DOES EMPLOYMENT PROTECTION CREATE ITS OWN POLITICAL SUPPORT?

This paper investigates the ability of employment protection to generate its own political support. A version of the Mortensen–Pissarides model is used for this purpose. If wages are set through Nash bargaining, workers value employment protection because it strengthens their hand in wage negotiations. Workers in high productivity matches benefit most from higher wages as they expect to stay employed for longer. By reducing turnover employment protection shifts the distribution of match‐specific productivity toward lower values. Thus stringent protection in the past actually reduces support for employment protection today. Introducing involuntary separations reverses this conclusion. Now workers value employment protection because it delays involuntary dismissals. Workers in low productivity matches gain most since they face the highest risk of dismissal. The downward shift in the productivity distribution is now a shift towards supporters.     

Lesbian and gay individuals' path into foster parenting in Norway—Barriers and facilitators at the person and system levels

Growing numbers of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, questioning (LGBTQ) people are becoming foster parents in several western countries. The LGBTQ perspective on the child welfare system has received little attention in practice, research and policy. Despite their increased rights, LGBTQ foster parents continue to face challenges related to fostering. Knowledge is needed on LGBTQ individual perceptions of the process of becoming foster parents, including barriers and facilitating factors. This paper reports on the experiences of 13 gay or lesbian foster parents in Norway. The study shows a lack of knowledge about the possibility of becoming foster parents due to lack of information directed at them as a minority group. Participants felt vulnerable and experienced “minority stress” before encountering the child welfare system, while mainly experienced the encounter with the staff as good and respectful. Although several valued being treated “like everyone else” by the system, others questioned why LGBTQ-specific parenting issues were not raised and discussed. Apart from lack of information, the process towards foster parenting seemed mostly hampered by participants' own assumptions that sexual identity would be a barrier and to some extent biological parents' refusal. The study suggests that foster care and child welfare services would benefit from information in recruitment of foster parents, aiming at being more inclusive. Furthermore, we address gender and sexuality diversity related to foster care work and highlight the strengths and challenges it may offer.     

Family involvement in child welfare services: The association between socio-economic status and self-reported parenting practices

In child welfare policies, as in contemporary society in general, great attention has been given to parenting roles and investing in ‘positive’ parenting practices. Several studies have suggested that socio-economic factors frame parenting practices. There is broad evidence of a significant correlation between socio-economic inequalities and child welfare intervention rates. Nevertheless, few studies have investigated parenting practices in a child welfare population. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association between socio-economic status (SES) and parenting practices in a Norwegian child welfare population. The study was based on a cross-sectional survey conducted in 2018–2019. The sample consisted of 256 parents (71.5% females). Linear regression analysis, adjusting for potential confounding and intermediate factors, was conducted. Lower SES was associated with higher levels of positive parenting/involvement practices (b = 0.146, CI: 0.026–0.266, P = 0.018), indicating an inverse pattern compared with the general population. When adjusting for symptoms of anxiety and depression, the association was slightly attenuated but remained statistically significant. No significant association was found between SES and inconsistent discipline/other disciplinary practices. The present study offers insights that should be useful in practice and further large-scale studies.     

Theorizing theory: Invitation to a broader conversation about ‘theory’ in sociology

‘Theory’ is a seminal term in sociology. Sociologists tend to ask that articles, chapters and monographs are ‘theoretical’, ‘develop theory’ or ‘make a theoretical contribution’. Yet, as demonstrated in Gabriel Abend’s 2008 article ‘The Meaning of ‘Theory’, it is generally unclear what sociologists mean when they talk about theory. Abend distinguishes seven different meanings sociologists tend to impute to ‘theory’ and argues that no single definition can usefully capture these substantively different meanings. Counter to Abend, we propose and defend a minimal and versatile theory of theory, which does capture the important common denominators in sociologists' various uses of the term theory. The major strengths of our proposal are that it enables informed and synthetic discussion and fosters reflexivity about differences and similarities between different types of theory. Our minimal theory of theory thus serves as an invitation to a broader conversation about theory in sociology.     

Evidence in Norwegian child protection interventions – Analysing cases of familial violence

How is expert evidence used in care order proceedings when children are considered for foster care placement because of familial violence? What are important factors and how do the decision-makers use and evaluate evidence from specialists and experts? In this in-depth analysis of 104 published care order decisions from the Norwegian County Boards, I investigate how decision-makers use and evaluate evidence from expert witnesses to determine whether a care order may be granted. The analysis shows that the evidence largely revolves around social functioning, care context and topics about how parents and children relate to each other. Led by the law, the decision-makers use this evidence to determine whether the child's situation is harmful, whether support services are viable and whether a care order is in the child's best interests. I find that decision-makers draw unevenly on evidence with regards to these legal requirements, and that the use predominantly defers to expert authority. However, there is also evidence of independent reasoning, where deferral to the epistemic authority of the experts is weakened. This is shown through evaluative and critical assessments and scrutiny of the disciplinary evidence.     

Prior distributions expressing ignorance about convex increasing failure rates

This paper deals with the specification of probability distributions expressing ignorance concerning annual or otherwise discretized failure or mortality rates, when these rates can safely be assumed to be increasing and convex, but are completely unknown otherwise. Such distributions can be used as noninformative priors for Bayesian analysis of failure data. We demonstrate why a uniform distribution used in earlier work is unsatisfactory, especially from the point of view of insensitivity with respect to the time scale that is chosen for the problem at hand. We suggest alternative distributions based on Dirichlet distributed weights for the extreme points of relevant convex sets, and discuss which consequences a requirement for scale neutrality has for the choice of Dirichlet parameters.     

Sensitivity analyses for the principal ignorability assumption using multiple imputation

In the context of clinical trials, there is interest in the treatment effect for subpopulations of patients defined by intercurrent events, namely disease-related events occurring after treatment initiation that affect either the interpretation or the existence of endpoints. With the principal stratum strategy, the ICH E9(R1) guideline introduces a formal framework in drug development for defining treatment effects in such subpopulations. Statistical estimation of the treatment effect can be performed based on the principal ignorability assumption using multiple imputation approaches. Principal ignorability is a conditional independence assumption that cannot be directly verified; therefore, it is crucial to evaluate the robustness of results to deviations from this assumption. As a sensitivity analysis, we propose a joint model that multiply imputes the principal stratum membership and the outcome variable while allowing different levels of violation of the principal ignorability assumption. We illustrate with a simulation study that the joint imputation model-based approaches are superior to naive subpopulation analyses. Motivated by an oncology clinical trial, we implement the sensitivity analysis on a time-to-event outcome to assess the treatment effect in the subpopulation of patients who discontinued due to adverse events using a synthetic dataset. Finally, we explore the potential usage and provide interpretation of such analyses in clinical settings, as well as possible extension of such models in more general cases.     

The Earnings Assimilation of Immigrants

Abstract. Earnings assimilation in Sweden is empirically addressed using a random sample of native Swedes and immigrants belonging to two different immigrant cohorts. The results show that the assimilation process differs for the two cohorts. Only the first cohort catches up with its native counterpart. These results also showed that the earnings of immigrants deteriorate with age faster than those. of native Swedes, after reaching a maximum level. This can happen because immigrants decrease their working hours faster than the native Swedes as they get older. Our results also suggest a different effect of the business cycle on the determination of earnings for immigrants and natives.