You are here: American University College of Arts & Sciences Sociology Center on Health, Risk, and Society

Center on Health, Risk, and Society

Who We Are

The American University Center on Health, Risk, and Society (CHRS) supports a thriving multi-disciplinary community of scholars that conducts research on health and health-related issues using the tools and lens of social science. We augment work done in the public health and medical fields by focusing on the social and structural contexts that produce health and health-related inequities.

Our emphasis on the social and structural dimensions of health and risk builds on the growing recognition that more traditional approaches to health targeting individual behaviors or those that focus on biomedical technologies (such as medicines, vaccines, or clinical practices) have had limited and/or short-term effects and consequently, have not reached those in greatest need. Addressing health and health-related inequities requires understanding health as constituted by social, cultural, economic, political, and historical processes.

What We Do

(C)onvene: CHRS brings together AU faculty and affiliated experts to examine health and health-related issues that span disciplines, methodological approaches and analysis levels to stimulate and sustain multi-disciplinary research.

(H)arness: CHRS ensures AU faculty and affiliated experts have the strategic resources to be successful in securing, implementing, and maintaining externally-funded research.

(R)each: CHRS fosters impact and visibility by offering assistance to AU-affiliated faculty in conceptualizing, designing, and disseminating their research agendas, projects, and outputs.

(S)ustain: In these ways and more, CHRS helps sustain a vibrant, multidisciplinary community with a shared commitment to achieving health equity.
 

Research Areas

CHRS scholars focus on five key areas and their intersections with structural inequities related (but not limited) to race, gender, income, ability and citizenship. Some of the topics which are addressed in these key areas are listed below (these lists are not exhaustive):

  • Sex, Sexuality, and Reproduction (e.g., Reproductive politics/health/aging, LGBTQI health, HIV/AIDS)
  • Migration, Displacement, and Disruption (e.g., Immigrant/migrant/refugee health, Deportation, Homelessness, Gentrification)
  • Violence and the Carceral State (e.g., Surveillance, Mass incarceration, Inter/Intra personal violence, Gun violence)
  • Wellbeing and Social Belonging (e.g., Aging and later life course, Intergenerational relationships, Mental health, Substance use)
  • Environment, Climate, and Place (e.g., Environmental justice, Food insecurity, Occupational health and safety, Community mobilization)


Dr. TaLisa Carter
Assistant Professor at the Department of Justice, Law & Criminology

Interviewer: Jason Davis

Dr. TaLisa Carter

[A] lot of criminologists and psychologists believe that when certain fields talk about trauma, they only look at the negatives but rarely is it discussed as a pathway to something positive. Through interviewing 500 students we found a certain amount of people that said they wanted to work in the criminal justice field because of traumatic early life events like seeing a family member get locked up.

-Dr. TaLisa Carter

Tell me a bit about your research, what can you say about the broad implications of colorism on societal health and risk?

In general, I study accountability and law enforcement, particularly in corrections and incarceration. My studies are funded by the National Institutes of Health. I focus on how employees or former employees who are addicted to opioids while they're incarcerated are connected to medical treatment for individuals that. I also study skin tone and how the shades of your skin impact your perception of justice and the criminal justice system.

So, what we know from literature beyond my own is that across space and time, and across social institutions, darker skinned people are more likely to experience negative and adverse outcomes throughout their lives. This idea is true in K-12 schools, it's true in college university settings, it's true when you're picking a partner i.e. attraction, and who's considered beautiful. It's true for who's more likely to get demoted or it's true of who receives higher salaries. Darker skinned people are just more likely to face negative outcomes altogether. So, in the carceral space, criminal justice space, and criminal legal space, it's also true that darker skinned people face longer sentences, and they're more likely to be assumed to be bad or evil. Overall, the darker your skin the more likely you are to face health issues as a result of racism throughout all societal institutions and life.

Can you tell me about your ongoing research about accountability in the justice system, specifically how accountability ties into the racial aspects of the criminal justice system?

In one of my studies, I found that there is no difference in the rate of punishment between black and white correctional staff when they engage in misconduct. There is, however, a difference in the intensity of punishments among officers, with African American correctional officers facing more intense punishments. So, what my accountability research does is propose theoretical framework to better understand and predict how prison institutions will respond to correctional employee behavior.

If somebody gets shot by the police, or if an incarcerated person gets sexually assaulted by a staff member. In these instances, we always blame individuals. We fire employees, we suspend employees, we punish employees, but we don't really include the institution in the conversation. What is the institution doing that would facilitate people thinking that it's okay, or they might get a pass? Particularly when you think about qualified immunity. All of these things happen where people are punished differently by the institution, even at the academic level, the teacher is more likely to suspend one kid while giving another kid a warning. The institutions are structurally protected by law from being exposed to sanctions and risk. What my research does is bring institutions into the conversation around accountability in a meaningful way. My research also finds that race matters in these situations; it is not something that pops up as statistically significant by happenstance.

How does COVID 19 as it was handled in prisons tie into issues of accountability?

Covid in the prison system was essentially classified as a containment issue. The structure of prisons and jails wasn't set up to handle this kind of sickness or contagion. In prisons, what you saw was they were responding to a stressful and dangerous situation without the structure and infrastructure to support a solid response. That population of incarcerated people are already much more likely to be sick and at risk than any other group of people, because of the conditions in which they live. The conditions in which they live aren't great to begin with, far from it, but COVID definitely exacerbated their living conditions. Then, many carceral institutions were breeding grounds for Covid because individuals go back and forth from prison to the outside world, particularly officers who went home at night, bringing disease back from the public. Essentially, the main point of my research about Covid in the carceral space, was to highlight this part of society that is often overlooked that was being seriously harmed by it. People in the carceral space really had no other options but to sit around and wait to get infected, with the resources and space there was really nothing they could do to prevent it.

Are there any recent publications that you are particularly proud of?

There is one that I published called “F**ked Up”, and that's a really important piece because what it does is blend a theoretical psychological framework and a criminology framework together to demonstrate the motivations behind students that plan to work in the criminal justice system. Mainly, how skin tone and identity influence people planning on working in the system. We ask, why are they motivated to work in the first place? So basically, I am teaching students every day in class that the criminal justice system is not that great, so why do these students still want to work in a system they know is flawed?

Some people say they are just interested in it. Some people are motivated for economic reasons. Though, there are some people that are motivated to go into a place and a system that they already know is broken because they think they can fix it. Some people are also led by their own personal trauma. I was really proud of this finding, because a lot of criminologists and psychologists believe that when certain fields talk about trauma, they only look at the negatives but rarely is it discussed as a pathway to something positive. Through interviewing 500 students, we found a certain number of people that said they wanted to work in the criminal justice field because of traumatic early life events, like seeing a family member get locked up.

What kind of insight did your work as a corrections officer give you about health in the prison system?

So, one of the stories I really like to tell in my classes is that I worked as a personnel officer after I graduated from UPenn with all this interdisciplinary knowledge. I had my degree, and I was really stoked to do real-life work. Then, during my work as a CO, there was this time when this woman who was incarcerated had a toothache. She was really in pain all over her mouth and screaming all night in agony. I was calling down to the medical every hour, asking somebody to come up here, to get somebody to help me, and they were like, “Carter, yeah yeah, we are coming.” Then, I called again, “Okay, Carter, we heard you.” Then I called again, “Carter, like, yo, chill out, like, we'll get there when we get there.” Then I called again, and then finally, “Stop calling, we’ll get there when we get there”. I think I remember that experience so well because, you know, it's a traumatic thing, not being able to help this woman. As an individual, one little link in the system. I wanted to fix it, but I felt so helpless. It gave me perspective that intention doesn't translate to impact.

I was 22 when I graduated from UPenn and went into the field. I'm telling this lady, “Hey, I'm calling, I’m going to get some help, I'm going to get some help” And I couldn't do a thing, I could not do anything. That was a really hard pill to swallow, I knew that I was raised to do what’s right. Though I had on a uniform, and I represented this system and I tried to fight for her, because she needed it. It was an emergency. That experience taught me that it's not just ‘does this place have enough resources?’ When you're actually a part of the system, you realize that you can have all the resources in the world but if the mindset of the individuals that work in a facility aren’t ones that believe in education, or believe in humanity, then it doesn't matter. The right thing won’t get done. The money won't go to the person who needs it. It doesn't matter if somebody was available, they weren't showing up. That's why my research focuses on practitioners instead of the people that are experienced in the system.


Dr. Ernesto Castañeda Associate Professor, American University

Interviewer: Sofia Guerra Oropeza

Dr. Ernesto Castañeda

As scholars, we can study whatever we want; that is the beauty of social science and sociology in particular. We can study anything humans do. It gives us the freedom to choose what to study and what methods we use.

-Dr. Ernesto Castañeda

What inspired you to conduct work on migration, urban issues, health disparities, marginalized populations, and social movements? 

We, as scholars, can study whatever we want and that is the beauty of social science and sociology in particular. You can study anything that humans do. So that could be research on how we talk about science, how we talk about life, how we talk about politics, the economy, how people talk to each other. We have a lot of freedom to do what we do. And I love sociology because you can use any method. It is a very diverse discipline with different approaches. I love that!  

Immigrants are at the hands of unjust structures, and society creates unfair relations between e.g., the U.S. and Latin America. In the U.S. there is this space to talk about collective rights to improve the state of democracy in the nation, but simultaneously a lot of Latinos in the USA don't have rights, just because they were not born here, or came to the country the “wrong way,” even if they have a job and pay taxes. This is not only a big problem for the people who are undocumented because they don't have rights. But how can we call ourselves a democracy when 3% of the population is seen as subhuman? So, part of my work is to try to change the way people think about these issues and negate stereotypes and the dehumanization of immigrants and other stigmatized groups. All so that American citizens can demand that governments do better for minorities, and thus strengthen U.S. democracy and its value of equality. In the end, it's a win-win for the U.S.A. and immigrants.  

In what ways does your work incorporate or apply social science concepts, theories, and/or methods? How do these elements contribute to the understanding of your research?

In the Immigration Lab and the Center for Latin American & Latino Studies (CLALS), we don’t use any one method or theory, in particular. We think in terms of problems, practical conundrums, and policy issues. Not knowing is the driving force of our research. We ask the questions and then find ways to incorporate the best methods to get the needed empirical data. What methods do you use? What data do you use? Well, it depends on which are the best methods to answer the research question at hand. Sometimes it is related to what data is available that can be used in imaginative ways. For example, two students and I finished a report a few days ago based on widely available data on remittances. From there we calculated that immigrants sending remittances home contributed through the gains to their employers at least 2.2 trillion dollars…so close to 10% of the U.S. GDP. That is something that can be part of the public discussion. So, the method that drove this report was a very simple mathematical exercise. It is an exercise that a sixth grader could do, and that's great because then the audience can understand it easily. The real question, which is not easy to answer, is the scale of immigrants’ contributions to the economy.

In what ways has your identity helped to shape the understanding of your work?

A lot. As a Mexican American and Latino living in DC, I am discovering much information just by living my life. I'm learning a lot about El Salvador, Cuba, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela, etc., from Latin Americans living in the DMV. Speaking in Spanish and having friendships with people of other nationalities makes it easier to understand others' Latin identities. It is difficult to understand a new Latin diasporic group, even if we are all Latinos because each national culture is still different, but being Latino makes the “knowledge distance” shorter. Nonetheless, the job of a sociologist is to tell people to think twice about something that is very commonly said, something that people think is true, and be like, be careful- do we really know that? Is that really true? Questioning your own beliefs, or assumptions, or why I think what I think. Some disciplines and some classes tell you not to use “I” or “we” when writing. That you shouldn’t use the first person when you are writing. In my books and articles, I use it all the time because, yeah, at the end of the day, you are the author. Your gender, age, nationality, etc., are going to shape the way you see the world. And it's okay. At the same time, experiential and narrative knowledge should be contrasted and verified with other types of information and with formal research projects.

In what way do you believe that your research is adding to the conversation of health, risk, and societal aspects?

In the health conversation, I’m adding to the conversation about the wisdom of putting Hispanics (and other races and ethnicities) in a “box” or into a category. Hispanics are a very diverse community, so some work that I'm doing is trying to show how creating categories discriminates against people who are not considered to be in these categories. This can affect health policies and access to health care. In an ideal scenario, refining categorization can prevent readers from distorting health disparities research. This helps avoid reinforcing racial stereotypes related to genetics and disease and the biological-centric approaches that overlook the broader social, economic, environmental, and political factors impacting health outcomes. I'm trying to add a theoretical discussion to that conversation.

Then, when it comes to risk, it's something very interesting. I have a book I am working on out of the Critical Social Thought class that I have taught for many years; in that class, we have an ongoing topic theme about how people in the U.S., regardless of origin, tend to try to control everything. We often assume that we can plan for the future and that we can have expectations about the future. That trajectories are linear and can be planned. However, social things are random and unexpected, and we cannot plan them. We have to remember though that a plan is just a guess and approximation. Getting to risk is related to the tendency that we have to think we know what will happen. The pandemic was a great example because it forced us to see that many things are out of our control and are completely unexpected. The pandemic showed us that suddenly we may have to change our everyday life routines. It again became obvious that we depend on other people for things like food. I was hoping that after the pandemic, people would be less determined in planning and forecasting. It’s this teleological thinking that you are going to arrive at this perfect destination soon or eventually, but it's not the case. It is a back-and-forth process. For example, two steps further and then one step back for people's rights, then three steps back. It is not a linear trajectory. Sociologists should be able to understand non-linear trajectories, and that is why it is important that in CHRS, there is that part about risk in the name and approach. It is also about the different probabilities of some illnesses happening to particular demographics.

What advice would you give to a student who wants to conduct research on the areas of your expertise?

That's an easy answer for me, and I tell everybody about it. The best, and maybe the only way to know how to do research, is to do it and revise and do some more research. Not just to take method courses, but to actually get engaged in a research project. And it is not the research that is done for a “research paper” for a class. That is not the type of research that professors are doing for a living. We do much more engaged research, one that is often done in teams, done collectively, sometimes co-authored. It goes through cycles of peer review. A lot of people critique it before it is allowed to see the day of light. So, I invite anybody who is interested, regardless of academic background and existing expertise, to come to work with us in CHRS as well as in the Center for Latin American and Latino Studies or the Immigration Lab.

How to do research is very hard to learn in the abstract. Most people learn it the hard way, such as in a doctoral program, by trial and error. Or once they're in the first job, and failing and feeling bad and thinking, “Oh, I wish somebody had told me that that is the way to do it.” That is the way we do research at the lab and the masters in sociology (SORP). Rather than me talking to you and lecturing about how it should be done, you are part of a team struggling through the research process and receiving and providing continuous feedback. You are not so much my research assistant; you are part of a big team that is doing work over many semesters, and that work may become a book, an article, or a report that maybe one day the media is going to cover because it addresses a problem of general concern in an original and useful manner, reframing the conversation in more productive ways.

How to Get Involved

CHRS welcomes scholars and learners engaged in, or interested in, social science research on health and health-related issues.

  • Faculty Associates and Affiliates 
  • Student Affiliates 
  • Visiting Scholars 

CHRS partners with other centers, departments, and schools across American University and includes faculty and learners from within the College of Arts and Sciences, the School of International Service, the School of Public Affairs, the School of Education, the School of Communication, and the Washington School of Law. Colleagues from George Washington University, Howard University, Georgetown University, the University of Maryland, the DC Center for AIDS Research, and other academic and research institutions in the DC area are also engaged in the CHRS intellectual community.