Professor Dauer makes two very interesting points about why endorsing a therapeutic jurisprudence (TJ) approach rocks fundamental assumptions about the common law legal system. First, he argues that demonstrating impartiality more than empathy is a practice so entrenched in the system that it cannot be dislodged. Second, he argues that the TJ approach that I advocate in my discussion of the Quebec Secession Reference is more "mediation" than adjudication. I would like to respond to both points and conclude with another example as to how a TJ approach may prove attractive in times of criticism about judicial activism in constitutional law.
Nathalie Des Rosiers, The Mythical Power of Myth? A Response to Professor Dauer, 24 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 307 (2000).
Health Law and Policy Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Law and Psychology Commons, Medical Jurisprudence Commons, Other Law Commons