Journal of Health and Social Behavior最新文献

On average, incarcerated people have higher rates of poor health, mental illness, and histories of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) than the general population. This mixed-methods analysis examines the relationship between ACEs and poor adult health among a sample of formerly incarcerated people. The quantitative analysis (N = 122) shows childhood adversity is associated with various health conditions in adulthood, although the strength of this relationship varies by the kinds of ACEs respondents encountered. The qualitative analysis of life history timelines (N = 42) reveals two pathways relating ACEs to poor health and legal system involvement: (1) violence and victimization and (2) drug use as a coping mechanism. Unaddressed mental health challenges in the aftermath of adversity emerged as an important precursor to both pathways. Prisons lack a meaningful consideration of these early life events and the social structures that result in the high rates of vulnerable people in its care.

We investigate recent trends in U.S. suicide mortality using a "structural determinants of health" framework. We access restricted-use multiple cause of death files to track suicide rates among U.S. Black, White, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Latino/a men and women between 1990 and 2017. We examine suicide deaths separately by poisonings and nonpoisonings to illustrate that (1) women's suicide rates from poisonings track strongly with increases in prescription drug availability and (2) nonpoisoning suicide rates among all adult Americans track strongly with worsening economic conditions coinciding with the financial crash and Great Recession. These findings suggest that institutional failures elevated U.S. suicide risk between 1990 and 2017 by increasing access to more lethal means of self-harm and by increasing both exposure and vulnerability to economic downturns. Together, these results support calls to scale up to focus on the structural determinants of U.S. suicide.

Research shows that restrictive immigration policies and practices are associated with poor health, but far less is known about the relationship between inclusive immigration policies and health. Using data from the United States natality files, we estimate associations between state laws granting undocumented immigrants access to driver's licenses and perinatal outcomes among 4,047,067 singleton births to Mexican and Central American immigrant birthing people (2008-2021). Fitting multivariable log binomial and linear models, we find that the implementation of a license law is associated with improvements in low birthweight and mean birthweight. Replicating these analyses among U.S.-born non-Hispanic White birthing people, we find no association between the implementation of a license law and birthweight. These findings support the hypothesis that states' extension of legal rights to immigrants improves the health of the next generation.

Patient-centered care is widely cited as a component of quality contraceptive health care, but its operationalization in clinical interaction is contested. This article examines patient-centered care as an interactional phenomenon using the case of patient dissatisfaction with side effects of hormonal contraceptive medications. Drawing on transcript data from 109 tape-recorded reproductive health visits, I find that provider responses to treatment dissatisfaction range from patient-centered to relatively authoritarian. Providers typically offer patient-centered responses that validate patient experiences and integrate them into contraceptive counseling and method selection. At the same time, explicit communication about patients' contraceptive priorities is rare. In its absence, providers use patient-centered communication to smooth the interactional path toward uptake of highly effective hormonal methods, mostly ignoring the possibility that some patients may prefer less effective methods. Patient-centered contraceptive care was circumscribed by the clinical goal of pregnancy prevention.

Cannabis can provide patients benefits for pain and symptom management, improve their functionality, and enhance their well-being. Yet restrictive medical cannabis programs can limit these potential benefits. This article draws on four years of research into Minnesota's medical cannabis program-one of the most restrictive in the United States-including in-depth interviews with patients and a survey of health care professionals. Drawing on the new materialist concepts of Deleuze and Guattari, this article analyzes (a) the benefits patients in Minnesota's medical cannabis program derive from cannabis, (b) how program restrictions mediate access to cannabis and its derived benefits, and (c) some key ways in which medical and criminal justice institutional authorities are reconfigured around medical cannabis. I show how the imperative to authoritatively govern "dangerous drugs" persists in consequential ways as the War on Drugs shifts toward a medicalized, criminalized, and commercial-legalized mixed regime.

This study employs multichannel sequence analysis of data from the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe to explore variations in the association between work-family life trajectories and women's mental health across European cohorts born between 1924 and 1965 within different policy contexts. It finds that trajectories characterized by prolonged employment and delayed familial commitments are generally associated with increased depressive symptoms. Notably, the strength of this association varies significantly across cohorts and is notably moderated by defamilization policies. These policies, which aim to reduce dependency on family for managing social risks, buffer mental health challenges in traditional family roles but are less effective for women in trajectories with delayed family formation. This investigation highlights the nuanced ways in which historical and cultural contexts alongside policy environments shape mental health outcomes at various life stages, offering valuable insights into our understanding of health disparities across the life course, with an emphasis on exposure to changing institutions.

There are competing perspectives on the impact of Hispanic immigrants' social networks on health; the Hispanic health paradox views networks as sources of resilience, whereas the tenuous ties perspective views networks as sources of risk. In this study, I explore the effect of networks on health by examining three network pathways: social capital, social bonding, and network stress. Using egocentric social network data from the VidaSana Study, a survey of 547 Hispanic immigrants in Indiana, I investigate how each network pathway is associated with physical health, mental health, and health care utilization. Results show that networks with greater capital, namely, more network health knowledge, promote physical health and health care access, whereas social bonding, operationalized as close and dense networks, benefits mental health and health care utilization. Network stress contributes to worse mental health yet improved health care access. Implications for social networks and health research among the Hispanics and more broadly are discussed.

With most scholarly attention directed toward understanding the stigma experiences of individuals with mental illness, less attention has been given to associative stigma: an understudied form of social exclusion and devaluation experienced by the social ties of stigmatized individuals. This study advances scholarly understanding of associative stigma by drawing on social network methods to better illuminate how the quantity and quality of social relationships with those dealing with mental illness impact experiences of perceived discrimination. Using a nationally representative sample from the General Social Survey, I find that (1) knowing more people with mental illness, (2) having more core (friends and family members) versus peripheral ties, and (3) having ties who are most at risk of facing public stigma themselves (e.g., stereotype-confirming ties) are associated with greater perceived discrimination experiences. Taken together, these findings shed light on how pervasive associative stigma truly is.

Scholars cite racist political-economic systems as drivers of health inequities in the United States (i.e., racial capitalism). But how does racial capitalism generate health inequities? I address this open question within the historical context of predatory lending during the 2008 financial crisis. Relevant hypotheses are tested with multiple waves of data from Black and White participants of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (N = 8,877). Across socioeconomic strata, I find that Black participants report higher rates of foreclosure, eviction, repossession, delinquent bills, lost income, and new debts in the wake of the financial crisis. Using structural equation and quasi-experimental models, I then show that Black participants also self-report rapid health declines and increases in prescription drug abuse throughout this period, much of which is explained by chronic financial stress. I conclude that racial capitalism can generate health inequities by ensnaring Black Americans in a toxic web of financial exploitation and stress proliferation.