Risk and Protective Factors Associated with Alcohol,Cigarette, and Marijuana Use During Adolescence

The purpose of this study was to increase the knowledge base of adolescent substance use by examining the influences of risk and protective factors for specific substance use, namely alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana. Participants included 271 adolescents and their primary caregivers referred for mental health services across North Carolina. A series of hierarchical multiple regressions showed that the relative influences of risk and protective factors differed depending on the target substance in some cases. History of parental felony predicted use of all 3 substances, although the direction of association was substance specific. Parental behavioral control (how families express and maintain standards of behavior) was predictive only of cigarette and marijuana use, not alcohol use. The different links among risk factors, protective factors, and specific substance use are discussed, and recommendations for both mental health and substance use professionals are offered.She received her M.A. in Psychology from Wake Forest University and is currently a doctoral student in Clinical Psychology at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Her major research interests include developmental pathways to aggressive behavior among females.An evaluator for the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, her major research interests include system of care intervention programming.She received her PhD in Clinical Psychology from Purdue University. Her major research interests include developmental psychopathology and early intervention.His research interests focus on youth violence and youth involved with the juvenile justice system.She received her PhD in Clinical Psychology from the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Her research interests focus on early intervention with young children.     

When Initial Interviews Are Delayed a Year: Effect on Children's 2-Year Recall

Three- to nine-year-old children were interviewed about a medical emergency (injury requiring hospital ER treatment) two years after it occurred. Half of the number of children had been interviewed shortly after injury as well as 6 and 12 months later, while the remaining children had had only one prior interview a year after injury. There was remarkably little long-term deterioration in memory by both groups. Having a delayed initial interview had two effects, and both were relevant only to the harder-to-remember hospital treatment event: (a) The late-interview group was less accurate, and (b) early-interview children had more extensive free recall, suggesting that multiple prior interviews teach children the “rules of the memory game' when they are asked open-ended questions. Forensic implications are discussed.     

Assessment and aftercare for deliberate self-harm patients provided by a general hospital psychiatric service

We report on a sample of 135 deliberate self-harm (DSH) patients who were assessed by a general hospital DSH service, and on those who were offered aftercare by, or telephone open access to, the service. Patients' satisfaction with assessment and treatment, and their outcome were investigated at follow-up 12-20 months later. Four-fifths of patients reported the assessment following DSH to have been helpful and the assessor sympathetic. Thirty-three (24%) of the 135 patients assessed were offered treatment by the DSH service but 13 declined or failed to attend. Of the 20 who engaged in treatment, 17 (94%) were satisfied with their care. Open access to the DSH service by telephone was offered to 53 (39%) patients, nine (22%) of whom reported at follow-up that they had used this facility. A specialist DSH service can effectively assess and treat patients following DSH. It is important that the service is accessible and acceptable to patients.     

What Workers Want Depends: Legal Knowledge and the Desire for Workplace Change among Day Laborers

In this article, we identify legal knowledge as a key difference between workers who desire workplace change and those who do not. Based on surveys with 121 day laborers, we find that not all day laborers are equally dissatisfied with their jobs, despite uniformly difficult working conditions. Some day laborers do not want to make any real changes to the day labor industry, while others desire a range of industry changes, from higher wages to greater government regulation and unionization. A key difference between these workers is their knowledge of employment law: Those who know the law are more likely to desire workplace change.