Family Structure and Problem Behavior of Adolescents and Young Adults: A Growth-Curve Study

In the present longitudinal 3-wave study of 1274 adolescents and young adults, aged 12–24 at the 1st wave, it is examined whether youngsters from intact versus postdivorce families show long-term differences in internalizing and externalizing problems. Furthermore, possible differences in the development of this problem behavior between offspring from intact and postdivorce families are examined, i.e., possible differences in growth curves of internalizing and externalizing problems are investigated. Longitudinal multilevel analyses reveal long-term differences in internalizing and externalizing problems according to family structure. Adolescents and young adults growing up in postdivorce families display more internalizing and externalizing problem behavior than youngsters of intact families. The development of these 2 types of problem behavior does not differ by gender or family structure. That is, the shape of the growth curves of internalizing and externalizing problem behavior is similar for boys and girls and also for youngsters from intact and postdivorce families. Inge VanderValk is a Postdoc Researcher at the Department of Child and Adolescent Studies, Utrecht University, the Netherlands. She received her Ph.D. in 2004 from Utrecht University. Her major research interests include associations between adolescent adjustment and parental marital quality and parental divorce. Ed Spruijt is an Associate Professor at the University of Utrecht. He received his Ph.D. in 1983 from Utrecht University. His major research interests are the consequences of parental divorce and visitation arrangements on children. Martijn de Goede is an associate Professor at Utrecht University, Department of Methodology and Statistics. He received his Ph.D. in 1988 from Utrecht University. His major research interests are occupational and relational life courses of youngsters. Cora Maas is an Assistent Professor at Utrecht University, Department of Methodology and Statistics. She received her PH.D. in 1992 in Utrecht from Utrecht University. Her major interests are: multilevel analysis (theory and applications). Wim Meeus is full Professor of Adolescent Development at Utrecht University. He received his Ph.D. in 1984 from Utrecht University. His major research interests are personality, identity, and relationships in adolescence.     

DNA typing: an accessory evidence in doping control

A clear positive case for anabolic steroids doping was confounded by alleged urine tampering during doping control procedures. Review of the chain of custody showed no flaws, but nevertheless the athlete was adamant that the urine sample should be analyzed for DNA in order to support her contention that she was not the donor of the sample. The results obtained showed that the urine sample that scored positive for steroids contained nuclear DNA that could not be matched to the DNA obtained from the athlete's blood. On the other hand, the same urine sample contained mitochondrial DNA whose nucleotide sequences spanning the hyper variable regions HV1 and HV2 proved to be identical to those determined in mitochondrial DNA amplified from the athlete's blood. The occurrence of an extraneous genotype is compatible with exogenous nuclear DNA admixture to the athlete's urine. Alternatively, taking in consideration the mitochondrial DNA, we could not exclude that a sibling or a maternal relative of the athlete could have acted as a donor of the urine utilized for doping control and DNA analysis. Both situations point to possible tampering of the urine by the athlete. Adjudication at CAS maintained previous national and international federation decision that there was no proof of a chain of custody flaw to justify the athlete's allegation of urine substitution after collection.