Search

We examined the effect of political rhetoric on the targets of that rhetoric. Drawing from scholarship on anti-Mexican and anti-immigrant rhetoric found readily in various media and scholarship on emotions, we tested four hypotheses. Hypotheses 1 and 2 predicted that positive and negative political rhetoric would increase and decrease positive and negative emotions, respectively. Hypotheses 3 and 4 then predicted that emotional responses to positive or negative political rhetoric would influence perceived stress, subjective health, and subjective well-being. Data collection occurred between August 2016 and June 2017 at a university in California. A sample of 280 Mexican-origin youth, defined broadly as having at least one ancestor born in Mexico or the participant themselves born in Mexico, participated in an experiment where they were randomly assigned to one of three study conditions: viewing (1) positive or (2) negative political rhetoric about immigrants and Latinos in general, or (3) neutral rhetoric as a control condition before providing qualitative responses to open-ended questions and completing measures of positive and negative affect, perceived stress, subjective health, and subjective well-being. Qualitative responses indicated that negative and positive political rhetoric elicited a range of negative emotions and positive emotions, respectively. Quantitative analysis with independent samples t-tests, ANOVA, and linear regression models found that negative political rhetoric elicited higher negative affect than positive and neutral rhetoric, and positive rhetoric elicited higher positive affect than negative and neutral rhetoric. Negative emotional responses, in turn, were associated with participants' higher perceived stress, lower subjective health and lower subjective well-being. Conversely, positive emotional responses were associated with lower perceived stress, higher subjective health, and higher subjective well-being. Positive political rhetoric, by eliciting positive emotions, can have a salubrious effect. Altogether, these findings suggest that political rhetoric matters for the targets of that rhetoric.

BackgroundThe regional impact of care at a National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCI-CCC) on adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) ovarian cancer treatment guidelines and survival is unclear.Study designWe performed a retrospective population-based study of consecutive patients diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer between January 1, 1996 and December 31, 2006 in southern California. Patients were stratified according to care at an NCI-CCC (n = 5), non-NCI high-volume hospital (≥ 10 cases/year, HVH, n = 29), or low-volume hospital (

ObjectiveTo estimate whether race or ethnic and socioeconomic strata are independently associated with advanced-stage ovarian cancer-specific survival after adjusting for adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network treatment guidelines.MethodsThe design was a retrospective population-based cohort study of patients with stage IIIC-IV epithelial ovarian cancer identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database (1992-2009). Quartile of census tract median household income was used as the measure of socioeconomic status (quartiles 1-4). A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify characteristics predictive of adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for surgery and chemotherapy. Cox proportional hazards models and propensity score matching were used for survival analyses.ResultsA total of 10,296 patients were identified, and 30.2% received National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-adherent care. Among demographic variables, black race (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-1.92) and low socioeconomic status (quartile 1, adjusted OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.14-1.52) were independently associated with nonguideline care. Stratified multivariate survival analysis using the propensity score-matched sample (n=5,124) revealed that deviation from treatment guidelines was associated with a comparable risk of disease-related death across race-ethnicity: whites (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.59, 95% CI 1.48-1.71), blacks (adjusted HR 1.66, 95% CI 1.19-2.30), Asian or Pacific Islanders (adjusted HR 1.52, 95% CI 0.99-1.92), and Hispanics (adjusted HR 1.91, 95% CI 0.98-3.72). Across socioeconomic status, deviation from treatment guidelines was also associated with a comparable risk of ovarian cancer mortality for quartile 1 (adjusted HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.47-1.95), quartile 2 (adjusted HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.42-1.87), quartile 3 (adjusted HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.32-1.73), and quartile 4 (adjusted HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.38-1.79).ConclusionAdherence to treatment guidelines for advanced-stage ovarian cancer is associated with equivalent survival benefit across racial or ethnic and socioeconomic strata. Ensuring equal access to standard treatment is a viable strategic approach to reduce survival disparities.

Does the undocumented status of 1.5-generation Latinos (those who migrated at a young age) in the United States affect their political, civic, and public selves? Our approach to this question begins with a theoretical framework based on the concept of abjectivity, which draws together abject status and subjectivity. We argue that the practices of the biopolitics of citizenship and governmentality-surveillance, immigration documents, employment forms, birth certificates, tax forms, drivers' licenses, credit card applications, bank accounts, medical insurance, car insurance, random detentions, and deportations-enclose, penetrate, define, limit, and frustrate the lives of undocumented 1.5-generation Latino immigrants. We examine data from a random-sample telephone survey of 805 Latinos and 396 whites in Orange County, California, to provide general patterns that distinguish 1.5-generation Latino immigrants from their first-generation counterparts and to suggest the contours of their lives as undocumented immigrants. We then examine in-depth interviews with 80 respondents also in Orange County who provide extensive qualitative information and personal narratives. The analysis shows how abjectivity and illegality constrain daily life, create internalized fears, in some ways immobilize their victims, and in other ways motivate them to engage politically to resist the dire conditions of their lives. © 2012 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research.

Does an undocumented immigration status predict the use of medical services? To explore this question, this paper examines medical care utilization of undocumented Latino immigrants compared to Latino legal immigrants and citizens, and non-Latino whites in Orange County, California. Data were collected through a random sample telephone survey of 805 Latinos and 396 non-Hispanic whites between January 4 and January 30, 2006. Findings show that undocumented immigrants had relatively low incomes and were less likely to have medical insurance; experience a number of stresses in their lives; and underutilize medical services when compared to legal immigrants and citizens. Predictors of use of medical services are found to include undocumented immigration status, medical insurance, education, and gender. Undocumented Latinos were found to use medical services less than legal immigrants and citizens, and to rely more on clinic-based care when they do seek medical services.

BackgroundRecurrent operational problems in teaching clinics may be caused by the different medical preferences of patients, residents, faculty, and administrators. These preference differences can be identified by cultural consensus analysis (CCA), a standard anthropologic tool.ObjectiveThis study tests the exportability of a unique CCA tool to identify site-specific operational problems at 5 different VA teaching clinics.DesignWe used the CCA tool at 5 teaching clinics to identify group preference differences between the above groups. We averaged the CCA results for all 5 sites. We compared each site with the averages in order to isolate each site's most anomalous responses. Major operational problems were independently identified by workgroups at each site. Cultural consensus analysis performance was then evaluated by comparison with workgroup results.ParticipantsTwenty patients, 10 residents, 10 faculty, members, and 10 administrators at each site completed the CCA. Workgroups included at minimum: a patient, resident, faculty member, nurse, and receptionist or clinic administrator.ApproachCultural consensus analysis was performed at each site. Problems were identified by multidisciplinary workgroups, prioritized by anonymous multivoting, and confirmed by limited field observations and interviews. Cultural consensus analysis results were compared with workgroup results.ResultsThe CCA detected systematic, group-specific preference differences at each site. These were moderately to strongly associated with the problems independently identified by the workgroups. The CCA proved to be a useful tool for exploring the problems in depth and for detecting previously unrecognized problems.ConclusionsThis CCA worked in multiple VA sites. It may be adapted to work in other settings or to better detect other clinic problems.

Latina reproduction and fertility have become ground zero in a political war-not just of words, but of public policies and laws. This article builds on a theoretical framework that includes issues of stratified reproduction, which characterize some women as reproductive threats to society. From an examination of the discourse found in 10 national magazines over a 35-year period, beginning in 1965, emerge three interrelated themes concerning Latina reproductive threat: 1) high fertility and population growth: 2) reconquest: and 3) overuse of medical and other social services. The final section examines data on reproduction and fertility collected from Latinas and Anglo women in Orange County, California to explore the "truth claims" associated with Latina reproduction and fertility. The findings suggest that Latinas do not begin sexual activities at a relatively early age nor do they have relatively more sexual partners than Anglo women. Most Latinas have used birth control pills at some point in their lives. Latinas generally have fewer than two children per woman. Mexican-origin women born or raised in the United States had fewer children than adult immigrants, and their differences from Anglo women were insignificant. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression finds that age, marital status, education, and language acculturation are more important than ethnicity for understanding fertility. © 2004 by the Society for Applied Anthropology.

Some problems in clinic function recur because of unexpected value differences between patients, faculty, and residents. Cultural consensus analysis (CCA) is a method used by anthropologists to identify groups with shared values. After conducting an ethnographic study and using focus groups, we developed and validated a CCA tool for use in clinics. Using this instrument, we identified distinct groups with 6 important value differences between those groups. An analysis of these value differences suggested specific and pragmatic interventions to improve clinic functioning. The instrument has also performed well in preliminary tests at another clinic.

Using data from a 1996/1997 survey of undocumented Latino immigrants in four sites, we examine reasons for coming to the United States, use of health care services, and participation in government programs. We find that undocumented Latinos come to this country primarily for jobs. Their ambulatory health care use is low compared with that of all Latinos and all persons nationally, and their rates of hospitalization are comparable except for hospitalization for childbirth. Almost half of married undocumented Latinos have a child who is a U.S. citizen. Excluding undocumented immigrants from receiving government-funded health care services is unlikely to reduce the level of immigration and likely to affect the well-being of children who are U.S. citizens living in immigrant households.

The study evaluated a theory-based breast cancer control program specially developed for less acculturated Latinas. The authors used a quasi-experimental design with random assignment of Latinas into experimental (n = 51) or control (n = 37) groups that completed one pretest and two posttest surveys. The experimental group received the educational program, which was based on Bandura's self-efficacy theory and Freire's empowerment pedagogy. Outcome measures included knowledge, perceived self-efficacy, attitudes, breast self-examination (BSE) skills, and mammogram use. At posttest 1, controlling for pretest scores, the experimental group was significantly more likely than the control group to have more medically recognized knowledge (sum of square [SS] = 17.0, F = 6.58, p < .01), have less medically recognized knowledge (SS = 128.8, F = 39.24, p < .001), greater sense of perceived self-efficacy (SS = 316.5, F = 9.63, p < .01), and greater adeptness in the conduct of BSE (SS = 234.8, F = 153.33, p < .001). Cancer control programs designed for less acculturated women should use informal and interactive educational methods that incorporate skill-enhancing and empowering techniques.

We conducted a telephone survey of randomly selected Latinas (n = 208) and Anglo women (n = 222) to determine predictors of mammography use. The cooperation rate was 78.5%. Relatively high proportions of Latinas (61%) and Anglo women (79%) reported mammography use within the past 2 years. A logistic regression analysis revealed that knowledge and attitudes did not independently predict use. On the other hand, having health insurance, being married, and being Latino were consistent independent predictors. We conclude that mammography use among Latinas and Anglo women is increasing. However, further gains in use must address difficult barriers such as lack of health insurance.

This paper examines how physicians' beliefs about risk factors for cervical cancer compare with Mexican and Salvadoran immigrant women's views (hereafter Latina immigrants). Between August 15, 1991 and August 15, 1992, we conducted ethnographic interviews with 39 Mexican immigrant women, 28 Salvadoran immigrant women, and 30 physicians in northern Orange County, California. Physicians and Latina immigrants converge on their beliefs that sexual behavior is a predominant risk factor for cervical cancer. They diverge, however, on their reasons. Latina immigrants' perceptions of health risks are embedded in a larger set of cultural values centering around gender relations, sexuality, and morality. Latina immigrants also emphasized men's behavior as risk factors. Physicians' views, on the other hand, are largely based on the epidemiology of cervical cancer risk factors. They emphasized beginning sexual relations at an early age, multiple sexual partners, and infection with sexually transmitted viruses. Some physicians, however, displayed moral interpretations of the sex-based risk factors for cervical cancer through the use of the culturally-loaded term "promiscuous" in place of "multiple sexual partners," through specific references to morality, and through characterizations of women at risk for cervical cancer. Both the physicians and the Latina immigrants in our study paid considerably less attention to socioeconomic factors. Our results have important implications for physicians who provide health care for Latina immigrants. Physicians should be clear to point out that women need not be "promiscuous" to get cervical cancer.

This article reports on a study of perceptions of breast and cervical cancer risk factors among 27 U.S.-born Chicanas, 39 Mexican and 28 Salvadoran immigrants, 27 Anglo women, and 30 physicians in northern Orange County, California. In open-ended responses explaining why women might be at risk for both cancers, Latinas expressed two general themes: physical stress and trauma to the body, and behavior and lifestyle choices. Interviewees ranked the specific risk factors that they themselves mentioned. Cultural consensus of ranked data revealed that Mexican and Salvadoran immigrants had a model of cancer risks that was different from those of Anglo women and physicians. U.S.-born Chicanas were bicultural in their views, which overlapped with both Mexican women's and Anglo women's views, but less so with physicians' views. Comparing views about the two cancers revealed that general themes apply across both cancers, that Latina immigrants agreed less on the risk factors for cervical cancer than for breast cancer, and that there is a consistent pattern in the different ways Latinas, Anglos, and physicians perceive risk factors for both cancers.

Recent theory in anthropology has increasingly been concerned with issues of power. Anthropology also has a long history of interest in variation in cultural knowledge, which, we argue, benefits from attention to power relations. To show this, we examine perceptions of breast cancer risk factors among physicians. Although physicians share a general cultural model of breast cancer risk factors, variation exists, especially between university-based physicians and community-based physicians. The nature of the work performed in these two settings influences the acquisition of various sources of information and frames what is considered valid information. Similar to Foucault's argument, we find that physicians working in a university setting are more disciplined in discussing their perceptions of breast cancer risk factors, compared to community-based physicians, who move away from the centers of knowledge and power (universities).

Using logistic regression, this article tests the relative importance of the “imagined community” on the intentions of undocumented immigrants to stay in the United States. The argument is that, everything else being equal, imagining oneself as part of a local community is a powerful influence on settlement. If for whatever reason, an undocumented immigrant comes to this self‐perception, then he or she is likely to desire to stay in the community. The results clearly underscore the importance of feeling part of the community. Not only is the influence on the dependent variable statistically significant, but the odds ratio indicates that those who feel part of the local community are almost four times (Mexicans) or almost five times (Central Americans) as likely to intend to stay permanently in the United States as those who do not. 1994 American Anthropological Association

This article argues that, because they accumulate economic and social linkages to U.S. society, many undocumented Mexican and Central American immigrants intend to stay in the United States and imagine themselves to be part of the community. However, because the larger society views them as outsiders, undocumented settlers cannot be fully incorporated into the larger society. They remain marginal members of the community, continually seeking an end to their liminal status. 1991 American Anthropological Association

Examines variation in coresidence among undocumented Mexican and Central American immigrants in San Diego (California). Proposes that by creatively forming and reforming coresident groups, undocumented immigrants use social organization strategically and effectively as a resource to assist them in their struggle to live and work in the United States. (AF)

This paper examines survey data gathered from 2103 Mexican immigrants living or working in San Diego County, California, in order to explore four fundamental questions concerning the utilization of health services: (a) What type of health services do Mexican immigrants use? (b) When hospitals are used, do they tend to be emergency room services? (c) Do Mexican immigrants use preventive services? (d) To what extent do the utilization patterns of undocumented immigrants differ from their legally-immigrated counterparts? The socioeconomic profile of the sample is characterized through analysis of variables such as sex, age, length of residence in the U.S., occupation and income. Mexican immigrants, particularly the undocumented, are relatively young compared to the non-immigrant population, of short duration in the U.S. and earn low income. In addition, undocumented and legally-immigrated respondents are covered by medical insurance at rates far below the general population. Mexican immigrants, including the undocumented, use a variety of health services. Hospital services are not the primary source of care. However, when undocumented respondents did use hospital services, they were more likely to use emergency room care than their legally-immigrated counterparts, who were more likely to use out-patient services. Finally, undocumented respondents tended to neglect preventive services as evidenced by examination of the use of pre-natal care, general check-ups and dental services.

This paper examines the case of Mexican immigrants in the United States and their access to medical services within a political economy of health framework. Such an approach stresses that the provision of health care is independent of health factors per se and that access to health care is not equally distributed throughout a population. The first section reviews the three major concepts influencing medical anthropologists working within a political economy framework: the social origins of illness; the allocation of health resources; and fieldwork in Third World countries. The analysis then focuses upon the reasons for limiting immigrants' access to health care, followed by an examination of the socioeconomic characteristics of Mexican immigrants, including an undocumented immigration status, which limit their access to health care. Finally, the consequences of limited access to health services are suggested, including a low utilization of preventive health services resulting from the high cost of care combined with the immigrants' generally low income, lack of medical insurance and fear of using U.S. health services.

The limited empirical data available on maternal health problems among Mexican immigrant women in the United States suggest that they underutilize health services, especially general preventive care. Research conducted among legal and undocumented women in the Mexican immigrant population in San Diego, California, support these findings. Among undocumented mothers, 11.5% of their births in the U.S. occurred with no prenatal care or care sought in the third trimester, which is much higher than Mexican women legally in the country (3.6%) and the general San Diego maternal population (3.8%). When we examine births which occurred within the last five years by immigration status, we find that women legally in the country have a much higher rate of cesarean delivery of both undocumented women and women in the general San Diego maternal population. Undocumented women in our sample were much less likely than their legal counterparts to return for postpartum examinations for themselves, to seek neonatal care for their infants, and to have had Pap examinations or carry out breast self-examinations.

Resentment in anti-immigrant and anti-Latino political rhetoric often focuses on perceived demographic changes, white population decline, and economic decline. Resentimiento, by contrast, connotes disgust and anger at mistreatment through hostile words or acts such as those conveyed in negative political rhetoric. To explore the nature of resentimiento, Mexican-origin students at a California university were shown samples of negative (N = 95) or positive (N = 93) statements and visual images about immigrants and Latinos. Their written responses to the negative rhetoric included anger and sadness, feelings of being stigmatized, and bodily reactions. Participants argued that the negative rhetoric suffered from overgeneralizations, racism, and misinformation, and that it failed acknowledge why people migrate, the valiant struggles of families to secure a better life, and the contributions of Latinos and immigrants to US society. The students recast the negative rhetoric as a flawed and inadequate source of representation and knowledge about them, their families, and their communities. They denied the rhetoric's epistemological efficacy while at the same time recognizing the emotional toll of being its target. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]