Childhood Adverse Experience: Yes or No? Mothers' Decision-Making Process When Responding to Survey Questions

The aim of this pilot study was to assess how difficult it is for mothers to answer questions regarding adversities their children might have experienced, and to investigate their considerations in the decision-making process. A nonrepresentative community sample of 628 mothers of 6- to 8-year-old children responded to an online survey. The mothers answered questions regarding adversities, rated the acceptability of these questions, and reported on any difficulties they had in responding. Based on the mothers' reports, qualitative analyses were conducted to identify metacategories of arguments. The study highlights the need for increased awareness of the complexity involved in soliciting information about adverse experiences in research and clinical settings, and for caution in interpreting epidemiological results in this field.     

How Much for the Child?

In this paper we explore what sacrifices you are morally required to make to save a child who is about to die in front of you. It has been argued that you would have very demanding duties to save such a child (or any adult who is in similar circumstance through no fault of their own, for that matter), and some examples have been presented to make this claim seem intuitively correct. Against this, we argue that you do not in general have a moral requirement to bear more than moderate cost to save even a child who is just in front of you. Moreover, we explain why you have a much more demanding moral requirement in certain cases by appealing to the notions of undue risk and cost sharing.     

Rumfitt on the logic of set theory

According to a famous argument by Dummett, the concept of set is indefinitely extensible, and the logic appropriate for reasoning about the instances of any such concept is intuitionistic, not classical. But Dummett's argument is widely regarded as obscure. This note explains how the final chapter of Rumfitt's important new book advances our understanding of Dummett's argument, but it also points out some problems and unanswered questions. Finally, Rumfitt's reconstruction of Dummett's argument is contrasted with my own preferred alternative.     

‘Just is’-Statements as Generalized Identities

Abstract

Identity is ordinarily taken to be a relation defined on all and only objects. This consensus is challenged by Agustín Rayo, who seeks to develop an analogue of the identity sign that can be flanked by sentences. This paper is a critical exploration of the attempted generalization. First the desired generalization is clarified and analyzed. Then it is argued that there is no notion of content that does the desired philosophical job, namely ensure that necessarily equivalent sentences coincide in this kind of content, and such pairs of sentences consequently are on a par with respect to metaphysical explanations.     

Norwegian airline passengers are not more afraid of flying after the terror act of September 11. The flight anxiety,however, is significantly attributed to acts of terrorism

The aim of this paper is to study: (1) the prevalence of flight anxiety among Norwegian airline passengers; (2) situations that may be of concern during flights and situations not related to flying; (3) whether passengers feel more afraid after the terror act of September 11, 2001; and (4) whether passengers were more afraid in 2002 than in 1986.A questionnaire was distributed during domestic flights in Norway in 1986 and 2002. To asses flight anxiety, a six point scale was used, from 0 = not afraid at all, to 5 = always very afraid, and sometimes avoid flying because of that. A 10‐cm visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to measure the degree of anxiety. There were 50.8% who were not afraid at all. There were 12 women (5.2%) and one man (0.4%) with flight phobia. However, 22 (4.5%) had cancelled flights because of anxiety during the last two years. Situations that caused most concern during flights were turbulence and fear of terrorism and highjacking. After September 11, 48% were not more afraid, 38% a little more, 10% moderately, 3% rather much and 2% very much. The passengers, however, were not more afraid of flying in 2002 than in 1986. About 3% of Norwegian airline passengers have a flight phobia. Women are significantly more concerned than men. The impact of the terror act September 11, 2001 was rather moderate. The level of flight anxiety among Norwegian airline passengers was not significantly different in 2002 and 1986.     

Assessments in Psychotherapy with Suicidal Patients: The Precedence of Alliance Work

Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy - In this article the aim was to explore how therapists handle suicide risk assessment in connection with patient’s experience of alliance in...     

THE STUDY AND TREATMENT OF MOTHERS AND INFANTS,THEN AND NOW: MELANIE KLEIN'S “NOTES ON BABY” IN A CONTEMPORARY PSYCHOANALYTIC CONTEXT

This paper draws on Melanie Klein's (unpublished) observational notes of her infant grandson, written primarily in 1938 and 1939. Apart from moving glimpses into a young family's life, the notes contain astute observations of an infant's behavior and emotions. Compared with Klein's published writings, the style is less theoretical and polemical. Later, in his latency years, Klein's grandson was in analysis with Marion Milner, who in 1952 published a paper drawing on the treatment. The present paper focuses on (1) how observations and treatment of the same child and his family by clinicians in close relationships with each other (Klein, Milner, and Winnicott) fertilized reciprocal influence but also brought into question the validity of Klein's observations, and (2) the relative merits and contributions of various modalities in understanding the infant's psyche, including experimental research, direct observation, parent–infant psychotherapy, and reconstructions from older patients—as occurs, for example, in psychoanalysis.     

Friend or foe? Postdivorce hostility among recently divorced individuals

High levels of hostility often occur during and postdivorce and may significantly affect the quality of life, parent–child relationships, and social functioning of divorcees. Moreover, hostility may predict aggressive and violent behavior. This study sought to (a) compare average general hostility levels of a large sample of Danish divorcees to the norms of the general adult Danish population, (b) compare general hostility levels between male and female divorcees, and (c) investigate the explanatory value of various sociodemographic and divorce-related factors on postdivorce general hostility and whether these factors differ across gender. Cross-sectional baseline data (N = 1,856) from a larger randomized controlled trial study was used in this study. Normative data from a general sample of Danish adults (N = 2,040) was used for comparisons of hostility levels between our study sample and the Danish background population. This study found that male and female divorcees did not report significantly different hostility levels. However, participants reported significantly higher hostility levels postdivorce than the comparative Danish norm sample. Significant predictors of postdivorce hostility were lower age, lower educational level, infidelity as a reason for divorce, higher degree of postdivorce conflict, worse communication with the former spouse, the former spouse as the initiator of the divorce, and new partner status with neither divorcees having a new partner, or only the former spouse having a new partner. The predictive strength of the factors did not differ across gender. The findings may be especially relevant for interventions targeting problematic outcomes postdivorce (e.g., preventing aggressive behavior).     

Reliability and validity of the Norwegian translation of the Child Eating Disorder Examination (ChEDE)

Frampton, I., Wisting, L., Øverås, M., Midtsund, M. & Lask, B. (2011). Reliability and validity of the Norwegian translation of the Child Eating Disorder Examination (ChEDE). Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 52, 196–199. The Child Eating Disorder Examination (ChEDE) is a valid and reliable semi‐structured interview, which measures eating‐disorder specific psychopathology in children and young adolescents. The instrument is an adaptation of version 12.0D of the original Eating Disorder Examination (EDE 12.0) for adults. The Norwegian translation of the ChEDE is currently the only instrument for assessing eating disorder psychopathology in Norwegian children and adolescents. This study aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the Norwegian translation of the ChEDE 12.0. The Norwegian version of ChEDE 12.0 was administered to 15 Norwegian children with anorexia nervosa (AN), 15 children with diabetes mellitus type 1 (DM) and two groups of 15 age‐matched controls. The groups were compared using a matched pairs design. The results showed that the subscale scores of the AN group were significantly higher than those of the other groups, and the DM comparison group did not differ from its control group. The current AN group scored significantly higher on the Shape Concern subscale than the previous UK sample, with implications for construct validity or cross‐cultural effects worthy of further study. Inter‐rater reliability was generally high (r = 0.91 to 1.00), although there were significant differences between raters on specific items for individual participants. Alpha coefficients for each of the ChEDE subscales indicated a high degree of internal consistency. It was concluded that the Norwegian version of the ChEDE 12 has adequate psychometric properties and can be recommended for clinical and research use with young people with eating disorders in Norway.