Search

This paper presents findings on the relationship between race and mental health extracted from a major five year epidemiologic study conducted in the southeastern United States. Mental health scores on five separate psychiatric scales are compared for blacks and whites. These comparisons are made in two ways. First, simple correlations using Tints and analysis of variance are computed; then the variable race is included with age, sex and socioeconomic status in a stepwise multiple regression equation. The results show that blacks had higher mean scores than whites on all the scales: the differences are statistically significant on every measure. When controlled for the oilier sociodemographic factors, however, the variable black is statistically significant in only two of the equations and in one of these the significance level is quite minimal. Being black is a highly significant variable when scores on a phobia scale are analyzed. In every instance, low socioeconomic status is the most powerful predictor of high mental health scores. The authors conclude that there is no definitive evidence that race alone is a primary etiologic factor in accounting for differences in the rates of mental illness between blacks and whites. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Racial inequity in the provision of healthcare is widely recognized. In this paper I assess the role of social distance from healthcare providers in accounting for whites' higher rating of healthcare providers. Using data from the Detroit Area Study, I test whether having higher socioeconomic status, like most healthcare providers, and racial concordance with healthcare provider account for the gap in satisfaction between whites and African Americans. I find that socioeconomic status and racial concordance variables account for a portion of whites' higher rating of the respect shown by their healthcare provider Racial differences in evaluation of time spent with healthcare provider are accounted for by socioeconomic status, but not racial concordance. As researchers explore the causes of and remedies for the racial disparity in use and evaluation of healthcare, the subtle and indirect effects of race on the patient-healthcare provider relationship must be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on the social determinants of health has increasingly sought to understand the relative importance of different features of socioeconomic status. Much of the ensuing debate has wavered between education and income, with recent research leaning increasingly toward income. This research has not, however; consistently explored interactions between different features of socio economic status and, in trying to understand the independent effects of different components of socioeconomic status, may have missed important features of socioeconomic position. With an eye toward examining how features of socio economic status combine and coalesce, this paper examines variation in the income-health association by level of education. Theories derived both from medical sociology and health economics suggest synergistic interactions between income and education, but they are unclear as to the direction and magnitude of these interactions. Results from two large and nationally representative data sets (the 1996-1997 Community Tracking Study and the 1972-2000 General Social Survey) indicate that the positive relationship between income and health varies substantially in both its strength and shape by level of education. Education improves health, and its effects are larger at lower levels of income. Moreover; education reduces the strength and curvature of the income-health relationship. Consequently, those with more education have better health for all levels of income, and fewer income-based disparities exist among the well educated than among the less well educated. The linear "gradient" relationship between income and health is, thus, more characteristic of groups with higher levels of education. Additional analyses indicate that these interactions existed in the United States in each of the last three decades. The results are discussed in light of theory regarding the perpetuation of health disparities, as well as current debates regarding the apparent incompatibility of distributive versus aggregative goals in health policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Life events checklists have been the predominant method for estimating variations in stress exposure. It is unknown, however, whether such inventories are equally meaningful for estimating differences in exposure between men and women, African Americans and whites, and those in lower and higher socioeconomic categories. In this paper, we employ a wider range of measures of stress-recent life events, chronic stressors, lifetime major events, and discrimination stress-to examine the extent to which these dimensions collectively yield conclusions about status variations in stress exposure that are similar to or different from estimates based only on a life events checklist Our analyses of data collected from 899 young men and women of African American and non- Hispanic white ancestry suggest that status differences in exposure to stress vary considerably by the measure of stress that is employed. Although women are more exposed to recent life events than men, males report more major events and discrimination stress than females. Our results also reveal that life event measures tend to substantially under-estimate differences between African Americans and non-Hispanic whites in exposure to stress. A similar pattern also holds for socioeconomic status. When stress is more comprehensively estimated, level of exposure profoundly affects ethnic differences in depressive symptomatology, accounting for almost half of the difference by socioeconomic status but contributing little to the explanation of the gender difference in distress. The implications of these findings for the debate over the relative mental health significance of exposure and vulnerability to stress are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Extensive research documents the relevance of families and socioeconomic resources to health. This article extends that research to sexual minorities, using 12 years of the National Health Interview Survey (N = 460,459) to examine self-evaluations of health among male and female adults living in same-sex and different-sex relationships. Adjusting for socioeconomic status eliminates differences between same- and different-sex cohabitors so that they have similarly higher odds of poor health relative to married persons. Results by gender reveal that the cohabitation disadvantage for health is more pronounced for different-sex cohabiting women than for men, but little difference exists between same-sex cohabiting men and women. Finally, the presence of children in the home is more protective for women’s than men’s health, but those protections are specific to married women. In all, the results elucidate the importance of relationship type, gender, and the presence of children when evaluating health. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Unlike other major adult social roles in the United States, parenthood does not appear to confer a mental health advantage for individuals. However, while research has examined parental status differences in emotional well-being, relatively little is known about variations in emotional distress among parents. In this article, we clarify the relationship between parenthood and current symptoms of depression using data from the National Survey of Families and Households. The analyses provide support for our first hypothesis: Parenthood is not associated with enhanced mental health since there is no type of parent who reports less depression than nonparents. We also find support for our second hypothesis: Certain types of parenthood are associated with more depression than others. Additionally, although we find marital status differences in symptoms among parents, there are no gender differences in the association between parenthood and depression. We discuss the implications of our findings for ongoing theoretical debates about the advantages of social role involvement for mental health as well as the meaning of contemporary parenthood in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lower mortality for older rural Americans, compared to urban residents, runs counter to rural-urban disparities in health care services and residents' socioeconomic resources. This paradox calls into question the ways in which community conditions influence mortality and contextualize the relationship between individuals' socioeconomic status and health. Drawing on 24 years of data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Older Men, we observe that rural older men's life expectancy advantages occur even after controlling for residential differences in social class and lifestyle factors. Our results also show that rural advantages in mortality coincide with a more equitable distribution of life chances across the social classes. The association between social class and mortality is strongest among urban men, arising from socioeconomic conditions throughout the life cycle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study describes stress as derived from minority status and explores its effect on psychological distress in gay men. The concept of minority stress is based on the premise that gay people in a heterosexist society are subjected to chronic stress related to their stigmatization. Minority stressors were conceptualized as: internalized homophobia, which relates to gay men's direction of societal negative attitudes toward the self; stigma, which relates to expectations of rejection and discrimination; and actual experiences of discrimination and violence. The mental health effects of the three minority stressors were tested in a community sample of 741 New York City gay men. The results supported minority stress hypotheses: each of the stressors had a significant independent association with a variety of mental health measures. Odds ratios suggested that men who had high levels of minority stress were twice to three times as likely to suffer also from high levels of distress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using data from a 1985 epidemiological survey of 2,115 adults in Florida, this research has two goals: it tests the proposition that race and SES jointly influence mental health, and it examines the contribution of undesirable life events and economic problems to psychological distress across SES groups. Using multiple indicators of SES and mental health, we found that the evidence for a model of joint influence of race and SES on mental health varied with the measures being used. The most general conclusion is that SES interacts with race to increase psychological symptoms of distress. Partitioning the sample into three SES categories (low, middle, high), we examined the contribution of stressors to the greater distress among lower-SES blacks compared to other blacks and lower-SES whites. Lower-SES blacks are more vulnerable than lower-SES whites to the impact of undesirable events, but they are less vulnerable than lower-SES whites to the impact of economic problems. Lower-SES blacks are more vulnerable than middle-SES blacks to the impact of both discrete events and economic problems. Limitations of the study indicate a need for future longitudinal studies with measures of coping resources and support networks to further our understanding of the race, social class and psychological distress relationship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]