Women Behind Bars: Trends and Policy Issues

In the crusade to get tough on crime, policy makers have also gotten tough on women, drawing them into prisons in rapidly growing numbers. Today, incarcerated women are predominately poor, uneducated, and unskilled; are disproportionately African American and Latina young women with children; and have severe health and mental health problems. This article examines the characteristics and needs of these women and presents recommendations for their more humane and pragmatic treatment and for social policy that is relevant for the decarceration of this country\u27s soaring female prison population

4-H Youth Development Professionals’ Perceptions of Youth Development Core Competence

The purpose of this descriptive study was to assess the perceived level of competence among 4-H Youth Development Agents from a Southern state in the United States. The findings will be used to identify gaps in and opportunities for professional training and development experiences in supporting the competence and growth of youth professionals. Based on the 4-H Professional Research, Knowledge, and Competency Model (Stone & Rennekamp, 2004), youth development professionals rated their youth development competence in nine youth development core competency areas. Utilizing a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1=no knowledge to 5=expert, youth development professionals rated their youth development competence ranging from 3.12 to 3.54. According to an interpretive scale, youth development professionals rated their competence as intermediate. Staff felt most competent in the areas of current youth issues, career opportunities for youth, and family structures/relationships. Staff felt least competent in the area of mental development of youth. No one identified themselves as an expert in the areas of psychological development, emotional development, and current youth issues

Adoption of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme for Injured Patients

Background: When emergency medical services (EMS) providers respond to the scene of an injury, they must decide where to transport the injured patients for further evaluation and treatment. This is done through a process known as “field triage”, whereby a patient’s injuries are matched to the most appropriate hospital. In 2005-2006 the National Expert Panel on Field Triage, convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, revised the 1999 American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma Field Triage Decision Scheme. This revision, the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme, was published in 2006.Methods: State Public Health departments’ and EMS’ external websites were evaluated to ascertain the current status of implementation of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme.Results: Information regarding field triage was located for 41 states. In nine states no information regarding field triage was available on their websites. Of the 41 states where information was located, seven were classified as “full adopters” of the 2006 Field Triage Decision Scheme; nine were considered “partial adopters”; 17 states were found to be using a full version or modification of the 1999 Field Triage Decision Scheme; and eight states were considered to be using a different protocol or scheme for field triage.Conclusion: Many states have adopted the 2006 Decision Scheme (full or partial). Further investigation is needed to determine the reasons why some states do not adopt the guidelines. [West J Emerg Med. 2011;12(3):275-283.

Treatment, Services and Follow-up for Victims of Family Violence in Health Clinics in Maputo, Mozambique

Background: Family violence (FV) is a global health problem that not only impacts the victim, but the family unit, local community and society at large.Objective: To quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the treatment and follow up provided to victims of violence amongst immediate and extended family units who presented to three health centers in Mozambique for care following violence.Methods: We conducted a verbally-administered survey to self-disclosed victims of FV who presented to one of three health units, each at a different level of service, in Mozambique for treatment of their injuries. Data were entered into SPSS (SPSS, version 13.0) and analyzed for frequencies. Qualitative short answer data were transcribed during the interview, coded and analyzed prior to translation by the principal investigator.Results: One thousand two hundred and six assault victims presented for care during the eight-week study period, of which 216 disclosed the relationship of the assailant, including 92 who were victims of FV. Almost all patients (90%) waited less than one hour to be seen, with most patients (67%) waiting less than 30 minutes. Most patients did not require laboratory or radiographic diagnostics at the primary (70%) and secondary (93%) health facilities, while 44% of patients received a radiograph at the tertiary care center. Among all three hospitals, only 10% were transferred to a higher level of care, 14% were not given any form of follow up or referral information, while 13% required a specialist evaluation. No victims were referred for psychological follow-up or support. Qualitative data revealed that some patients did not disclose violence as the etiology, because they believed the physician was unable to address or treat the violence-related issues and/or had limited time to discuss.Conclusion: Healthcare services for treating the physical injuries of victims of FV were timely and rarely required advanced levels of medical care, but there were no psychological services or follow-up referrals for violence victims. The healthcare environment at all three surveyed health centers in Mozambique does not encourage disclosure or self-report of FV. Policies and strategies need to be implemented to encourage patient disclosure of FV and provide more health system-initiated victim resources. [West J Emerg Med. 2011;12(3):348-353.

Toxicology Studies on Lewisite and Sulfur Mustard Agents: Mutagenicity of Lewisite in the Salmonella Histidine Reversion Assay Final Report

The mutagenic potential of lewisite was evaluated in the standard plate incorporation method and by the preincubation modification of the Ames Salmonella/microsomal assay with tester strains TA97, TA98, TAlOO and TA102. All strains were tested with activation (20 and 50 {micro}l/ plate) and without activation. The lewisite was screened initially for toxicity with TA98 over a range of concentrations from 0.01 to 250 {micro}g of material per plate. However, concentrations selected for mutagenicity testing were adjusted to a range of 0.001 to 5 {micro}g/plate because of the sensitivity of tester strain TA102, which exhibited cytotoxicity at 0.01 ug/plate. No mutagenic response was exhibited by any of the strains in either method used. All other tester strains showed evidence of cytoxicity (reduction in mutagen response or sparse background lawn) at 5.0 {micro}g/plate or lower

Toxicology Studies on Lewisite and Sulfur Mustard Agents: Mutagenicity of Sulfur Mustard in the Salmonella Histidine Reversion Assay Final Report

The mutagenic potential of bis 2-chloroethyl sulfide (HD} a bifunctional sulfur mustard was evaluated in the standard plate incorporation version and the preincubation modification of the Salmonella/microsomal assay with tester strains TA97, TA98, TA100 and TA102, with and without 59 activation. HD-induced point mutations in strain TA102 and frameshift mutations in TA97 but showed little or no mutagenicity against strains TA98 and TA100. Extensive HD-induced cell killing was observed with the excision repair deficient strains (TA100, TA98 and TA97) but not with strain TA102, which is wild-activation by Aroc1or induced rat liver microsomes (S9)

Toxicology Studies on Lewisite and Sulfur Mustard Agents: Mutagenicity of Lewisite in the Salmonella Histidine Reversion Assay Final Report

The mutagenic potential of lewisite was evaluated in the standard plate incorporation method and by the preincubation modification of the Ames Salmonella/microsomal assay with tester strains TA97, TA98, TAlOO and TA102. All strains were tested with activation (20 and 50 {micro}l/ plate) and without activation. The lewisite was screened initially for toxicity with TA98 over a range of concentrations from 0.01 to 250 {micro}g of material per plate. However, concentrations selected for mutagenicity testing were adjusted to a range of 0.001 to 5 {micro}g/plate because of the sensitivity of tester strain TA102, which exhibited cytotoxicity at 0.01 ug/plate. No mutagenic response was exhibited by any of the strains in either method used. All other tester strains showed evidence of cytoxicity (reduction in mutagen response or sparse background lawn) at 5.0 {micro}g/plate or lower