A focused ethnographic study of community social capital

Social capital, a relatively new public health concept, represents the intangible resources embedded in social relationships that facilitate collective action. Current interest in the concept stems from empirical studies linking social capital with health outcomes. However, in order for social capital to function as a meaningful research variable, conceptual development aimed at refining the domains, attributes, and boundaries of the concept are needed. An existing framework of social capital (Uphoff, 2000), developed from studies in India, was selected for congruence with the inductive analysis of pilot data from a community that was unsuccessful at mobilizing collective action. This framework provided the underpinnings for a formal ethnographic research study designed to examine the components of social capital in a community that had successfully mobilized collective action. The specific aim of the ethnographic study was to examine the fittingness of Uphoff's framework in the contrasting American community. A contrasting context was purposefully selected to distinguish essential attributes of social capital from those that were specific to one community. Ethnographic data collection methods included participant observation, formal interviews, and public documents. Data was originally analyzed according to codes developed from Uphoff's theoretical framework. The results from this analysis were only partially satisfactory, indicating that the theoretical framework required refinement. The refinement of the coding system resulted in the emergence of an explanatory theory of social capital that was tested with the data collected from formal fieldwork. Although Uphoff's framework was useful, the refinement of the framework revealed, (1) trust as the dominant attribute of social capital, (2) efficacy of mutually beneficial collective action as the outcome indicator, (3) cognitive and structural domains more appropriately defined as the cultural norms of the community and group, and (4) a definition of social capital as the combination of the cognitive norms of the community and the structural norms of the group that are either constructive or destructive to the development of trust and the efficacy of mutually beneficial collective action. This explanatory framework holds increased pragmatic utility for public health practice and research. ^

A global perspective on intimate partner violence during pregnancy: An analysis of twelve developing countries

Violence against women has been recognized as a significant worldwide human rights issue and public health problem. Women of reproductive age may be particularly at risk, and pregnancy may trigger or escalate violence. Using data available from Demographic and Health Surveys on 271,103 women of reproductive age (15-49) from Bolivia, Cameroon, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Haiti, India, Kenya, Nicaragua, Peru, South Africa, and Zambia, this study examined the nature of domestic violence during pregnancy in developing countries, including prevalence, demographic and risk factors, maternal and child health outcomes, perpetrators of violence, help-seeking behavior, and social support. In the majority of countries analyzed, violence during pregnancy consistently occurred at approximately one-third the rate at which domestic violence occurred overall. Younger women and women with more children were particularly at risk. Abuse during pregnancy was significantly associated with history of a terminated pregnancy and under-5 child mortality in most countries, and with neonatal and post-neonatal mortality in most Latin American countries. Women who were abused during pregnancy were most often abused by their current or former husband or boyfriend and most never attempted to seek help. In most countries that examined social support, women abused during pregnancy had significantly less contact with family and friends. Implications for practice and research are discussed. ^

Child Welfare Workers’ Perceptions of the Influence of the Organizational Environment on Permanency Decisions for Families

The findings of this study suggest that while child welfare workers are consistently distracted by competing priorities from unexpected events, most are committed, and to understand perspectives is more inclusive and may improve retention rates. Notably, while it is recognized that permanency decisions are not made in an intellectual, legal or clinical vacuum and certain traditional aspects of the bureaucratic structure do not impact decision making, this study advances the body of knowledge on child welfare decision making. Examined in this study are child welfare case workers’ perceptions of the extent to which the organizational environment influences the permanency decisions they make to reunify or terminate parental rights of children placed out-of-home. This study includes a sample of 95 child welfare social workers employed in three public child welfare agencies in the Baltimore and Washington, DC metropolitan area. It used a cross-sectional research design, employing a survey instrument to examine bureaucratic distraction, role conflict, and supervisory adequacy as contextual factors in the organizational environment's influence on permanency outcome decisions. Implications are made for child welfare policy, practice, and research.