Search

People with pedophilia (PWP) can deal with their sexual desires by relieving sexual arousal without sexually exploiting children. Study 1 investigated whether public reactions toward nonoffending pedophilic men are affected by their strategies to relieve sexual arousal (nonsexual pictures vs. child sex dolls) or to reduce their sex drive via testosterone lowering medication in legally nonproblematic ways. A sample of German-speaking participants (N = 143) read three vignettes describing PWP using either of these strategies. Participants' (59.4% females) mean age was 39.7 (SD = 15.6). Although no significant difference was detected between the nonsexual pictures and sex dolls conditions on cognitive (except for dangerousness), affective, and behavioral levels, both consistently elicited more stigmatizing reactions than the testosterone-lowering medication condition. To investigate if this effect was driven by disapproving any relief of sexual arousal or the use of actual child stimuli in particular, Study 2 (N = 151) added two conditions with PWP using adult child-like stimuli to relieve sexual arousal: adult-as-schoolgirl porn and adult partner with childlike appearance. Here, Participants' (57.6% females) mean age was 28.0 (SD = 13.3). Results indicate that stigmatization was driven by disapproving the use of child stimuli rather than the relief of sexual arousal in general. Individuals with a sexual interest in children face strong stigmatizing reactions, which are only alleviated when they are described as undergoing treatment lowering sex drive or – to a lesser extent – being able to mate with an adult partner or using porn with adult actors posing as schoolgirls. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This study investigated the reasons why pedohebephilic clients disclose their sexual attraction to children in therapy and the experiences associated with this decision among English-speaking samples. Method: The pre-registered online survey combined (1) quantitative correlational data of self-reported improvement, alliance, therapist reaction to disclosure, and the belief that mandatory reporting laws were in place, and (2) qualitative data about reasons for disclosure or no disclosure as well as perceived consequences. The sample consisted of pedohebephilic people who have been clients in therapy and have disclosed (n = 96) or not disclosed (n = 40). Results: While the disclosure and no disclosure groups did not differ in improvement or beliefs about mandatory reporting, those who had disclosed reported a stronger alliance. Clients who did not perceive the therapist's reaction as supportive reported less improvement than the no disclosure group. Thematic analysis of qualitative data identified three themes concerning motives for disclosing or not disclosing and a fourth regarding differential impacts of disclosure. Discussion: This study indicates that disclosing pedohebephilia does not in and of itself lead to improvement but is contingent on a therapist's reaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

National military and veteran service organizations (MVSOs) have the potential to be advocates for stronger military tobacco control. This study consisted of qualitative analysis of interviews with 5 MVSO leaders (or their designees) and 6 focus groups conducted with veterans, to explore the opinions of MVSO leaders and veterans about military tobacco use and tobacco control policy, and to assess their current knowledge, attitudes, and likelihood of engaging with civilian tobacco control. Themes discussed include the impact of tobacco use on the military mission and on veterans; the possibility of stronger military tobacco control policies; and the idea that such policies would affect the rights of military personnel. Participants considered whether tobacco use impacts the military mission in the most literal sense (e.g., giving away patrol locations), ignoring larger scale effects on long term health and costs. While familiar with tobacco's impacts on veterans' health, MVSO leaders did not endorse stronger policies, although some veterans did. Participants were largely unaware of the impact of tobacco use on military readiness. Establishment of better alliances among MVSOs and civilian public health groups for mutual education about tobacco's many negative effects on the military's mission may be necessary to achieve a tobacco-free military.

BackgroundTobacco pricing impacts use, yet military retailers sell discounted cigarettes. No systematic research has examined how military retail stores use internal community comparisons to set prices. We analysed data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request on community price comparisons used by military retail to set cigarette prices.MethodsData on cigarette prices were obtained directly from military retailers (exchanges) from January 2013 to March 2014. Complete pricing data were obtained from exchanges on 114 military installations.ResultsThe average price for a pack of Marlboro cigarettes in military exchanges was US$5.51, which was similar to the average lowest community price (US$5.45; mean difference=-0.06; p=0.104) and almost a US$1.00 lower than the average highest price (US$6.44). Military retail prices were 2.1%, 6.2% and 13.7% higher than the lowest, average and highest community comparisons, respectively, and 18.2% of exchange prices violated pricing instructions. There was a negative correlation (r=-0.21, p=0.02) between the number of community stores surveyed and exchange cigarette prices.ConclusionsThere was no significant difference between prices for cigarettes on military installations and the lowest average community comparison, and in some locations, the prices violated Department of Defense (DoD) policy. US Marine Corps exchanges had the lowest prices, which is of concern given that the Marines also have the highest rates of tobacco use in the DoD. Given the relationship between tobacco product prices and demand, a common minimum (or floor) shelf price for tobacco products should be set for all exchanges and discount coupon redemptions should be prohibited.

BackgroundTobacco use among members of the US military service is unacceptably high, resulting in substantial healthcare and personnel costs. Support of military command is critical to the success of tobacco control policies because line commanders are responsible for implementation and enforcement. This study is the first to examine US military line commanders' perspectives about current tobacco control policies and the impact of tobacco on readiness.MethodsWe conducted key-informant interviews with 20 officers at the US Army's Command and General Staff College about military tobacco use and tobacco control policy.ResultsParticipants identified the long-term impact of tobacco use on military members, but were unaware of proximal effects on health and readiness other than lost productivity due to smoke breaks. Officers also discussed nicotine addiction and the logistics of ensuring that an addicted population had access to tobacco. Regarding policy, most knew about regulations governing smoke-free areas and were open to stronger restrictions, but were unaware of current policies governing prevention, intervention and product sales.ConclusionsFindings suggest that strong policy that takes advantage of the hierarchical and disciplined nature of the military, supported by senior line and civilian leadership up to and including the secretaries of the services and the Secretary of Defense, will be critical to substantially diminishing tobacco use by military personnel.

ObjectivesAlthough the United States Air Force (USAF) has been a leader in efforts to reduce tobacco use among service members, tobacco continues to be a problem and initiatives to decrease tobacco use further require buy-in from leadership. We explored line leaderships' perspectives on tobacco.MethodsA diverse group of 10 senior commissioned and 10 non-commissioned personnel were interviewed.ResultsRespondents reported substantial changes in the culture of tobacco use during their years of service, from near ubiquity to restricted use areas. They also perceived mixed messages coming from the USAF, including simultaneous discouragement of and accommodations for tobacco use, and variability in policies and enforcement. Many respondents indicated that allowing tobacco use creates conflict and undermines military discipline and suggested that a tobacco-free policy would be the best way to eliminate these contradictions.ConclusionAlthough there has been substantial movement away from a culture of tobacco in the USAF, current policies and variable enforcement of these policies create unnecessary contradictions. Establishing a tobacco-free service would resolve these issues in addition to improving the health of service members and veterans.

IntroductionHigher tobacco taxes reduce tobacco use. On military installations, cigarettes and other tobacco products are sold tax-free, keeping prices artificially low. Pricing regulations in the military specify that tobacco should be within 5% of the local most competitive price, but prices still average almost 13% lower than those at local Walmarts.MethodsTo gain insight into policy leaders' ideas and positions on military tobacco pricing, we interviewed members of the Department of Defense (DoD) Addictive Substances Misuse Advisory Committee and the Advisory Committee on Tobacco about tobacco pricing policies (n = 12).ResultsParticipants frequently lacked specific knowledge of details of military pricing policy, and the impact higher prices might have on military tobacco use. Most participants thought tobacco should not be sold at military stores, but many also felt that this policy change was unlikely due to tobacco industry pressure, and DoD reliance on tobacco profits to support Morale, Welfare, and Recreation funds.ConclusionsAchieving a tobacco-free military will require changing pricing policy, but this study suggests that for effective implementation, military leadership must also understand and articulate more clearly the rationale for doing so.ImplicationsPrevious work has found that adherence to military tobacco pricing policy is inconsistent at best. This study suggests that lack of knowledge about the policy and conflicting pressures resulting from the funding stream tobacco sales represent extend to high level military policy leaders. Without clearer information and direction, these leaders are unlikely to be able to establish and implement better tobacco pricing policy.

BackgroundTobacco pricing impacts use, yet military retailers sell discounted cigarettes. No systematic research has examined how military retail stores use internal community comparisons to set prices. We analysed data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request on community price comparisons used by military retail to set cigarette prices.MethodsData on cigarette prices were obtained directly from military retailers (exchanges) from January 2013 to March 2014. Complete pricing data were obtained from exchanges on 114 military installations.ResultsThe average price for a pack of Marlboro cigarettes in military exchanges was US$5.51, which was similar to the average lowest community price (US$5.45; mean difference=-0.06; p=0.104) and almost a US$1.00 lower than the average highest price (US$6.44). Military retail prices were 2.1%, 6.2% and 13.7% higher than the lowest, average and highest community comparisons, respectively, and 18.2% of exchange prices violated pricing instructions. There was a negative correlation (r=-0.21, p=0.02) between the number of community stores surveyed and exchange cigarette prices.ConclusionsThere was no significant difference between prices for cigarettes on military installations and the lowest average community comparison, and in some locations, the prices violated Department of Defense (DoD) policy. US Marine Corps exchanges had the lowest prices, which is of concern given that the Marines also have the highest rates of tobacco use in the DoD. Given the relationship between tobacco product prices and demand, a common minimum (or floor) shelf price for tobacco products should be set for all exchanges and discount coupon redemptions should be prohibited.

Achieving a tobacco-free military requires rethinking current perceptions of service members' tobacco use and unmasking the forces perpetuating those perceptions. Prohibiting tobacco use would be entirely consistent with other military requirements regarding health.

Objectives Despite increasing attention to the occupational impact of firefighting, little is known specific to the health of women firefighters. In particular, quantitative data is lacking on the impact firefighting has on maternal and child health for women who become pregnant while working as firefighters. Methods A total of 1821 women firefighters responded to requests to complete a self-report survey of questions about pregnancy. Women answered questions about their departments' policies and practices and their own experiences of pregnancy. Those participants who reported a pregnancy while serving as a firefighter were asked detailed questions about their pregnancy and outcomes. Results Female firefighters reported that nearly a quarter of their first pregnancies while in the fire service ended in miscarriage and that increased to a third of pregnancies by the fourth. Rates of pre-term delivery also were high among this population. Conclusions Findings have important implications for policy and practice among women who become pregnant while actively serving in the fire service., Author(s): Sara A. Jahnke [sup.1] , Walker S. C. Poston [sup.1] , Nattinee Jitnarin [sup.1] , Christopher K. Haddock [sup.1] Author Affiliations: (Aff1) 0000 0004 0442 0766, grid.276773.0, Center for [...]