Bridging Alone: Religious Conservatism, Marital Homogamy, and Voluntary Association Membership

This study characterizes social insularity of religiously conservative American married couples by examining patterns of voluntary associationmembership. Constructing a dataset of 3938 marital dyads from the second wave of the National Survey of Families and Households, the author investigates whether conservative religious homogamy encourages membership in religious voluntary groups and discourages membership in secular voluntary groups. Results indicate that couples’ shared affiliation with conservative denominations, paired with beliefs in biblical authority and inerrancy, increases the likelihood of religious group membership for husbands and wives and reduces the likelihood of secular group membership for wives, but not for husbands. The social insularity of conservative religious groups appears to be reinforced by homogamy—particularly by wives who share faith with husbands

Earthquakes, Volcanoes and God: Comparative Perspectives from Christianity and Islam

This paper asserts that both Christian and Islamic traditions of faith affect the ways in which people both try to make sense of, and respond to, disasters. This contention is supported by the results of empirical research, which demonstrates that differing Islamic and Christian perspectives on human suffering caused by disasters are neither as diverse, nor are they so intractable, as is commonly supposed. Today pastoral convergence between the two traditions may also be discerned, together with a general acceptance of the policies of both State agencies and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) which are concerned with hazard relief and the propagation of policies of disaster risk reduction (DRR). Indeed some important disaster relief NGOs have emerged from Islamic and Christian faith communities and are supported by charitable donations

Prognostic model to predict postoperative acute kidney injury in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery based on a national prospective observational cohort study.

Background: Acute illness, existing co-morbidities and surgical stress response can all contribute to postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery. The aim of this study was prospectively to develop a pragmatic prognostic model to stratify patients according to risk of developing AKI after major gastrointestinal surgery. Methods: This prospective multicentre cohort study included consecutive adults undergoing elective or emergency gastrointestinal resection, liver resection or stoma reversal in 2-week blocks over a continuous 3-month period. The primary outcome was the rate of AKI within 7 days of surgery. Bootstrap stability was used to select clinically plausible risk factors into the model. Internal model validation was carried out by bootstrap validation. Results: A total of 4544 patients were included across 173 centres in the UK and Ireland. The overall rate of AKI was 14·2 per cent (646 of 4544) and the 30-day mortality rate was 1·8 per cent (84 of 4544). Stage 1 AKI was significantly associated with 30-day mortality (unadjusted odds ratio 7·61, 95 per cent c.i. 4·49 to 12·90; P < 0·001), with increasing odds of death with each AKI stage. Six variables were selected for inclusion in the prognostic model: age, sex, ASA grade, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate, planned open surgery and preoperative use of either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker. Internal validation demonstrated good model discrimination (c-statistic 0·65). Discussion: Following major gastrointestinal surgery, AKI occurred in one in seven patients. This preoperative prognostic model identified patients at high risk of postoperative AKI. Validation in an independent data set is required to ensure generalizability

Social Capital: Dealing with Community Emergencies

This article appeared in Homeland Security Affairs (July 2006), v.2 no.2Of course, the central symbol of international terrorism in the United States was the collapse of the World Trade Towers in New York and the perhaps 3,000 deaths that resulted from the collapse. Often overlooked, however, is the fact that at the time of impact there were an estimated 17,400 occupants in those buildings and eighty-seven percent of them evacuated successfully. Most of the deaths were on the floors or above the floors where the planes hit. It is now determined that ninety-nine percent of those below the impact floors successfully evacuated. This successful evacuation was not accomplished by conventional search and rescue groups; it was the result of people on site helping others and themselves to take protective action to get out of the towers and to a safe location. While the loss of property and life occurring on 9/11 is frequently recalled, the protective actions of the other 'victims' in the building are often overlooked. Much of the contemporary discussion about emergency planning assumes that community members 'panic' and that strong authority is necessary. The vocabulary of 'command and control' suggests chaos rather than citizen adaptability and creativity. Such assumptions can be questioned by the research evidence accumulated in recent years. While we calculate damage to physical and human capital, we usually ignore the social capital available within communities to deal with emergencies. Social capital is our most significant resource in responding to damage caused by natural and other hazards, such as terrorism.Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited

Conceptualizing Disaster in Ways Productive for Social Science Research

Over the course of the next several days, we will have the opportunity to conceptualize a research agenda which will be appropriate for a region as well as significant for the social sciences. This is an unusual opportunity since research problems for the social scientists are usually a part of some one else's agenda, either governmental policy agencies or by implications derived from other scientific endeavors. For example, meteorological agencies have often asked the question "Why do people ignore our warnings?" but are seldom content to listen to distinctions which point out the difference between meteorological forecasts and warning messages. Nor do they formulate the question "How can meteorological agencies issue messages in such a way in which people will give attention to them?" In other agendas, questions are often phrased so tat they imply technological answers, rather than "social" solutions. For example, the question of "what can be done to prevent flooding?" usually evokes answers about building more dams and levees when part of the answer might emerge if the question were raised "what is the most efficient and rational use a society can made of flood prone lands?

The Lisbon Earthquake In 1755: The First Modern Disaster

The timing of the Lisbon earthquake made it a topic of discussion and disputation among intellectuals involved in what has come to be known as the Enlightenment. In part, it challenged growing liberal views about the miracles and wonder of nature itself. And it seemed to reaffirm the presence of God that many were trying to make abstract, distant and benign. The interest here, however, is that the earthquake on November 1, 1755 can be considered the first “modern” disaster because it was first to evoke a coordinated state emergency response as well as a forward looking comprehensive effort for reconstruction which included mitigation efforts to reduce future disaster efforts. Major earthquakes were not new. There had been a major earthquake in Port Royal, Jamaica in 1693 and in Catania, Sicily and in Naples in 1693. But most of Northern Europe was seismically stable and for most Europeans, earthquakes occurred elsewhere. Lisbon was not the first to evoke governmental interest. At times, European governments have been involved in the process of reconstructing colonial towns and villages destroyed by earthquakes. But when the Lisbon earthquake occurred, it became the focus of attention for the “relevant civilized world”. Revised version of Preliminary Paper #255 (1997

Noah And Disaster Planning: The Cultural Significance Of The Flood Story

Disasters are both interesting and infrequent. Thus, understanding them usually depends on stories others tell us. Such stories frame our understandings and imaginations. With those stories at hand, we comprehend reality and history on the basis of what everyone knows. At times, however, it is useful to examine what everyone knows