Cooperation or Tension? Dyadic Coping in Cystic Fibrosis

Following a rise in the life expectancy of cystic fibrosis (CF) patients, many adults with CF form couple relationships. Yet, dyadic coping has not been previously examined in people with CF. This study examined how adults with CF and their partners cope as a couple with the illness, and what meanings each partner and the couple as a unit attribute to the experience. Seventeen adult CF patients and their partners participated in separate semi‐structured in‐depth interviews. Two main patterns of dyadic coping with CF were identified as follows: cooperation and tension. For couples in cooperation, the marital relationship served as a resource for adaptive coping. These couples were characterized by similarities in their perception of the place of CF in their lives and of their roles in the marital relationship. Couples in tension described the couple relationship as strained by difficulty of accepting the disease, proliferation of negative emotions, and a sense of burden and loneliness in the process of coping. Findings point to the importance of mutual empathy, clear and accepted division of roles between the partners, and open communication for facilitating coping as a couple.     

Maintenance of Relationship and Individual Functioning Gains Following Online Relationship Programs for Low‐Income Couples

Initial evidence suggests that gains in relationship functioning from brief, web‐based programs are maintained through one year following the intervention; however, whether these results generalize to a low‐income sample is unclear. Furthermore, previous research from in‐person couple therapy suggests there may be different shapes of maintenance slopes for behavioral versus acceptance‐based techniques. This study contacted 668 individuals who enrolled in online behavioral (ePREP) or acceptance‐based (OurRelationship) programs one year following completion of the program. Multilevel modeling was used to examine linear and quadratic rates of change in the year following the online intervention as well as total amount of change from pretreatment to 12‐month follow‐up for both relationship and individual functioning. The majority of couples who responded continued to be in a relationship with the same partner (68.3%). Examinations of relationship functioning indicated couples in both programs maintained their gains over follow‐up (i.e., no significant linear or quadratic changes), with medium‐to‐large within‐group effect sizes from pre‐ to one‐year follow‐up. There were no significant differences in relationship outcomes between OurRelationship and ePREP. Similarly, examinations of individual functioning outcomes indicated couples maintained their gains over follow‐up or continued to improve. In total, couples experienced small‐to‐medium within‐group effect sizes from pretreatment to one‐year follow‐up, with larger effects for individuals who were initially distressed. These results suggest that online programs create lasting change for low‐income couples in relationship and individual functioning, with minimal differences between behavioral and acceptance‐based orientations.     

Adverse caregiving in early life: The trauma and deprivation distinction in young children

Knowledge and understanding about the impact of cumulative adverse experiences on the health and wellbeing of children, adolescents, and adults has rapidly expanded over the past 30 years. Despite the invaluable attention and support this proliferation has drawn to the importance of early childhood experiences, we believe that it is time to move beyond broad indices of risk and toward more specific and individualized understanding of how risk exposures are linked to clinical outcomes in young children. Within infant and early childhood mental health, there is a need for greater specificity in linking adverse caregiving experiences in early life to psychopathology in children. We highlight a framework distinguishing experiences of trauma from experiences of deprivation and use the examples of posttraumatic stress disorder and reactive attachment disorder to demonstrate how greater specificity in our understanding of early adverse caregiving can lead to more accurate and targeted diagnosis and treatment for young children. Both researchers and clinicians benefit from an approach to gain a greater appreciation of the links between specific types of experiences and outcomes in the children that we serve.     

What did mummy say? Dyadic interactions between young "hard to manage" children and their mothers

Thirty preschoolers rated as hard to manage on Goodman's (R. Goodman, 1997) Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), and a group of matched control children were observed and recorded on audiotape at home, interacting with their mothers (Time 1). At the 18-month follow-up home visits (Time 2), the children and mothers were filmed across 4 observation settings. Mother–child interactions were rated on affect, control, responsiveness and connectedness of communication. At Time 1, mothers of the hard to manage group used more negative control and engaged in fewer connected conversations than did mothers in the control group. At Time 2, mothers of the hard to manage group displayed higher levels of negative control and lower levels of positive control. These results are discussed in terms of the importance of examining connected communication and different observation contexts when examining dyadic mother–child interactions.     

Reducing reactive aggression in schoolchildren through child,parent, and conjoint parent‐child group interventions: An efficacy study of longitudinal outcomes

This study was the first to evaluate the effectiveness of three different group interventions to reduce children's reactive aggression based on the social information processing (SIP) model. In the first stage of screening, 3,734 children of Grades 4–6 completed the Reactive–Proactive Aggression Questionnaire (RPQ) to assess their reactive and proactive aggression. Respondents with a total score of z ≥ 1 on the RPQ were shortlisted for the second stage of screening by qualitative interview. Interviews with 475 children were conducted to select those who showed reactive aggression featuring a hostile attributional bias. Finally, 126 children (97 males and 29 females) aged 8 to 14 (M = 9.71, SD = 1.23) were selected and randomly assigned to one of the three groups: a child group, a parent group, and a parent–child group. A significant Time × Intervention effect was found for general and reactive aggression. The parent–child group and child group showed a significant drop in general aggression and reactive aggression from posttest to 6‐month follow‐up, after controlling for baseline scores, sex, and age. However, the parent group showed no treatment effect: reactive aggression scores were significantly higher than those in the child group at 6‐month follow‐up. This study has provided strong evidence that children with reactive aggression need direct and specific treatment to reconstruct the steps of the SIP involving the selection and interpretation of cues. The intervention could help to prevent severe violent crimes at the later stage of a reactive aggressor.     

Stepfamilies Doing Family: A Meta‐Ethnography

The present review examines how stepfamily members without a shared history co‐construct a shared family identity and what family processes are relevant in this stepfamily formation. Three databases (Web of Science, PsycInfo, and ProQuest) were systematically searched, resulting in 20 included qualitative studies. The meta‐ethnography approach of Noblit and Hare allowed synthesizing these qualitative studies and constructing a comprehensive framework of stepfamilies doing family. Three interdependent family tasks were identified: (a) honoring the past, (b) marking the present, and (c) investing in the future. Stepfamily members’ experiences of these family tasks are strongly affected by the dominant societal perspectives and characterized by an underlying dialectical tension between wanting to be like a first‐time family and feeling the differences in their family structure at the same time. These findings clearly demonstrate the family work that all stepfamily members undertake and provide a broader context for interpreting stepfamilies’ co‐construction of a new family identity.     

Clinical Guidelines for Working With Stepfamilies: What Family,Couple, Individual,and Child Therapists Need to Know

This article draws on four decades of research and clinical practice to delineate guidelines for evidence‐informed, clinically sound work with stepfamilies for couple, family, individual adult, and child therapists. Few clinicians receive adequate training in working with the intense and often complex dynamics created by stepfamily structure and history. This is despite the fact that stepfamilies are a fundamentally different family form that occurs world‐wide. As a result many clinicians rely on their training in first‐time family models. This is not only often unhelpful, but all too often inadvertently destructive. The article integrates a large body of increasingly sophisticated research about stepfamilies with the author's four decades of clinical practice with stepfamily relationships. It describes the ways in which stepfamilies are different from first‐time families. It delineates the dynamics of five major challenges stepfamily structure creates: (1) Insider/outsider positions are intense and they are fixed. (2) Children struggle with losses, loyalty binds, and change. (3) Issues of parenting, stepparenting, and discipline often divide the couple. (4) Stepcouples must build a new family culture while navigating previously established family cultures. (5) Ex‐spouses (other parents outside the household) are part of the family. Some available data are shared on the impact of cultural and legal differences on these challenges. A three‐level model of clinical intervention is presented: Psychoeducational, Interpersonal, and Intrapsychic/Intergenerational Family‐of‐Origin. The article describes some “easy wrong turns” for well‐meaning therapists and lists some general clinical guidelines for working with stepfamily relationships.     

Disrupted narrative and narrative symbol

In this article a specific type of narrative, which often appears in analytic sessions, is discussed. It is characterized by a seemingly ordinary, everyday topic and by a peculiar disruption of the narrative flow. The threefold structure of this type of narrative is described, along with its main characteristics. One element of this type of narrative is very similar to symbolic content or complex symbolic structures, e.g. dreams, the sort of material that can be used for the purpose of interpretation. The similarities as well as the differences are elaborated in the article. Thanks to the observed general structure and ‘symbolic’ nature of some parts of the narrative, it is easy to notice some of the unconscious elements, which are not familiar to the patient's ego, and to make an interpretation. Because these elements are close to the threshold of consciousness, the patient willingly accepts an interpretation based on them. This is especially true for patients whose dominant function is thinking. A temporary, working name for this type of narrative is proposed in the article: ‘disrupted narrative’ ? and for its disruptive part ‘narrative symbol’.