Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships between (1) employed parents' work–family conflict (WFC), (2) their children with disabilities' support needs, (3) their children's age, and (4) those parents' levels of school engagement.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from 193 US parents of children with disabilities who completed a survey regarding work and family strain as well as school engagement. Descriptive statistical and correlational analyses were used, followed by moderated regression analysis.FindingsResults indicate that higher levels of WFC have a negative impact on parents' school engagement. Similarly, children with disabilities' increased needs for parental support have a negative impact on school engagement. Moreover, the age of children with disabilities holds a moderating role in the relationship between support needs and school engagement.Research limitations/implicationsHuman resource managers can acquire information regarding employed parents of children with disabilities' increased support needs and formalize flexible policies leading to supportive workplace cultures. School personnel can instigate a range of options that facilitate parents' school engagement, such as maximizing use of technology via virtual meetings and activities.Originality/valueThese innovative findings contribute to theoretical underpinnings in work and family strain research as well as conservation of resources theory, given the lack of previous empirical work specific to children with disabilities and their employed parents.

Radiation exposure has long been a concern for the public, policy makers, and health researchers. Beginning with radar during World War II, human exposure to radio-frequency radiation (RFR) technologies has grown substantially over time. In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reviewed the published literature and categorized RFR as a "possible" (Group 2B) human carcinogen. A broad range of adverse human health effects associated with RFR have been reported since the IARC review. In addition, three large-scale carcinogenicity studies in rodents exposed to levels of RFR that mimic lifetime human exposures have shown significantly increased rates of Schwannomas and malignant gliomas, as well as chromosomal DNA damage. Of particular concern are the effects of RFR exposure on the developing brain in children. Compared with an adult male, a cell phone held against the head of a child exposes deeper brain structures to greater radiation doses per unit volume, and the young, thin skull's bone marrow absorbs a roughly 10-fold higher local dose. Experimental and observational studies also suggest that men who keep cell phones in their trouser pockets have significantly lower sperm counts and significantly impaired sperm motility and morphology, including mitochondrial DNA damage. Based on the accumulated evidence, we recommend that IARC re-evaluate its 2011 classification of the human carcinogenicity of RFR, and that WHO complete a systematic review of multiple other health effects such as sperm damage. In the interim, current knowledge provides justification for governments, public health authorities, and physicians/allied health professionals to warn the population that having a cell phone next to the body is harmful, and to support measures to reduce all exposures to RFR.