Cited by 124Migration, Refugees, and IntegrationMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesDiscrimination and Equality Law

The Seattle Compromise: Multicultural Sensitivity and Americanization

Open access
Coleman, Doriane Lambelet·1998·Duke Law Journal

Abstract

Obstetrician to Pregnant Woman: "If it's a boy, do you want him circumcised?"Pregnant Woman: "Yes, and also if it's a girl." 1 An effective society-one that can accomplish its common goals, facilitate the private ends of its members, and nourish its system of values-requires that newcomers achieve at least a modest degree of assimilation into its culture.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1372912

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the 1990s, as European and North American countries received increased numbers of immigrants from FGM/C-practicing countries, several proposals were drafted recommending offering pricking in lieu of more severe cutting in children old enough to give consent and for families where prevention strategies did not work.

    “In parallel, in the 1990s as European and North American countries received increased numbers of immigrants from countries where FGM/C is practiced, several proposals were drafted recommending offering pricking in lieu of more severe forms of cutting in children old enough to give consent and for those families where any prevention strategy did not work.”

    From Medicalized Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: Contentious Practices and Persistent Debates (2018) · cites this paper as [39]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Each of the proposals to offer pricking in lieu of more severe cutting ignited public outrage and was never implemented.

    “each of these proposals ignited public outrage and were never implemented.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Coleman, D. L.
Corresponding author
Coleman, Doriane Lambelet
Venue
Duke Law Journal
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1998-02
Volume
47
Issue
4
Pages
717
ISSN
0012-7086 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1562793863
Cited by
124
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
40.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Duke Law Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Duke Law Scholarship Repository (Duke University) (submittedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Migration, Refugees, and Integration
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies
  • Social Sciences › Law › Discrimination and Equality Law
Keywords
multicultural sensitivity, Americanization, assimilation, immigrants, cultural pluralism, multiculturalism, national identity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review