Explore the vast range of titles available.

Objective Data on the physical and mental health benefits of paid maternity leave for mothers and infants is abundant. Data on the make-up of current maternity leave policies in US psychiatry residency programs is not. This survey of program directors was undertaken to assess the components of their program’s policies and the perceived impact of maternity leave on the training of childbearing residents, co-residents, and programs. Methods An anonymous 19-question survey was emailed to US psychiatric residency program directors. Questions assessed demographics for respondents and their programs, composition of maternity leave including paid and unpaid components, and the perception of effects of maternity leave on childbearing residents, co-residents, and programs (with optional free-text elaboration). Results The response rate was 19.5% (49 out of 262 program directors). Many programs require the use of FMLA (81%), vacation days (75%), sick days (75%), and short-term disability (30%) for maternity leave. Around a third (34%) offer separate paid time off varying from 2 to 12 weeks at 80–100% of pay. Most respondents relate a neutral to strongly positive impact of leave on the psychiatric training of childbearing residents (98%) and co-residents (84%), citing benefits like improved empathy, compassion, and patience. Conclusions Maternity leave is seen to have minimal negative impact on training received within psychiatry residency programs. A minority of residents have access to paid maternity leave policies that would best support their health and career trajectories.

Stigma in mental illness is a problem fueled by misrepresentation by the media and the assimilation of parent opinion, noted in those as young as six years old. Intervening in adolescence is critical given juxtaposition of increased judgement/fear of judgement and the onset of serious mental illness. This paper details the efforts of an intervention designed to specifically target the perception of dangerousness, social distancing, and use of stigmatizing language. A total of 124 high school freshman participated in the interactive presentation delivered over the course of a typical 40 min class period. An identical survey with a 5-point Likert scale was administered before and after to measure level of agreement with stigmatizing statements. Most participants reported prior exposure through the media (86.6%) and through conversations with family/friends (67.7%). Post intervention, improvement was seen in the perception of dangerousness (MD = 0.45, t = 4.435, p = <0.001), the need for social distancing (measure 1: MD = 0.148, t = 1.785, p = 0.039; measure 2: MD = 0.142, t = 1.773, p = 0.04), and understanding of the experience of those with serious mental illness (MD = 0.377, t = 3.378, p = <0.001). No significant difference was seen in terms of stigmatizing language use (MD = 0.114, t = 1.192, p = 0.118). This study supports the delivery of anti-stigma education to adolescents that avoids the biogenetic and contact approaches, embraces the continuum model of mental health, normalizes psychotic experiences, addresses dangerousness with data, identifies prominent figures with mental illness, and uses personalized statistics to demonstrate why this topic is of importance.