The Evolving Position of the American Psychiatric Association on Firearm Policy (1993–2014)

Before the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the American Psychiatric Association's position on gun policy reflected the strong gun control perspective championed by the nation's public health establishment. After Heller declared that an individual's right to bear arms is constitutionally protected, the APA refocused its attention on the specific aspects of firearm policy that implicate the interests and rights of persons with mental illness. Psychiatrists are mindful of the need to curtail firearm access by persons with mental disorders that elevate the risk of suicide or violence to others, but they are also opposed to stigmatization, discrimination, and unfair treatment of individuals based on mental illness. Although civil commitment is an acceptable basis for prohibiting access to firearms, other adjudications of conduct indicative of elevated risk should also be included. Every state should provide a fair and reasonable process for restoring firearm rights after a suitable waiting period based on individualized assessment of whether the person remains at an elevated risk. However, restricting firearm rights of persons solely on the basis of a diagnosis of a mental disorder or voluntary treatment, whether in-patient or outpatient, discourages treatment and would be counterproductive. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. (original adopted by the American Psychiatric Association 2014).     

Resource Document on Access to Firearms by People with Mental Disorders

The American Psychiatric Association, (“APA”), with more than 36,000 members at present, is the Nation's leading organization of physicians who specialize in psychiatry. APA provides for education and advocacy and develops policy through Position Statements. It promotes enhanced knowledge of particular topics relevant to psychiatric practice and patient care through Resource Documents. Since 1993, the APA has developed various positions and resource materials related to firearms and mental illness, incorporating evolving themes as new issues emerge. This paper reflects the APA's 2014 Resource Document on “Access to Firearms by People with Mental Disorders.” This article is derived from work done on behalf of American Psychiatric Association and remains the property of APA. It has been altered only in response to the requirements of peer review. Copyright © 2015 American Psychiatric Association. Published with permission (original adopted by the American Psychiatric Association 2014).     

Characteristics of memories for traumatic and nontraumatic birth

Evidence for memory characteristic differences between trauma and other memories in non‐clinical samples is inconsistent. However, trauma is frequently confounded with the event recalled. This study compares trauma and nontrauma memories for the same event, childbirth, in a non‐clinical sample of 285 women 4–6 weeks after birth. None of the women met diagnostic criteria for post‐traumatic stress disorder. Traumatic birth, defined by the DSM‐5 event criterion, was reported by 100 women. The ratings of some memory characteristics did not differ between memories for traumatic and nontraumatic birth: All were rated highly coherent and central to women's lives, with moderate sensory memory. However, women who experienced traumatic births reported more involuntary recall, reliving, and negative/mixed emotions. Thus, trauma memories differed from nontrauma memories. In this non‐clinical sample, this is likely to be due to encoding during trauma rather than the distinctive memory profile for memories retrieved by those experiencing trauma symptoms.     

Development and Evaluation of the Atheist Identity Concealment Scale (AICS)

Journal of Religion and Health - The Atheist Identity Concealment Scale (AICS) was developed as a tool to assess the degree to which atheists conceal their atheist identity from others. Drawing on...     

Couple Relationship Education at the Transition to Parenthood: A Window of Opportunity to Reach High‐Risk Couples

This study evaluated if the transition to parenthood is a window of opportunity to provide couple relationship education (CRE) to new parents at high risk for future relationship problems. Fifty‐three percent of eligible couples approached agreed to participate in CRE and of these 80% had not previously accessed CRE. Couples were a broad representative of Australian couples having their first child, but minority couples were underrepresented. A third of couples had three or more risk factors for future relationship distress (e.g., cohabiting, interpartner violence, elevated psychological distress, unplanned pregnancy). Low education was the only risk factor that predicted drop out. The transition to parenthood is a window of opportunity to recruit certain types of high‐risk couples to CRE.