Objectives: The relationship between dissociation and PTSS was studied by examining the moderating role of prior trauma. The relationship between prior trauma and PTSS was studied by examining the mediating role of dissociation. The relationship between various coping styles, dissociation and prior trauma was also addressed. Study Design: The current study was a retrospective correlational between-subjects design. Subjects: The study included 90 subjects who were admitted into a level one trauma center following a traumatic physical injury. Results: Dissociation was most strongly and significantly related to PTSS (r = .583). Childhood sexual abuse, childhood physical abuse, and total prior trauma were also significantly related to PTSS (r = .249, r =.298, r = .295, respectively). The results of the study indicated that prior trauma did not moderate the relationship between dissociation and PTSS. The addition of the interaction term (prior trauma X dissociation) explained 3.5% additional variance in PTSS (F(3,82) = 1.10, p = .354). However, the relationship between prior trauma and PTSS was found to be partially mediated by dissociation. The effect of prior trauma on PTSS was reduced when dissociation was added into the regression equations for each of the prior trauma predictor variables including: childhood sexual abuse (b = 9.122 reduced to b = 2.050), childhood physical abuse (b = 1.011 reduced to b = .547), and total prior trauma (b = .114 reduced to b = .055). Dissociation was also found to be significantly related to maladaptive coping including: emotional venting (r = .373), denial (r = .213), and behavioral disengagement (r = .330). Prior trauma was not found to be related to maladaptive coping styles. Conclusions: The study findings suggest that the relationship between prior trauma and PTSS is partially due to the engagement in dissociation. However, those who have not experienced a prior trauma are also at risk for experiencing dissociation and subsequent PTSS. Additionally, dissociation was found to be related to maladaptive coping, while prior trauma was not significantly related to any coping styles. Therefore, the findings suggest that dissociation is related to more disruptive psychological sequelae, as compared to pre-trauma factors such as the experience of prior trauma.

La métamorphose du risque professionnel puise ses sources dans la mutation de la représentation du risque professionnel factuel qui a permis la consécration de la notion de maladie professionnelle. Substituée à l’accident du travail comme centre de gravité du droit des risques professionnels, elle devient le point d’impulsion d’une réflexion nouvelle du concept juridique de risque professionnel entraînant la mutation du risque professionnel pris en charge. Cette métamorphose, dans le droit de la Sécurité sociale, permet la réactivation de l’obligation de sécurité de l’employeur qui irradie le droit du travail et entraîne l’affirmation du droit à la santé et à la sécurité des travailleurs. Partant, la réparation des atteintes à la santé du travailleur est considérablement étendue. Néanmoins, cette construction se heurte à des obstacles de taille, et s’accompagne d’incohérences, qu’il faut dépasser. / The metamorphosis of occupational hazard has its sources in the mutation of the representation of factual occupational hazard that led to the consecration of the notion of occupational disease. Substituted for the occupational accident as the centre of gravity of the occupational hazards law, it becomes the impetus for a new reflection about the legal concept of occupational hazard causing the mutation of occupational hazard taken charge of. This metamorphosis in the Social Security law, allows the reactivation of the employer's duty to ensure security that radiates labour law and causes the assertion of the workers’ right to health and safety. Therefore, the compensation of damages to workers’ health is considerably extended. However, this construction is fraught with obstacles, and is accompanied by inconsistencies that must be overcome.

L’expression « nouveaux risques » est de plus en plus employée pour désigner les risques sanitaires et environnementaux liés au progrès scientifique et technique lorsque leurs conséquences dommageables bien qu’anticipées sont entourées d’un fort contexte d’incertitude scientifique. Cette incertitude est souvent invoquée par les professionnels créateurs de ces risques pour tenter d’échapper à leur responsabilité et, quand ils n’y parviennent pas, pour en faire supporter la charge par leur assureur de responsabilité, au risque d’accréditer l’idée que l’assurance déresponsabilise. C’est autour de la question de l’assurabilité des nouveaux risques, ou plutôt de leur inassurabilité, que cette thèse est construite. Il s’est agi d’étudier l’aptitude du système actuel de responsabilité du fait des produits, aidé par l’assurance de cette responsabilité, à satisfaire l’objectif social de prise en charge des victimes de nouveaux risques. Les solutions du droit français ont été éprouvées à la lumière de celles retenues par les droits américain et chinois qui sont confrontés aux mêmes problèmes. A cet égard, l’étude des nouveaux risques, en conduisant à revisiter la notion de risque assurable, fait prendre conscience des limites des systèmes actuels de prise en charge. Il apparaît opportun de revenir aux fondamentaux du droit de la responsabilité et du droit des assurances tout en recherchant des techniques complémentaires. Ce pourrait être le recours à la solidarité nationale (par la création d’un fonds d’indemnisation) ou aux marchés financiers. / The expression « emerging risks » is increasingly used to describe the health and environmental risks related to scientific and technical progress whenever their damaging consequences, although anticipated, are shrouded in an opaque veil of scientific uncertainty. The professionals, who created these risks, often use this uncertainty in an attempt to avoid any liability. When unable to do so, they try to have them covered by their liability insurance, even though such behavior fuels the idea that insurance promotes irresponsible behavior. This thesis is built around the question of the insurability, or to be more precise, the non-insurability of emerging risks. The aim was to study the capacity of the current products liability system, complemented by the relevant liability insurance, to meet the social goal of taking care of the victims of those « emerging risks ». The solutions provided by the French law system have been put up for a test by comparing them with those of the American and Chinese ones, while taking into account the contextual problems met by the latter. In this regard, the study of emerging risks leads us to review the concept of insurable risk, and to admit there are limits to the current system dealing with the victims’ compensation. It seems appropriate to refer back to the fundamentals of liability law and insurance law while seeking additional solutions. Appealing to national solidarity (through the setting up of a compensation fund) or to financial markets could be the solution.

Les transports suborbitaux privés peuvent être définis comme tout vol réalisé au moyen d’un véhicule aérospatial, capable d’atteindre une très haute altitude et d’évoluer dans les couches supérieures de l’atmosphère terrestre, sans pour autant être mis en orbite. Plusieurs entreprises ont pour projet de faire des vols suborbitaux, le mode de transport de personnes à grande vitesse de demain. Dans l’hypothèse d’un tel développement, la réflexion autour de la règlementation de ces activités devient primordiale. Les activités suborbitales ont la particularité de prendre place à la fois dans l’espace aérien et dans l’espace extra-atmosphérique et pour ce faire, empruntent autant les caractéristiques techniques de l’aéronef que de l’engin spatial. Il est donc particulièrement difficile de les qualifier du fait qu’il existe plusieurs corpus législatifs susceptibles de régir ces vols : le droit aérien, le droit spatial ou un nouveau régime qu’il conviendrait alors d’imaginer. Sans prétendre à l’exhaustivité, ce mémoire envisagera les différentes options normatives pouvant permettre de règlementer la responsabilité du transporteur suborbital de personnes lorsqu’il cause un dommage au participant durant le vol. Le cas échéant, nous proposerons les meilleures alternatives pouvant permettre d’assurer le développement pérenne de ce secteur d’activité, tout en garantissant un haut niveau de sécurité juridique pour l’ensemble des parties prenantes, participants comme opérateurs spatiaux. / Private suborbital transportation can be defined as any spaceflight by an aerospace vehicle capable of reaching a very high altitude into the edge of space without reaching orbital velocity. For now, the aim of those activities is to offer customers direct experience with space travel. However, the ultimate goal is to provide high speed flights between various point of the Earth. When this objective will be achieved, the need to promulgate an integrated and uniform legal regime will be of great importance in order to facilitate and secured commercial aerospace activities expansion. Private suborbital activities have the dual specificities of using a vehicle that use either astronautic et aeronautics technology in order to achieve lift and thereby flying in air space, and also traveling through outer space during a small portion of the flight. This hybrid nature raises legal uncertainties about the applicable legal regime that could be one of air law, space law or a new regime that would need to be invented. This essay will focus on the specific issues surrounding liability. In other terms, it will focus on the different options that are available to manage liability issues that will arise between spaceflight participant and spaceflight operators and the way it will impact disputes when an accident occurs. Then, we will make a proposal for solutions that would best preserve the economic needs of this emerging industry, while insuring legal certainties for both spaceflight operators and participants.