Predictors of self-harm and emergency department attendance for self-harm in deprived communities.

Emergency departments (EDs) are often the first point of contact for individuals following self-harm. The majority of previous research relies on hospital-based data, yet only a minority of individuals who self-harm in the community present to healthcare services. The study design is cross-sectional survey design. Data from the National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration North West Coast (NIHR ARC NWC) Household Health Survey, a community-based public health survey in North West England, was collected using stratified random sampling. Three thousand four hundred twelve people were recruited in 2018 from relatively disadvantaged areas. The sample included 1490 men and 1922 women aged 18 to 100 years (M = 49.37, SD = 18.91). Logistic regression analysis was employed to examine demographic, health and socioeconomic predictors of self-harm and ED attendance for self-harm. Age (18-24 years), lower financial status, depression, anxiety and physical and mental health co-morbidity was associated with significantly higher levels of self-harm. People aged 18-24 years, with physical and mental health co-morbidity and lower levels of social support had significantly higher levels of attending EDs for self-harm. Improving people's financial situations, social connectivity, mental and physical health may help to reduce individual risk for self-harm and strain on health services.

The Formal-Informal Control Nexus During COVID-19: What Drives Informal Social Control of Social Distancing Restrictions During Lockdown?

The public rely on the police to enforce the law, and the police rely on the public to report crime and assist them with their enquiries. Police action or inaction can also impact on public willingness to informally intervene in community problems. In this paper we examine the formal-informal control nexus in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing on a survey sample of 1,595 Australians during COVID-19 lockdown restrictions, we examine the relationship between police effectiveness, collective efficacy, and public willingness to intervene when others violate lockdown restrictions. We find that perceptions of police effectiveness in handling the COVID-19 crisis has a positive impact on the public's willingness to intervene when others violate lockdown restrictions.

Children and Young People Presenting in a Pediatric Emergency Department in North-West England in Suicidal Crisis: An Exploratory Case Series Study.

Suicide is a leading cause of death among children and young people (CYP) worldwide, and rates have been increasing in recent years. However, while evidence exists regarding factors associated with suicide and self-harm, there is limited information publicly available on the CYP who present in suicidal crisis. This is a case series study of CYP (aged 8-16) experiencing suicidal crisis who presented in an Emergency Department at a pediatric hospital in North-West England between March 2019 and March 2021 (n = 240). Clinical records were extracted and audited to explore demographic data, methods of recording patient attendance, the clinical pathways available and the patterns of pathway usage, and differences in CYP presentations before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Attendees were mostly White females, with a mean age of 13.5 years, and 24% had a diagnosed special educational need. "Social/social problems" was the most commonly used code for recording attendance (38%), and pathways varied depending on code used. A range of parental and familial factors were also identified. There were more CYP presenting with self-harm in addition to suicide ideation after the pandemic began (43 vs 27% pre-pandemic). This study provides the first clear insight into CYP who seek help at a North-West Emergency Department for suicidal crisis, and work is now needed to develop effective prevention strategies tailored toward the groups most at-risk.

Empowering the police during COVID-19: How do normative and instrumental factors impact public willingness to support expanded police powers?

This article seeks to test the police ?empowerment hypothesis? to better understand public support for police powers during the COVID-19 pandemic. To do so, we draw on Australian survey data to compare the efficacy of the instrumental and normative models of police empowerment to enforce social distancing regulations. We find that instrumental concerns about risk dominate participants? willingness to empower the police during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, when it comes to what police can do to encourage police empowerment, procedural justice appears to be more important than police effectiveness, supporting the normative model. Our article adds to the limited but growing body of research that examines the correlates of police empowerment and the conditions under which members of the public are willing to grant police expanded powers.

COVID-19 Conspiracies, Trust in Authorities, and Duty to Comply with Social Distancing Restrictions

In 2020 governments worldwide implemented various laws and social distancing restrictions to contain the spread of the COVID-19 virus. At the same time, conspiracy theories emerged purporting that authorities were using the COVID-19 pandemic to permanently control or harm citizens. These conspiracies undermined government responses to the pandemic and in some cases elicited civil disobedience. Using survey data from 779 Australians collected eight months into the pandemic, we examined the relationship between conspiracy beliefs, trust in the government, and duty to comply with authorities during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also examined whether trust in government moderated the association between conspiracy beliefs and duty to comply. We found that those prone to conspiracy theory beliefs and who distrusted government were less likely to comply with authorities during the pandemic. We also found that trust in the government moderated the negative relationship between conspiracy beliefs and duty to comply;high trust served as a protective factor against conspiracy beliefs. Importantly, we found that how government actions were experienced and perceived during the pandemic were important correlates of Australians’ level of trust in the government. Our findings point to the importance of governments maintaining high trust in their efficacy and approach during a crisis.

Examining the relationship between conspiracy theories and COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy: A mediating role for perceived health threats, trust, and anomie?

The COVID‐19 pandemic has led to an upswing in conspiracy theory beliefs, which creates challenges for effectively countering the pandemic, with higher rates of COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy found among conspiracy theorists. Research suggests health risk perceptions, trust in government and anomie may mediate the relationship between COVID‐19 conspiracy theory beliefs and vaccine hesitancy. However, the mediating role of trust in government and anomie on vaccine hesitancy have not been empirically examined in the context of COVID‐19, and it is not clear whether different conspiracy theories have distinct mediational pathways to vaccine hesitancy. The current study examines the extent to which perceptions of the health threat posed by COVID‐19, trust in government and anomie can explain the relationship between distinct COVID‐19 conspiracy theories and COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy. Drawing on data from a national online survey of 779 Australian adults, a series of path analyses examining the influence of three distinct conspiracy theories on vaccination hesitancy revealed two key mediational pathways, which varied across conspiracy theory types. Anomie and perceptions of the health threat posed by COVID‐19 were the most common mediators of this relationship. Implications for COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy and for conspiracy theory research are discussed. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Analyses of Social Issues & Public Policy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Initial impacts of COVID-19 on youth offending: An exploration of differences across communities

A number of international studies have found that the initial stages of the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with reductions in crime, primarily due to changes in the routine activities of the population. However, to date there has been no targeted exploration of how COVID-19 may have influenced youth offending, which may be more heavily impacted by the changes heralded by COVID-19 containment measures. This study examines changes in youth offending in an Australia jurisdiction, Queensland, following the implementation of COVID-19 containment measures from the period April to June 2020. Additionally, differences in impacts across community types were explored. Findings from the panel regression indicated significant declines in youth property offending, offences against the person and public order offences in this period, but no significant changes in illicit drug offences. There were also significant differences across communities according to socio-economic status, per cent Indigenous population, and the extent of commercial or industrial land use. Findings are explored with reference to environmental crime theories and the potential impacts of social, economic and policing changes that occurred in this period.

Why people comply with COVID-19 social distancing restrictions: Self-interest or duty?

On 11 March 2020 the World Health Organization declared the novel coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19) a global pandemic. At the time of writing, over 16 million cases of COVID-19 had been confirmed worldwide, and more than 650,000 people had died from the virus. A priority amongst governments globally is limiting the spread of the virus. In Australia, this response included mandatory ?lockdown? restrictions which limited citizens? freedom of movement. This article uses survey data from 1595 Australians to examine compliance with COVID-19 lockdown restrictions in the early stages of the pandemic. Results revealed that a substantial number of Australians did not comply fully with the measures. Further, while self-interest and health concerns motivated compliance, normative concerns regarding duty to support the authorities dominated compliance decisions. The findings? implications for both compliance research and for authorities wanting to nurture voluntary compliance with public health orders are discussed.