Valuing life and evaluating suffering in infants with life-limiting illness

Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics - In this paper, we explore three separate questions that are relevant to assessing the prudential value of life in infants with severe life-limiting illness....     

The Darlington Family Assessment Sytem: clinical guidelines for practitioners

The Darlington Family Assessment System (DFAS) consists of a framework of widely accepted concepts, a semi-structured family interview and rating scale, and a detailed account of how to use the system in clinical practice. The model views health issues within a family life-cycle (developmental) framework. It assesses problems at four systemic levels: the child perspective, the parental perspective, the parent-child perspective, and the whole family perspective. The semi-structured interview is designed to see how family members perceive problems and to map out other possible problems, and is a useful basic training tool. Empirical work suggests that the framework of key concepts and the rating scale offer a powerful method for describing and differentiating families. There is evidence that the model is useful as a training method for health professionals undergoing basic training. Detailed clinical guidelines have also been developed, to show how the model can be applied in practice. The advantage of the model is that it can be used with a variety of therapeutic approaches, and to inform choices about which interventions are likely to be successful or not.     

The paradox(es) of pitying and fearing fictions

The acknowledged paradox in our emotional response to fictional characters and events is that the very beliefs required by a cognitive account of the emotions are excluded by knowledge that the context is fictional. Various proposed solutions have failed to reconcile cognitivism with respect to the emotions with the facts of that response. Those offered include denying cognitivism by excluding the belief on the emotions, denying genuine emotional response in these contexts, or advocating either fictional realism or irrationalism in such response. By specifically examining pity and fear this paper tries to reconcile genuine emotional response to fictional characters and events with a unified cognitive account of the emotions by arguing that instead of excluding belief the existential condition on the beliefs in an emotion can be lifted by the invitation to imagine. At the same time it shows that the richness of that response need not be denied and throws some light on further related paradoxes (for instance by indicating why not all emotions are rationally possible in fictive contexts and that although we can pity fictions we cannot rationally fear them). Then by explaining why, unlike in ordinary contexts we do not act on our emotions in fictive ones, it differentiates the reasons for passivity in fictional and in historical circumstances.     

How do we understand empathy systemically?

This paper considers what a systemic understanding of empathy might be in the context of recent developments in systemic approaches. Clinical work is the basis for an exploration of which systemic ideas might be useful in thinking about 'systemic empathy'. The question of whether empathy is inherent in the systemic approach is considered.     

Direct and Indirect Measures of Social Perception,Behavior, and Emotional Functioning in Children with Asperger’s Disorder,Nonverbal Learning Disability,or ADHD

Understanding social interactions is crucial for development of social competence. The present study was one of the first to utilize direct and indirect measures of social perception to explore possible differences among children with nonverbal learning disability (NLD), Asperger’s Syndrome (AS), Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder-Combined (ADHD-C), Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder-Predominately Inattentive (ADHD-PI), and controls (N = 342). Multiple informants provided ratings of the child’s behavioral and social functioning. Results indicated that the NLD and AS groups experienced the most difficulty understanding emotional and nonverbal cues on the direct measure. In addition, children with AS or NLD showed significant signs of sadness and social withdrawal compared to the other groups. Attentional skills, while related to social perception, did not predict social perception difficulties to the same degree as number of AS symptoms.     

Feeling socially powerless makes you more prone to bumping into things on the right and induces leftward line bisection error

Social power affects the manner in which people view themselves and act toward others, a finding that has attracted broad interest from the social and political sciences. However, there has been little interest from those within cognitive neuroscience. Here, we demonstrate that the effects of power extend beyond social interaction and invoke elementary spatial biases in behavior consistent with preferential hemispheric activation. In particular, participants who felt relatively powerless, compared with those who felt more powerful, were more likely to bisect horizontal lines to the left of center, and bump into the right-hand (as opposed to the left-hand) side when walking through a narrow passage. These results suggest that power induces hemispheric differences in visuomotor behavior, indicating that this ubiquitous phenomenon affects not only how we interact with one another, but also how we interact with the physical world.