Getting Time Off: Access to Leave Among Working Parents

"Mommy, I don't feel good." "Honey, it's time to go to the hospital." When working parents, or parents-to-be, hear these phrases, their anxiety levels often increase. Not only because their children are sick or their partners are in labor, but also because they will have to find a way to keep their jobs while tending to their families' needs. Maternity and paternity leave, along with vacation, sick leave, and personal leave, help workers balance their responsibilities at home and at the office. This brief uses new data from the National Survey of America's Families (NSAF) to portray which working parents have access to paid and maternity/paternity leave.Although federal law guarantees job-protected, unpaid family leave to many workers, only three in five American workers are eligible to take this leave (Cantor et al. 2001). Moreover, no state or federal legislation requires employers to provide paid leave of any kind. Because access to leave is not universal, some caregivers do not fully realize the benefits of job-protected leave, namely job security and some flexibility to care for children.This analysis examines whether access to leave differs by socioeconomic characteristics. The data suggest that the majority of working parents can take maternity or paternity leave from their jobs. Although access to maternity/paternity leave varies with measures of economic well-being, it is much more equal than access to paid leave. Most poor workers, working welfare recipients, and working recent welfare leavers cannot take paid leave from their jobs. And those who can take paid leave typically have fewer days of paid leave than nonpoor workers or workers with no recent welfare experience. The relatively even distribution of access to maternity and paternity leave, compared with the uneven access to paid leave, could be an effect of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA)

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

The EITC: Expectation, Knowledge, Use, and Economic and Social Mobility

This paper presents initial findings on the economic impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) based on a sample of Chicago area households that filed tax returns in the spring of 1998. Respondents reported on their detailed use of the funds to pay bills, purchase new items, or save. Asset information on the households was also gathered, along with questions regarding the ability of households to make particular expenditures without the help of the EITC. Uses of the EITC are divided into those that improve social mobility (e.g., purchase a car, pay tuition, change housing) and those that primarily help to make ends meet (e.g., pay routine bills, purchase food) and determinants of each are explored in a regression framework. The paper also explores the relationship among the financial system, asset and borrow status, and EITC usage. Implications for tax policy and social policy are drawn in conclusion. As far as we know, this is the first research to address these issues, despite the fact that, excluding programs for the elderly and Medicaid, the EITC is our largest federal entitlement program. This paper was revised April 2000.

Fourth Draft

Economic independence is an important indicator of the transition to adulthood. This chapter portrays the level of economic independence among young adults, aged 18 to 32, in seven industrialized countries. The cross-national variations we uncover help us to understand how work, family, and comparative income packages affect economic self-sufficiency. In all countries, young women are less able than young men to become economically independent through market work alone. The ability to support a family is affected more by government transfers than the ability to support ones self. We also find that family support through additional income, the provision of housing, and caring labor and decisions to have roommates are clearly important to the economic well-being of young adults. In closing, we suggest several avenues for future research