Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
2.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 118(30)2021 07 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34282022

ABSTRACT

This article provides county-level estimates of the cumulative prevalence of four levels of Child Protective Services (CPS) contact using administrative data from the 20 most populous counties in the United States. Rates of CPS investigation are extremely high in almost every county. Racial and ethnic inequality in case outcomes is large in some counties. The total median investigation rate was 41.3%; the risk for Black, Hispanic, and White children exceeded 20% in all counties. Risks of having a CPS investigation were highest for Black children (43.2 to 72.0%). Black children also experienced high rates of later-stage CPS contact, with rates often above 20% for confirmed maltreatment, 10% for foster care placement, and 2% for termination of parental rights (TPR). The only other children who experienced such extreme rates of later-stage CPS interventions were American Indian/Alaska Native children in Middlesex, MA; Hispanic children in Bexar, TX; and all children except Asian/Pacific Islander children in Maricopa, AZ. The latter has uniquely high rates of late-stage CPS interventions. In some jurisdictions, such as New York, NY, (0.2%) and Cook, IL (0.2%), very few children experienced TPR. These results show that early CPS interventions are ubiquitous in large counties but with marked variation in how CPS systems respond to these investigations.


Subject(s)
Child Abuse/statistics & numerical data , Child Protective Services/statistics & numerical data , Ethnicity , Racial Groups , Child , Humans , Social Marginalization , United States
4.
Annu Rev Sociol ; 40: 105-128, 2014 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25342872

ABSTRACT

Visualizing data is central to social scientific work. Despite a promising early beginning, sociology has lagged in the use of visual tools. We review the history and current state of visualization in sociology. Using examples throughout, we discuss recent developments in ways of seeing raw data and presenting the results of statistical modeling. We make a general distinction between those methods and tools designed to help explore datasets, and those designed to help present results to others. We argue that recent advances should be seen as part of a broader shift towards easier sharing of the code and data both between researchers and with wider publics, and encourage practitioners and publishers to work toward a higher and more consistent standard for the graphical display of sociological insights.

5.
Duke Law J ; 62(3): 645-70, 2012.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23461002

ABSTRACT

In this Essay, we examine a case in which the organizational and logistical demands of a novel form of organ exchange (the nonsimultaneous, extended, altruistic donor (NEAD) chain) do not map cleanly onto standard cultural schemas for either market or gift exchange, resulting in sociological ambiguity and legal uncertainty. In some ways, a NEAD chain resembles a form of generalized exchange, an ancient and widespread instance of the norm of reciprocity that can be thought of simply as the obligation to "pay it forward" rather than the obligation to reciprocate directly with the original giver. At the same time, a NEAD chain resembles a string of promises and commitments to deliver something in exchange for some valuable consideration--that is, a series of contracts. Neither of these salient "social imaginaries" of exchange--gift giving or formal contract--perfectly meets the practical demands of the NEAD system. As a result, neither contract nor generalized exchange drives the practice of NEAD chains. Rather, the majority of actual exchanges still resemble a simpler form of exchange: direct, simultaneous exchange between parties with no time delay or opportunity to back out. If NEAD chains are to reach their full promise for large-scale, nonsimultaneous organ transfer, legal uncertainties and sociological ambiguities must be finessed, both in the practices of the coordinating agencies and in the minds of NEAD-chain participants. This might happen either through the further elaboration of gift-like language and practices, or through a creative use of the cultural form and motivational vocabulary, but not necessarily the legal and institutional machinery, of contract.


Subject(s)
Altruism , Contracts/legislation & jurisprudence , Culture , Donor Selection/legislation & jurisprudence , Kidney Transplantation/methods , Living Donors/supply & distribution , Social Responsibility , Tissue Donors/supply & distribution , Transplantation, Homologous/methods , Gift Giving , Humans , Kidney Transplantation/legislation & jurisprudence , Living Donors/legislation & jurisprudence , Tissue Donors/legislation & jurisprudence , Tissue and Organ Procurement/legislation & jurisprudence , Tissue and Organ Procurement/organization & administration , Transplantation, Homologous/legislation & jurisprudence
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...