If We Build It,They Will Come: Exploring Policy and Practice Implications of Public Support for Couple and Relationship Education for Lower Income and Relationally Distressed Couples

Over the past decade, public funding for Couple and Relationship Education programs has expanded. As program administrators have been able to extend their reach to low‐income individuals and couples using this support, it has become apparent that greater numbers of relationally distressed couples are attending classes than previously anticipated. Because psychoeducational programs for couples have traditionally served less distressed couples, this dynamic highlights the need to examine the policy and practice implications of more distressed couples accessing these services. This paper reviews some of the most immediate issues, including screening for domestic violence and couple needs, pedagogical considerations, and the potential integration of therapy and education services. We also make suggestions for future research that can inform policy and practice efforts.     

On Murray Jackson's 1961 ‘Chair,couch and countertransference’

One of the problems facing psychoanalysts of all schools is that theory has evolved at a much faster pace than practice. Whereas there has been an explosion of theory, practice has remained, at least officially, static and unchanging. It is in this sense that Murray Jackson's 1961 paper is still relevant today. Despite the rise of the new relational and intersubjective paradigms, most psychoanalysts, and not a few Jungian analysts, still seem to feel that the couch is an essential component of the analytical setting and process. If the use of the couch is usually justified by the argument that it favours regression, facilitates analytical reverie and protects the patient from the influence of the analyst, over time many important psychoanalysts have come to challenge this position. Increasingly these analysts suggest that the use of the couch may actually be incompatible with the newer theoretical models. This contention is strengthened by some of the findings coming from the neurosciences and infant research. This underlines the necessity of empirical research to verify the clinical effectiveness of these different positions, couch or face‐to‐face, but it is exactly this type of research that is lacking.     

Race for Power in Public Good Games with Unequal,Unstable Punishment Power

Decentralized punishment can maintain contributions to a public good at a high level. This positive effect holds even for situations involving inequality in punishment power, meaning that the relative costs for punishment differ between persons. We extend this line of research by examining the additional influence of instability of and thus potential competition for punishment power in public good experiments. As in previous research, inequality is operationalized by assigning the role of a ‘strong player’ to one group member, who can punish others at a reduced cost compared to other players. Instability is operationalized by the fact that the role assignment can change across rounds and is contingent on behavior in previous rounds. Three experiments show that under unequal, unstable (punishment‐) power, individuals behave more competitively and engage in a race for power resulting in detrimental effects for the group. Specifically, we find that (i) unstable power goes along with a disproportionate use of punishment; (ii) not inequality by itself but rather the combination of instability and inequality causes this effect; and (iii) this excessive use of punishment is found not only when the role of the strong player is assigned to individuals who previously behaved rather selfishly but also when prosocial behavior leads to the top, speaking for a generalizability of our findings. Implications for organizational settings are discussed. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

One ring to rule them all: Master discourses of enlightenment—and racism—from colonial to contemporary New Zealand

We interrogated historical continuity and change in discourses of enlightenment and racism through the analysis of 160 years of New Zealand Speeches from the Throne (1854–2014, 163 speeches). Enlightenment discourses of benevolence and perfectibility were prevalent in all periods, much more so than racism. ‘Old‐fashioned’ racism took the form of an assumed civilizational superiority (including accusations of ‘barbarism’) during colonization, with ‘modern’ racism taking forms like blaming Māori for not ‘productively’ using the land. Both declined to almost zero by the 20th century, undermining the idea of ‘old‐fashioned’ versus ‘modern’ racism. Utilitarian discourses peaked in the late 19th to early 20th centuries as justification for Māori land alienation. ‘Master discourses of enlightenment’ consisted of a central core of social representations that changed at the periphery, with a gradual expansion of symbolic inclusion of Māori in discourses of national identity to the point where biculturalism is the dominant discourse for elites today.     

My father,Herbert Rosenfeld

Abstract

This is the modified version of the powerpoint that Angela Rosenfeld, the elder daughter of Herbert Rosenfeld (1910–1986) – one of Melanie Klein's most important collaborators – presented in Nuremberg, his native town, on October 5, 2014, upon the invitation of the German Psychoanalytic Society (DPG). In it, Angela Rosenfeld reconstructs not only her father's main life events, but also her personal relationship to him and the family climate in which she grew up. The traumas brought about by Hitler's rise to power in 1933 are partly still reflected in the holes and/or open questions that the author herself became aware of while writing and presenting the paper – and which profoundly touched and moved her audience.     

Developing a Model of Advanced Training to Promote Career Advancement for Certified Genetic Counselors: An Investigation of Expanded Skills,Advanced Training Paths,and Professional Opportunities

There are currently multiple paths through which genetic counselors can acquire advanced knowledge and skills. However, outside of continuing education opportunities, there are few formal training programs designed specifically for the advanced training of genetic counselors. In the genetic counseling profession, there is currently considerable debate about the paths that should be available to attain advanced skills, as well as the skills that might be needed for practice in the future. The Association of Genetic Counseling Program Directors (AGCPD) convened a national committee, the Committee on Advanced Training for Certified Genetic Counselors (CATCGC), to investigate varied paths to post-master’s training and career development. The committee began its work by developing three related grids that view career advancement from the viewpoints of the skills needed to advance (skills), ways to obtain these skills (paths), and existing genetic counselor positions that offer career change or advancement (positions). Here we describe previous work related to genetic counselor career advancement, the charge of the CATCGC, our preliminary work in developing a model through which to view genetic counselor advanced training and career advancement opportunities, and our next steps in further developing and disseminating the model.     

“Be Prepared if I Bring It Up:” Patients’ Perceptions of the Utility of Religious and Spiritual Discussion During Genetic Counseling

As debates continue about the relevance of religion to health care, research is needed to guide decisions about whether genetic counselors (GCs) should routinely address religious and/or spiritual (R/S) issues with their patients. We conducted an online survey to gauge patient perspectives on this issue. Among the 70 respondents, frequencies of closed-ended responses and thematic analyses of open-ended responses revealed multiple patient concerns related to R/S discussions with GCs. Although 60 respondents reported being R/S, only a small minority would want to discuss R/S issues if it meant less time discussing medical information. Most respondents also expressed opinions that: 1) genetic counseling should be about science; 2) GCs are not qualified to discuss R/S issues; 3) other outlets are available to meet the needs of patients who want R/S counseling; and/or 4) R/S discussions are more likely to be acceptable if patients broach the topic or in specific circumstances (e.g., when patients are facing end-of life issues). Overall, responses suggest routine or comprehensive R/S assessments or discussions are not necessary and that GCs would be best equipped to help all their patients if they were prepared to listen, be supportive, and make referrals when R/S issues arise in clinic.