The critical perspective in psychological jurisprudence: Theoretical advances and epistemological assumptions

Fonte: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6V7W-44X0092-3-...
Acesso em: 10 nov. 2009.

This article describes five leading approaches to engaging in critical law?psychology
research. These include the perspectives of: (1) anarchism, (2) critical legal studies, (3)
feminist jurisprudence, (4) postmodernism, and (5) chaology. Summarily presenting these
perspectives, along with their corresponding assumptions, is noteworthy especially as
researchers increasingly question the field?s capacity to produce meaningful and sustainable
change for people and for society (e.g., Fox, 1991, 1993a; Melton, 1992; Ogloff, 2000;
Roesch, 1995). As I demonstrate, the critical or radical agenda considerably advances the
aims of citizen justice and social well-being, values integral to the founding of the
American Psychology?Law Society (AP-LS) (Arrigo, 2001a; Fox, 1999; Haney, 1993).
Thus, each radical orientation, as a basis for critique and as a recipe for change, tells us
something quite distinctive about how to decenter organized (and mainstream liberal)
psychology and displace the legal status quo, such that wholesale transformation can occur.
Further, as a blueprint for radical change, the theories and their corresponding assumptions
collectively embody a new, different, and necessary direction for doing law?psychology
research. As I conclude, it is this very agenda that dramatically reframes the debates in the
academy, returning the AP-LS back to its future of making real the call for justice in theory,
research, and policy.