between males and females. Sociobiology also does not suggest that women should be restricted to parenting roles; indeed, sociobiological research can provide the basis for greater freedom for both men and women in reproduction and resource acquisition.

This article considers one of the many ways in which the state might intervene in the life of a pregnant woman in order to prevent serious harm to the child she intends to bear: requiring a substance-abusing pregnant woman to live in a residential treatment center for the duration of her pregnancy. While the author agrees with those who argue that such state action is unjustifiable, she points out that the facts grounding this normative conclusion may change. Disagreeing with those who contend that, regardless of the circumstances, the state may never interfere with the activities of a pregnant woman in order to prevent harm to her future child, the author considers both the present situation and the most likely future scenario, and offers a compromise solution—civil commitment to an outpatient treatment facility.

International concern with the ability of the 1972 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention to fulfill its purpose induced the treaty parties to explore the means to promote compliance with the treaty and to detect noncompliance. In September 1995, the Conference on Disarmament hosted a Special Conference to discuss the findings of the ad hoc group of governmental experts to identify and examine potential verification measures from a scientific and technical standpoint. This article analyzes the work of the Special Conference and the most contentious issues raised there, especially (1) objective criteria for permitted and prohibited activities; (2) the concept of a threshold quantity of agent; (3) technical assistance to States Parties; (4) export controls; (5) the use of a list of agents and toxins for facility declarations; (6) on-site measures to promote compliance; (7) the intrusiveness of these measures; and (8) the protection of sensitive information. Ultimately, the conference delegates endorsed a legally binding protocol to strengthen the treaty. The article concludes with a discussion of the trade-offs necessary to achieve consensus on such a protocol.

Despite a dramatic decline in transfusion-associated AIDS, increased safety of the national blood supply, and voluntary efforts to find alternatives to homologous blood sources, Americans remain fearful about the possibility of acquiring AIDS through a blood transfusion. Numerous states have initiated legislative efforts that would require explicit warnings about blood safety and that would direct patients to alternative sources of blood. These proposed laws—known as MANTRA bills, for “mandatory notification of transfusion alternatives”—would require physicians to advise patients of blood transfusion options prior to any surgery. Many would mandate the development of new informed consent documents and involve health departments in the implementation of new regulations regarding transfusions. This article concludes that MANTRA legislation is primarily a symbolic attempt to reassure the public about AIDS. It mandates practices that are being adopted voluntarily; it will not make the blood supply safer; it will increase the cost of health care to individuals and in the aggregate; it may diminish the number of donors to the voluntary blood supply system; and it is likely to intensify public fear about the risk of a blood transfusion.

As part of the annual meeting of the American Society for Microbiology (ASM), David L. Huxsoll and Raymond A. Zilinskas convened a roundtable of biological weapons inspectors who have served in recent United Nations inspections in Iraq. The roundtable was presented over a three-hour period on May 22, 1995. To give the audience a “feel” for what inspectors do and the conditions under which they work, the roundtable session opened with a 35 mm slide presentation. The photos were taken by Zilinskas in the course of two 1994 inspections of Iraqi biological research and production facilities.

This paper has five parts: (1) a historical background to UNSCOM; (2) an explanation of how I came to work for UNSCOM as a staffer and inspector; (3) a description and analysis of the UNSCOM experience in Iraq; (4) a review of seven verification measures employed by UNSCOM; and (5) concluding thoughts on the wider applicability of the UNSCOM experience.

Written declarations have been identified as one of the most useful tools in determining a nation's potential for a biological warfare capability. Declarations are defined as mandatory reports (provided on a periodic basis) that describe various aspects of a state's biological infrastructure, including both academic and governmental programs. Specifically included are descriptions of facilities, summaries of research projects, and other information considered relevant to making an evaluation of that country's capabilities. Notifications of specific events of interest are also considered as part of the required declaration. As part of the confidence-building measures (CBMs) of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BWC), between 25 and 30 of the State Parties have been providing written declarations for a number of years. With specific regard to the Iraqi experience, the government of Iraq was required (under the auspices of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687) to provide specific declarations about any and all facilities potentially associated with their biological warfare program. UNSCOM inspectors have the responsibility of verifying the accuracy of the information provided by Iraq in declarations.