Alcohol’s Secondhand Harms in the United States: New Data on Prevalence and Risk Factors

Abstract

The data came from 8,750 adult men and women in two parallel 2015 U.S. national surveys conducted in English and Spanish. Both surveys used computer-assisted telephone interviews and two-stage, stratified, list-assisted, random samples of adults ages 18 and older. Results: One in five adults experienced at least one of ten 12-month harms because of someone else's drinking. The prevalence of specific harm types and characteristics differed by gender. Women were more likely to report harm due to drinking by a spouse/partner or family member, whereas men were more likely to report harm due to a stranger's drinking. Being female also predicted family/financial harms. Yo unger age increased risk for all AHTO types, except physical aggression. Being of Black/ other ethnicity, being separated/widowed/divorced, and having a college education without a degree each predicted physical aggression harm. The harmed individual's own heavy drinking and having a heavy drinker in the household increased risk for all AHTO types. The risk for physical aggression due to someone else's drinking was particularly elevated for heavy drinking women. Conclusions: Secondhand effects of alcohol in the United States are substantial and affected by sociodemographics, the harmed individual's own drinking, and the presence of a heavy drinker in the household. Broad-based and targeted public health measures that consider AHTO risk factors are needed to reduce alcohol's secondhand harms.

Association between state‐level alcohol availability and taxation policies on the prevalence of alcohol‐related harms to persons other than the drinker in the USA, 2000–2015

“…Self‐reported, individual‐level covariates included age [categorical, 18–29 years (reference), 30–39 years, 40–49 years, 50–59 years and 60+ years], gender [male vs. female (reference)], race/ethnicity [White (reference) vs. African American, Hispanic/Latino and other racial/ethnic groups], marital status [not married (reference) vs. married or living with a partner] and poverty status [below federal poverty line (reference) vs. income 1–2 times the federal poverty line, and income >2 times the federal poverty line]. The AHTO literature finds that people who are younger, are not married or have low incomes tend to have higher odds of being harmed by drinkers , and the odds of AHTO differ by race/ethnicity . In addition, women are more likely to be harmed by family or friends and to suffer family/financial harms or relationship harms than men .…”

“…The AHTO literature finds that people who are younger, are not married or have low incomes tend to have higher odds of being harmed by drinkers , and the odds of AHTO differ by race/ethnicity . In addition, women are more likely to be harmed by family or friends and to suffer family/financial harms or relationship harms than men . Conversely, men are more likely to be harmed by strangers and to experience physical/aggression‐ or driving‐related harms .…”

“…Therefore, we present models with all three availability policies simultaneously to examine associations with each specific policy. [2, 42,44]. In addition, women are more likely to be harmed by family or friends and to suffer family/financial harms or relationship harms than men [42].…”

“…[2, 42,44]. In addition, women are more likely to be harmed by family or friends and to suffer family/financial harms or relationship harms than men [42]. Conversely, men are more likely to be harmed by strangers and to experience physical/aggression-or driving-related harms [42].…”

“…Conversely, men are more likely to be harmed by strangers and to experience physical/aggression-or driving-related harms [42]. We included a binary (yes/no) indicator of whether respondents have a biological relative who is/was an alcoholic or lived with someone they classified as a 'problem drinker' when growing up, which is associated with higher odds of AHTO later in life [42,45]. We also adjusted for two environmental covariates: county-level poverty and regional drinking.…”