Intangible Identity Theft and Intimate Partner Violence.

While tougher domestic violence laws and protective orders are frequently credited with attenuating intimate partner violence (IPV), one unexplored explanation for this observed reduction is that intimate partner abusers are shifting their abusive behavior to intangible identity theft to thwart legal mechanisms traditionally used to deter IPV. Unlike the monetary motive associated with document identity theft, intangible identity theft is committed by someone with a preexisting grievance against the victim because the theft's primary purpose is to tarnish the victim's reputation. Results from a multilevel analysis show that a woman has a lower probability of being a victim of an intimate rather than nonintimate partner crime in cities with a higher intangible identity theft rate. Such a finding suggests that intangible identity theft may be a form of intimate partner abuse with few adverse consequences for offenders because identity thieves are rarely arrested and prosecuted. Nevertheless, the current study is only preliminary. Further research is needed before our findings and conclusions can be universally accepted.

The effect of cannabis laws on opioid use.

BACKGROUND: Many Americans rely on opioids at varying dosages to help ameliorate their suffering. However, empirical evidence is mounting that opioids are ineffective at controlling non-cancer related chronic pain, and many argue the strategies meant to relieve patient suffering are contributing to the growing opioid epidemic. Concurrently, several states now allow the use of medical cannabis to treat a variety of medical conditions, including chronic pain. Needing more exploration is the impact of cannabis laws on general opioid reliance and whether chronic pain sufferers are opting to use cannabis medicinally instead of opioids. METHODS: This study investigates the effect of Medical Marijuana Laws (MML)s on opioid use and misuse controlling for a number of relevant factors using data from several years of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health and multivariate logistic regression and longitudinal analysis strategies. RESULTS: Results provide evidence that MMLs may be effective at reducing opioid reliance as survey respondents living in states with medical cannabis legislation are much less apt to report using opioid analgesics than people living in states without such laws, net other factors. Results further indicate that the presence of medicinal cannabis legislation appears to have no influence over opioid misuse. CONCLUSION: MMLs may ultimately serve to attenuate the consequences of opioid overreliance.

The effect of medical cannabis laws on juvenile cannabis use.

BACKGROUND: A number of states in the United States legally allow the use of cannabis as a medical therapy to treat an illness or to alleviate symptoms. Concern persists as to whether these types of laws are increasing juvenile recreational cannabis use. It is also plausible that medical cannabis laws engender an escalation of illicit non-cannabis drug use among juveniles because cannabis is frequently considered to be a gateway drug. METHODS: This study uses longitudinal data drawn from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health for the 50 U.S. states and a cross-sectional pooled-time series research design to investigate the effect of medical cannabis laws on juvenile cannabis use and on juvenile non-cannabis illicit drug use. Our study period encompasses five measurement periods calibrated in two-year intervals (2002-2003 to 2010-2011). This research design is advantageous in that it affords us the ability not only to assess the effect of the implementation of medical cannabis laws on juvenile drug use, but also to consider other state-specific factors that may explain variation in drug use that cannot be accounted for using a single time series. RESULTS: Findings show that medical cannabis laws amplify recreational juvenile cannabis use. Other salient predictors of juvenile cannabis use at the state-level of analysis include perceived availability of cannabis, percent of juveniles skipping school, severity of perceived punishment for cannabis possession, alcohol consumption, percent of respondents with a father residing in household, and percent of families in the state receiving public assistance. There is little empirical evidence to support the view that medical cannabis laws affect juveniles' use of illicit non-cannabis drugs. CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, it seems reasonable to speculate that medical cannabis laws amplify juveniles' use of cannabis by allaying the social stigma associated with recreational cannabis use and by placating the fear that cannabis use could potentially result in a negative health outcome.

Stepchildren, community disadvantage, and physical injury in a child abuse incident: a preliminary investigation.

It is proffered that stepchildren are more likely than genetic children to be physically abused because they are unable to ensure the genetic survival of their adoptive parents. This abuse is theorized to be more pronounced in communities where social and economic resources are scarce. The salience of this cross-level interaction hinges on the assumption that the limited resources of a family are first allocated to genetic offspring because these children, unlike their nongenetic siblings, carry the genes of their parents. A multilevel analysis of child abuse incidents reported to police in 133 U.S. cities during 2005 shows that in cities with a high level of community disadvantage, stepchildren are much more apt than are genetic children to suffer a physical injury in a child abuse incident. Such a finding buttresses the position articulated by proponents of sociobiology.

Is nonsmoking dangerous to the health of restaurants? The effect of California's indoor smoking ban on restaurant revenues.

The state of California passed the Smoke-Free Workplace Act on January 1, 1995. This legislation effectively banned indoor smoking in all public and private workplaces including restaurants. Many restaurant owners, especially owners of restaurants that served alcohol, opposed the ban for fear that their businesses would be affected adversely because of the loss of patrons who smoked. Using an interrupted times-series autoregressive integrative moving average study design, the authors assess the effect of California's indoor smoking ban on revenue rates for all restaurants, for non-alcohol-serving restaurants, and for alcohol-serving restaurants. Results showed that revenues for alcohol-serving restaurants dropped by about 4% immediately following the establishment of the indoor smoking ban. However, this reduction was temporary because revenues for alcohol-serving restaurants quickly returned to normal levels. Findings also revealed that the indoor smoking ban had little observable impact on the revenue rate for restaurants overall and for non-alcohol-serving restaurants.

"Born to be wild". The effect of the repeal of Florida's mandatory motorcycle helmet-use law on serious injury and fatality rates.

In response to political pressure, the state of Florida repealed its mandatory motorcycle helmet-use law for all operators and passengers older than the age of 21, effective July 1, 2000. Using monthly data and a multiple time-series design, the authors assessed the effect of this law change on serious injury and fatality rates for motorcycle riders aged 21 and older. Controls for serious injury and fatality rates for motorcycle riders younger than 21 years of age were included in the analyses. Maximum-likelihood results showed that the repeal of the mandatory helmet-use law in Florida had little observable effect on serious injuries or on fatalities that resulted from motorcycle crashes. Policy implications of these findings are discussed, and explanations are given as to why the repeal of the mandatory motorcycle helmet-use law in Florida was inconsequential.