Explore the vast range of titles available.

Research on carceral institutions and mortality finds that people in prisons and jails have a high risk of death immediately following release from custody and that while incarcerated, racial disparities in prisoner mortality counter observed death patterns among similarly situated non-incarcerated, demographic groups. Yet, many of these studies rely on data prior to the millennium, during the COVID-19 pandemic, or are relegated to a small number or select group of states. In this paper, we explore changes in mortality and life-expectancy among different demographic groups, before and after the Great Recession, across forty-four states that reported deaths in custody to the federal government between 2000 and 2014. Drawing on a novel dataset created and curated, we calculate standard, age- specific quantities (death rates and life-expectancy) using period lifetable methods, disaggregated by race and sex, across three different periods (2000-2004, 2005-2009, and 2010-2014) for each state. Ordinary least squares regression models with state and year fixed-effects are included to examine state-level factors that may explain differences in prisoner mortality rates between 2000 and 2014. We also benchmark death counts reported to federal agencies with official state reports to cross-validate general mortality patterns. Among imprisoned men, age-specific trends in mortality have shifted across the three periods. Following the Great Recession and the push for criminal justice reforms, prisoner mortality dropped significantly and is concentrated at older ages among men during 2010-2014; the shifting pattern of mortality means that men age 30 in 2010-2014 had similar death rates as men in their early 20s during 2000-2004, representing a 7.5 year shift in age-specific mortality rates. Gains in the mortality decline were disproportionately experienced by Non-Hispanic White and Non-Hispanic Black men, with the latter experiencing the greatest gains in life-expectancy of any demographic group. State-level violent crime rates are strongly and positively associated with prison mortality rates across states, net of socioeconomic and political factors. The large and significant disappearance of deaths in prisons from official data reported to federal agencies calls into question the narrowing gap in racial disparities among people in carceral facilities. Legal decisions and social policies aimed at reducing mortality may be most effective in the short-run; however, the effects of these policy changes may fadeout over time. Research should clearly discern whether changes in mortality rates across states are due to diminished gains in social policies or increases in the disappearance (or underreporting) of deaths in custody. Understanding how and why gains in survivorship may stall is important for aligning health initiatives with social policy to facilitate maximal and consistent mortality declines for all demographic groups.

\"An enlightening work of science that enriches our understanding of the power of human-animal cooperation, and shows how an ancient partnership with the wolf helped Homo Sapiens conquer the World.\"--Dust jacket flap.

In this article we examine the link between family complexity—measured by noncustodial parenthood and multiple-partner fertility—and incarceration. In 2012, close to 2.6 million children, or roughly one in twenty-five minors, had a parent in jail or prison. The risk of having a parent currently or ever incarcerated is disproportionately concentrated among black children and children of high school dropouts, many of whom are noncustodial parents. Variation in question wording, differences in length of exposure to parental incarceration, and the measurement of residential parenthood in household-based sample surveys converge to produce different estimates of race and class inequality in having a parent currently or ever incarcerated, when compared to similar estimates of parental incarceration from inmate surveys. Drawing on data from multiple sources and the development of a new method for the estimation of multiple-partner fertility among inmates, we consider how race and class inequality in parental incarceration may contribute to family complexity and the reproduction of childhood disadvantage.

قرأت منذ سنوات كتاب سبع بنات لحواء لنفس المؤلف المتخصص في علم الوراثة بريان سايكس والذي نشر في مكتبة الأسرة في عهد سمير سرحان في هذا الكتاب سبع بنات لحواء يعرض سايكس كيف أمكن التوصل لحل العديد من الغاز التاريخ وأصول الإنسان عبر جينات الميتوكوندريا حيث إن جيناتها تورث فقط من خلال الأم وبالتالي فهي تورث كما هي دون تغيير باستثناء الطفرات التي قد تحدث بها والتي وان حدثت فإنه أيضا تكون هناك ثمة قرابة بل ويعكس معدل الطفرات زمن معيشة الأم الأولى... وفي النهاية توصل إلى إرجاع أصل الأوروبيين إلى سبع أمهات في هذا الكتاب لعنة آدم يكرر سايكس نفس الفكرة ولكن على جينات أخرى تورث من الرجال فقط هذه المرة. . هي الجينات الموجودة على كروموسوم واي ويبدأ في الكشف عن أصول بعض العائلات ومنهم عائلته نفسها ويحاول أن يقارن بين نتائجه التي توصل إليها مسبقا في كتابه الأول عن جينات الميتوكوندريا المورثة من الأم فقط بنتائجه في كتابه الثاني عن جينات كروموسوم واىوأيولىوآي المورثة عبر الأب فقط... ويتطرق إلى مستقبل الذكور في العالم... وهل تفيد هذه التقنية في تفسير ظواهر مثل غلبة الإناث أو الذكور في بعض العائلات. . وضعف الحيوانات المنوية لدى البعض.. والشذوذ الجنسي... والاستنساخ يندر أن تجد ترجمة عربية سلسة غير منفرة للمواد العلمية... المترجم للكتابين مصطفى إبراهيم فهمي أحد القلائل جدا الذين يترجمون العلوم باحتراف دون فذلكة للمصطلحات ودون أي اشتقاقات غريبة وبإضافة حواش مختصرة تصيب أهدافها.

Monetary sanctions, also known as legal financial obligations (LFOs), are a highly consequential yet underexplored element of the criminal legal system. LFOs consist of fines, fees, costs, restitution, surcharges, and other financial penalties that are imposed on individuals when they encounter the criminal legal system. This contact can occur via traffic citation, or misdemeanor, juvenile, and felony conviction. Although indistinguishable for the people who are required to pay them, monetary sanctions are variably understood as punishments prescribed by state statutes and local codes, restitution for victims of crime, user fees to recoup system expenses or pay for services rendered, and additional charges for failure to pay. Most monetary sanctions are sentenced on conviction or citation, but some pretrial costs—such as jail booking fees, electronic monitoring, or public defender services in the absence of a conviction—can be passed on to defendants as well.1 These fines and fees are experienced as bills and debts for those on whom they are imposed and as revenue sources for the courts, agencies, jurisdictions, and states that collect them. Although the practice of imposing fines and fees on convicted persons has existed in law since the Magna Carta in 1215, research shows that the prevalence and amounts of monetary sanctions have grown over the last five decades across federal, state, and local governments (Bannon, Nagrecha, and Diller 2010; Fergus 2018; Greenberg, Meredith, and Morse 2016; Harris, Evans, and Beckett 2010; Harris 2016; Shapiro 2014; U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 2017).2The policy, legal, and social science literatures on monetary sanctions document critical features of this punishment schema (for an extensive review, see Martin et al. 2018; Martin 2020). Research shows that individuals struggle to pay their court debts, making it even more difficult to pay for essential expenses such as food, housing, health care, medicine, transportation, and childcare, thereby increasing stress (Harris, Evans, and Beckett 2010; Harris 2016; Pleggenkuhle 2018). This burden is not borne solely by those convicted of crimes but also by their family members and communities (deVuono-powell et al. 2015; Katzenstein and Waller 2015). Further, because people are not released from criminal legal supervision until their accounts are fully paid, monetary sanctions prolong supervision, make probation violations more likely, escalate sanctions for new criminal convictions, and result in incarceration for nonpayment (ACLU 2010; T. Atkinson 2016; Kohler-Hausmann 2018; Middlemass 2017; Western 2018). The racially disparate impact of monetary sanctions intensifies the aggressive policing of Black and Latinx neighborhoods because these groups typically find it more difficult to pay (Harris, Evans, and Beckett 2011; Henrichson et al. 2017; Henricks and Harvey 2017; Piquero and Jennings 2017; Sances and You 2017; U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 2017). The criminal legal monitoring and collection of fines, fees, and other costs extends and deepens the punishment of nonpayers and individuals reentering society, and warps the very legal institutions that legislate and implement these practices (Harris, Evans, and Beckett 2010, 2011; Harris 2016; Pattillo and Kirk 2021).

Age-period-cohort (APC) models are often used to decompose health trends into period- and cohort-based sources, but their use in epidemiology and population sciences remains contentious. Central to the contention are researchers' failures to 1) clearly state their analytic assumptions and/or 2) thoroughly evaluate model results. These failures often produce varying conclusions across APC studies and generate confusion about APC methods. Consequently, scholarly exchanges about APC methods usually result in strong disagreements that rarely offer practical advice to users or readers of APC methods. We use research guidelines to help practitioners of APC methods articulate their analytic assumptions and validate their results. To demonstrate the usefulness of the guidelines, we apply them to a 2015 American Journal of Epidemiology study about trends in black-white differences in U.S. heart disease mortality. The application of the guidelines highlights two important findings. On the one hand, some APC methods produce inconsistent results that are highly sensitive to researcher manipulation. On the other hand, other APC methods estimate results that are robust to researcher manipulation and consistent across APC models. The exercise shows the simplicity and effectiveness of the guidelines in resolving disagreements over APC results. The cautious use of APC models can generate results that are consistent across methods and robust to researcher manipulation. If followed, the guidelines can likely reduce the chance of publishing variable and conflicting results across APC studies.

Monetary sanctions, also known as legal financial obligations (LFOs), are a highly consequential yet underexplored element of the criminal legal system. LFOs consist of fines, fees, costs, restitution, surcharges, and other financial penalties that are imposed on individuals when they encounter the criminal legal system. This contact can occur via traffic citation, or misdemeanor, juvenile, and felony conviction. Although indistinguishable for the people who are required to pay them, monetary sanctions are variably understood as punishments prescribed by state statutes and local codes, restitution for victims of crime, user fees to recoup system expenses or pay for services rendered, and additional charges for failure to pay. Most monetary sanctions are sentenced on conviction or citation, but some pretrial costs—such as jail booking fees, electronic monitoring, or public defender services in the absence of a conviction—can be passed on to defendants as well.1 These fines and fees are experienced as bills and debts for those on whom they are imposed and as revenue sources for the courts, agencies, jurisdictions, and states that collect them. Although the practice of imposing fines and fees on convicted persons has existed in law since the Magna Carta in 1215, research shows that the prevalence and amounts of monetary sanctions have grown over the last five decades across federal, state, and local governments (Bannon, Nagrecha, and Diller 2010; Fergus 2018; Greenberg, Meredith, and Morse 2016; Harris, Evans, and Beckett 2010; Harris 2016; Shapiro 2014; U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 2017).2The policy, legal, and social science literatures on monetary sanctions document critical features of this punishment schema (for an extensive review, see Martin et al. 2018; Martin 2020). Research shows that individuals struggle to pay their court debts, making it even more difficult to pay for essential expenses such as food, housing, health care, medicine, transportation, and childcare, thereby increasing stress (Harris, Evans, and Beckett 2010; Harris 2016; Pleggenkuhle 2018). This burden is not borne solely by those convicted of crimes but also by their family members and communities (deVuono-powell et al. 2015; Katzenstein and Waller 2015). Further, because people are not released from criminal legal supervision until their accounts are fully paid, monetary sanctions prolong supervision, make probation violations more likely, escalate sanctions for new criminal convictions, and result in incarceration for nonpayment (ACLU 2010; T. Atkinson 2016; Kohler-Hausmann 2018; Middlemass 2017; Western 2018). The racially disparate impact of monetary sanctions intensifies the aggressive policing of Black and Latinx neighborhoods because these groups typically find it more difficult to pay (Harris, Evans, and Beckett 2011; Henrichson et al. 2017; Henricks and Harvey 2017; Piquero and Jennings 2017; Sances and You 2017; U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 2017). The criminal legal monitoring and collection of fines, fees, and other costs extends and deepens the punishment of nonpayers and individuals reentering society, and warps the very legal institutions that legislate and implement these practices (Harris, Evans, and Beckett 2010, 2011; Harris 2016; Pattillo and Kirk 2021).

Social mobility is high on the policy agenda and is an important component of reducing inequalities. Estimating the relationship across generations of multiple dimensions of mobility such as health and wages can be used to understand the current state of mobility. However, there has been little research on how policy impacts on the relationship of multiple outcomes across generations and how that may be contributing to health inequalities and long-term mobility. In this paper, we use the UK as a case study to evaluate the impact of three distinct policy periods: 1991-1998 (Increasing neo-liberalism); 1998-2009 (English Health Inequalities Strategy); 2010-2017 (Austerity) on the relationship across generations in health (self-assessed health (SAH) and mental health measured by General Health Questionnaire 12 (GHQ-12)) and hourly wages. We employ fixed effects models on data from the British Household Panel Survey (1991-2008) and its successor the Understanding Society Survey (2009-2017). To investigate the role of policy on inequalities, sub-group analysis is performed by parental socioeconomic status measured by parental educational attainment, parental occupation, and if a single parent household. Results show that for the population on average, a changing policy focus has no impact on the strength of the relationship across generations in both health and wages. However, when looking at sub-groups the strength of the relationship in SAH and wages is increasing for parents with basic and higher qualifications and their young adult children. Whereas the influence of parents on their young adult children's SAH, mental health, and wages has remained fairly constant over the period 1991-2017 for parents with manual occupations and professional occupations. There has been a slight weakening in the influence of parents on their young adult children's SAH and wages for single parent families from 2010.

Knowledge about legal financial obligations in American punishment has been largely confined to criminal law and the penal codes of a few states. Yet in the nation’s most populous state, California, there is reason to believe that a wider expanse of law beyond the penal code harbors the legal capacity to impose monetary punishments and indebtedness. A legal census of the entire corpus of California’s civil and criminal statutory law identifies the presence and distribution of monetary sanctioning statutes within each and across all of the state’s twenty-nine legislative code sections. Results show that one in twenty-three statutes in California law concern monetary sanctions and that they are dispersed throughout every section of the legislative code. Our investigation reveals that monetary sanctions are embedded within the broader architecture of state law, and that variations in the structure, as much as the substance, of statutory schemes must figure into empirical and theoretical accounts of racial disparity in the imposition of monetary punishments.