'Best for everyone concerned' or 'Only as a last resort'? Views of Australian doctors about sterilisation of men and women with intellectual disability

Background  Doctors have the potential to influence opportunities for normative life experiences in the area of sexuality for individuals with intellectual disability (ID). Method  In Study One, 106 doctors completed the Attitudes to Sexuality Questionnaire (Individuals with an Intellectual Disability). In Study Two, 97 doctors completed a modified form of the questionnaire that included additional questions designed to assess their views about sterilisation. Results  Attitudes were less positive about parenting than about other aspects of sexuality, and less sexual freedom was seen as desirable for adults with ID. A surprising number of doctors agreed that sterilisation was a desirable practice. Study Two provided data about the conditions under which sterilisation was endorsed. Most doctors reported they had not been approached to perform sterilisations. Only 12% believed medical practitioners receive sufficient training in the area of disability and sexuality. Conclusions  The findings have implications for training and professional development for doctors

New Estimates of Intergenerational Mobility in Australia

© 2016 Economic Society of Australia We present new estimates of intergenerational earnings elasticity for Australia. We closely follow the methodology used by Leigh [BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 7 (2007) 1], but use considerably more data (12 waves of HILDA and four waves of PSID). Our adjusted estimates are intended to be comparable to those for other countries in Corak [Journal of Economic Perspectives, 27 (2013) 79]. Our preferred estimate (0.35) is considerably higher than implied by Leigh's study, and is less subject to sampling variation. In an international context, intergenerational mobility in Australia is not particularly high, and is consistent with its relatively high level of cross-sectional inequality

Ten years on from the World Health Organization Commission of Social Determinants of Health: Progress or procrastination?

Judd, JA ORCiD: 0000-0001-8441-5008Ten years have passed since the release of the final report of the World Health Organization (WHO) Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH),1 a landmark document that provided a global blue-print for the health promotion community and the stakeholders we work with. Three overarching recommendations were outlined, improving daily living conditions; tackling the in equitable distribution of power, money and resources; and measuring and understanding the problem and assessing the impact of action.1 The extent to which progress has been, and continues to be, made is contested. This editorial briefly reflects on what has been achieved over the past decade —in broad terms—about action on the social determinants of health (SDH) in Australia. We deliberately take a balanced view by highlighting the weaknesses and strengths in what has been achieved by governments, non-government organisations,research institutions, peak bodies and civil society. We also reflection the ongoing role that the Australian Health Promotion Association (AHPA) has played in advancing our understanding about, and action on, the SDH