Caste and COVID-19: Psychosocial disparities amongst rural Indian women during the coronavirus pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated preexisting mental health disparities. In India, marginalization based on caste membership, gender, and rural residence are critical determinants of inequity across the lifespan. Guided by the theoretical frameworks of minority stress and intersectionality, this study examined caste-based disparities in fear of coronavirus (FOC), mental health symptoms, and perceived loneliness amongst rural women in north India during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants (N = 316) completed self-report measures and were classified into three groups based on their responses: General caste (GC, n = 124), other backward castes (OBC, n = 122), and scheduled caste or tribe (SC/ST, n = 71). Using a three-way ANOVA and Tukey t-tests, women in SC/ST and OBC groups reported greater FOC (OBC d = .37; SC/ST d = .40) and greater mental health symptoms (OBC d = .58; SC/ST d = .43) relative to the GC group. OBC, but not SC/ST, group also reported higher perceived loneliness (d = .32). The results were consistent after adjusting for demographic variables such as wealth and highlight caste as an important social determinant for well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic amongst rural Indian women.

DIAGNOSTIC USE OF CRITTENDEN'S ATTACHMENT MEASURES IN FAMILY COURT IS NOT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

We express serious doubt and cautioning regarding Spieker and Crittenden's (2010) claim that attachment measures associated with the dynamic-maturational model of attachment and adaptation (DMM; Crittenden, 2016) can be used for court decision-making. We demonstrate, using Crittenden's and coworkers' (e.g., Spieker & Crittenden, 2010) own data, that such measures have (a) insufficient reliability for use in individual diagnosis and (b) cannot retrodict maltreatment with sufficient sensitivity or specificity for court use. Just as atypical forms of attachment are sometimes observed among children reared adequately, typical (secure or mildly insecure) forms of attachment are sometimes observed among maltreated children and among children of caregivers struggling with psychopathology or socioeconomic adversity. The stakes are high, so it is imperative that court decisions accord with the rule of law. Certainty beyond a reasonable doubt is required, and DMM measures do not meet that requirement.