This study examines how a 2013 Arizona law on shared parenting would affect living arrangements, and thus mental health measures. There were two hypotheses. According to the Law Change Hypothesis, it was hypothesized that parenting time in Arizona would be more equal following the 2013 Arizona law change while there would be no change in parenting time in other states following the 2013 Arizona law change. It was further hypothesized that child mental health would be better after the law change in Arizona with no change being seen in other states. Results of this study were almost completely inconsistent with the hypothesis. According to the Law Reflect Hypothesis, the law is actually reflecting the behavior of the community and their thoughts on equal parenting time becoming more favorable, and therefore a change towards more equal parenting time would be found prior to 2013 in Arizona with no change seen in other states. Furthermore, as the Arizona community’s behavior changed, child mental health would be better with no change being seen in other states. Regressions found that a small change toward more equal parenting and closeness with father was prior to 2013 for Arizona students, compared to out-of-state students, although it did not find that the year of divorce resulted in less anxiety, stress, and depression. This partially agrees with past research that the 2013 law is working as intended, even if it started working earlier than we thought. This does not agree with previous research stating there is a connection between equal parenting and better mental health. This is important because this study questions the efficacy of an important and controversial policy. If future studies are consistent with this one, the effectiveness of the Arizona 2013 law change on mental health will need to be further evaluated.

Health and Wealthness is a podcast where your hosts, Emily Weigel and Hanaa Khan discuss pressing and trending topics about health and wealth that everyone should know about. Our first four episodes focus on the opioid crisis. Both the science and healthcare sides. We then go on to talk about burnout and mental health in a conversational episode.

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated alarming increases in psychological distress and alcohol use behaviors and has caused the greatest increases in depression and anxiety symptoms among college students. Prior studies have examined the impact of COVID-19 broadly on mental health and alcohol use outcomes; however, few studies have examined these impacts in college students. Previous studies have examined individual factors that could moderate the relation between COVID-19 related stressors and mental health and alcohol use outcomes, but knowledge is lacking regarding the role of emotion regulation. The present study aimed to examine the role of emotion regulation in the relation between both COVID-19 stressful experiences and COVID-19 related worry and mental health and alcohol use outcomes, and to explore racial/ethnic differences in their associations. Four hierarchical multiple regression models were conducted to assess main effects of COVID-19 stressors and emotion regulation, as well as moderation of the effect of emotion regulation on depression symptoms, anxiety symptoms, alcohol consumption, and alcohol use disorder (AUD) symptoms during the past year. COVID-19 related worry was associated with greater symptoms of both mental health outcomes, whereas COVID-19 related stressful experiences were associated with both mental health outcomes, more alcohol consumption, and more AUD symptoms. Difficulties in emotion regulation had significant main effects on mental health outcomes and AUD symptoms, but not alcohol consumption. Hispanic/Latinx students reported higher experiences of both COVID-19 related stressors, but consumed less alcohol than did White/European students. This study provides further insight into the nature of COVID-19 related stressors and their subsequent impacts. Implications for prevention and intervention on college campuses are discussed.

Suicide is a significant public health problem, with incidence rates and lethality continuing to increase yearly. Given the large human and financial cost of suicide worldwide alongside the lack of progress in suicide prediction, more research is needed to inform suicide prevention and intervention efforts. This study approaches suicide from the lens of suicide note-leaving behavior, which can provide important information on predictors of suicide. Specifically, this study adds to the existing literature on note-leaving by examining history of suicidality, mental health problems, and their interaction in predicting suicide note-leaving, in addition to demographic predictors of note-leaving examined in previous research using data from the National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS, n = 98,515). We fit a logistic regression model predicting leaving a suicide note or not, the results of which indicated that those with mental health problems or a history of suicidality were more likely to leave a suicide note than those without such histories, and those with both mental health problems and a history of suicidality were most likely to leave a suicide note. These findings reinforce the need to tailor suicide prevention efforts toward identifying and targeting higher risk populations.