The Effects of California's Paid Family Leave Program on Mothers’ Leave‐Taking and Subsequent Labor Market Outcomes

This analysis uses March Current Population Survey data from 1999 to 2010 and a differences‐in‐differences approach to examine how California's first in the nation paid family leave (PFL) program affected leave‐taking by mothers following childbirth, as well as subsequent labor market outcomes. We obtain robust evidence that the California program doubled the overall use of maternity leave, increasing it from an average of three to six weeks for new mothers—with some evidence of particularly large growth for less advantaged groups. We also provide evidence that PFL increased the usual weekly work hours of employed mothers of 1‐ to 3‐year‐old children by 10 to 17 percent and that their wage incomes may have risen by a similar amount.     

The highs and lows of working with sexual offenders: A New Zealand perspective

Abstract

The positive effects on clinicians responsible for the treatment of sexual offenders are little understood. The few available studies have focused upon the negative sequelae of this work. The current study of clinicians working therapeutically with sexual offenders at a community-based organization aimed for a more balanced picture of the effects of sex offender treatment provision. Using qualitative methods, both negative and positive aspects of this work emerged within three main themes: taking an optimistic perspective, working for community outcomes and supportive agency culture. Although the study revealed many challenges for therapists, these were found to be counterbalanced against rewards, affording a high degree of personal and professional fulfilment from working within this field.     

Inching toward incrementalism: federalism, devolution, and health policy in the United States and the United Kingdom

In the United States, the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 envisions a significant increase in federal oversight over the nation's health care system. At the same time, however, the legislation requires the states to play key roles in every aspect of the reform agenda (such as expanding Medicaid programs, creating insurance exchanges, and working with providers on delivery system reforms). The complicated intergovernmental partnerships that govern the nation's fragmented and decentralized system are likely to continue, albeit with greater federal oversight and control. But what about intergovernmental relations in the United Kingdom? What impact did the formal devolution of power in 1999 to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have on health policy in those nations, and in the United Kingdom more generally? Has devolution begun a political process in which health policy in the United Kingdom will, over time, become increasingly decentralized and fragmented, or will this "state of unions" retain its long-standing reputation as perhaps the most centralized of the European nations? In this article, we explore the federalist and intergovernmental implications of recent reforms in the United States and the United Kingdom, and we put forward the argument that political fragmentation (long-standing in the United States and just emerging in the United Kingdom) produces new intergovernmental partnerships that, in turn, produce incremental growth in overall government involvement in the health care arena. This is the impact of what can be called catalytic federalism.     

Does Interrater (Dis)agreement on Psychopathy Checklist Scores in Sexually Violent Predator Trials Suggest Partisan Allegiance in Forensic Evaluations?

Many studies reveal strong interrater agreement for Hare's Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) when used by trained raters in research contexts. However, no systematic research has examined agreement between PCL-R scores from independent clinicians who are retained by opposing sides in adversarial legal proceedings. We reviewed all 43 sexual-offender civil-commitment trials in one state and identified 23 cases in which opposing evaluators reported PCL-R total scores for the same individual. Differences between scores from opposing evaluators were usually in a direction that supported the party who retained their services. These score differences were greater in size than would be expected based on the instrument's standard error of measurement or the rater agreement values reported in previous PCL-R research. The intraclass correlation for absolute agreement for the PCL-R Total score from a single rater (ICC 1,A = .39) was well below levels of agreement observed for the PCL-R in research contexts, and below published test-retest values for the PCL-R. Results raise concerns about the potential for a forensic evaluator's "partisan allegiance" to influence PCL-R scores in adversarial proceedings.