Nativity,Duration of Residence,and the Health of Hispanic Adults in the United States1

This article examines subgroup differences in the health status of Hispanic adults in comparison to non‐Hispanic whites and non‐Hispanic blacks. We pay particular attention to the influences of nativity and duration of residence in the United States. Data are pooled from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) for 1989–94. Puerto Ricans exhibited the worst health outcomes of any group (including whites and blacks) for each of the three health measures. Persons of Central/South American origin exhibited the most favorable outcomes for activity limitations and bed sick days, advantages that were eliminated when controlled for nativity/duration. For two of the three health status variables, Mexican Americans were very similar to non‐Hispanic whites in baseline models and were more favorable than non‐Hispanic whites once socio‐economic factors were controlled; this was not the case, however, for self‐reported overall health. Immigration also helped to explain the relatively positive outcomes among Central/South American origin individuals, Cubans, and Mexican Americans. For most Hispanic groups (as well as non‐Hispanic whites and non‐Hispanic blacks), immigrants reported better health than the U.S. born, which is consistent with a selectivity hypothesis of immigrant health. In addition, this advantage tended to be significantly smaller among immigrants with ten or more years' duration in the United States. Although the latter finding is consistent with the negative acculturation hypothesis, alternative interpretations, including the generally more limited access of immigrants to the formal health care system, are suggested.     

So near yet so far: blocked networks,global links and multiple exclusion in the German–Polish borderlands

Abstract The building blocks of global society are conventionally thought of in terms of ‘flows’, ‘scapes’, ‘key nodes’, and ‘global cities’, to name a few. We rarely consider borders and border regions. However, state borders provide a crucial component of a globalizing society in transition. Exhibiting a structural ambivalence, borders can be seedbeds of cosmopolitanism, sites of cultural closure, or often both simultaneously. To understand cross‐border interaction we have to engage with a complex configuration of global and sub‐global dynamics. In this article I argue that borders are revealing analytical tools that must be included in any grounded theory of global change. I draw on fieldwork conducted in the German‐Polish border region, mostly in the German‐Polish twin city Guben/Gubin. Here we are confronted with the simultaneous processes of globalization, European integration and post‐socialist transformation.     

Beyond “identity”

Theory and Society -     

Why populism?

It is a commonplace to observe that we have been living through an extraordinary pan-European and trans-Atlantic populist moment. But do the heterogeneous phenomena lumped under the rubric “populist” in fact belong together? Or is “populism” just a journalistic cliché and political epithet? In the first part of the article, I defend the use of “populism” as an analytic category and the characterization of the last few years as a “populist moment,” and I propose an account of populism as a discursive and stylistic repertoire. In the second part, I specify the structural trends and the conjunctural convergence of a series of crises that jointly explain the clustering in space and time that constitutes the populist moment. The question in my title is thus twofold: it is a question about populism as a term or concept and a question about populism as a phenomenon in the world. The article addresses both the conceptual and the explanatory question, limiting the scope of the explanatory argument to the pan-European and trans-Atlantic populist conjuncture of the last few years.     

Process and evaluation of a group intervention for mothers with parenting difficulties

Twenty-one mothers with severe parenting difficulties, including 12 children on the Child Protection Register, were involved in an intensive parenting intervention. The 4-month group-based package included psychotherapy to allow mothers to come to terms with past and present stressors, and direct and video work with mothers and children using a multi-dimensional model of parenting. Considerable positive change in interaction and child centredness was evident when before and after videotapes of the mothers and children were compared. Negative interaction dropped to one-quarter of the pre-group level and mothers were more effective in exercising appropriate control. Of the 12 children on the Child Protection Register, 10 subsequently had their names removed, with both remaining children returning to the mother's care from compulsory care. This compares favourably with area figures, suggesting that about one-third of children are removed annually from the register. The multi-dimensional model of parenting not only provided a basis for measuring mother's skills but a coherent focus for intervention.