Research with children: sharing the dilemmas

This paper identifies a number of significant gaps between the principles of good practice in research with children and the practical realities of conducting a research project with children. The context of the discussion is an ongoing research study of children and young people in Scotland with a parent or carer with HIV. The paper argues that conducting research with what is a hidden (and in many ways secret) population throws into sharp relief some difficulties and contradictions that are at the heart of the research process. The paper does not intend to present easy answers to the complex questions that it raises: the research project it describes is ongoing and not yet at the stage of disseminating findings in any definitive way. Moreover, it seems likely that there are no answers to the questions raised, but that the act of posing the questions may contribute to the development of better, more reflexive research with children.     

Re-examining Children's Consent to Medical Treatment

The question of consent to the medical treatment of children is looked at across the four disciplines of law, medicine, psychology and philosophy. The conclusion is reached that while there is a remarkable consensus on the issues considered to be important, none of the disciplines provides a complete answer to the problems involved. As an experiment, reference is made throughout the article to various literary conceptions of childhood. It is hoped that some of these may give cause for thought about how children are treated by the professions. The article was prepared for publication before release of the judgements of the High Court in Re Marion in May 1992 (renamed Secretary, Department of Health and Community Services v JWB and SMB on appeal). In the appeal a majority of the High Court followed the Full Court of the Family Court in Re Marion and confirmed that judicial consent is required for the medical treatment of children in some cases. The notion of treatment being therapeutic or non-therapeutic was not accepted, the majority preferring to rest judgement on assessments of the risks and gravity of consequences of a wrong decision (JWB and SMB 79,180 and 79,206–7). There are many other points of interest discussed by the High Court, for example, Brennan J's comments on the absurdities of the concept of substituted consent (79,196–7), Deane J's acceptance that the issues involved were moral and social and therefore beyond legal competence (79,208) and McHugh J's understanding of the sources of the parental power to consent (79,214). Although adding authority to some of the views expressed in the Full Court of the Family Court, the judgements of the High Court do not dispose of debate on the issues raised in the article.     

“Trying to be positive in the face of the storm”: The experiences of independent college students during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic created multiple stressors for college students, particularly for young adults experiencing multiple forms of disadvantage. Little is known about the pandemic experiences of independent college students, many of whom are emancipated minors, former wards of the state, and other students who lack familial financial and practical support as they pursue higher education. Twenty-three independent students, ages 18–23, from one northeastern university were interviewed to understand how independent students were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, and their needs for support from the university during this time. Most participants were identified as Black or Latinx, and two thirds were first-generation college students. Participants reported an overall lack of support from their families prior to the pandemic. During the pandemic, they experienced compounding academic, economic, and mental health-related stressors. Students responded to these stressors in resilient and resourceful ways, by adapting to their new realities, expressing gratitude, and finding opportunities for self-growth. Participants recommend that institutions of higher education support independent students during periods of emergency through providing financial assistance, offering opportunities for connection with both adults and peers, and demonstrating administrative flexibility and understanding of their unique needs.     

An examination of gender difference in advancement and salary for Marriage and Family Therapy faculty members working in public universities

Evidence for inequitable advancement and salary disparity for women in academia is compelling, but only a marginal amount of research has explored this in the field of Marriage and Family Therapy (MFT) specifically. Current research provides preliminary evidence that women remain underrepresented at the Full Professor rank and are paid less than men MFT faculty. This study collected publicly available data for MFT faculty in public universities to explore gender differences in advancement between ranks, salary disparity, and the representation of women and men in the highest and lowest paying niches of MFT academia. Results showed that, despite being 60.15% of MFTs in public universities, women were paid an average of $5596.25 less than men. Men were 1.40 times more likely than women to be promoted to Full Professor on time—within 13 years of their terminal degree. Implications for addressing inequitable advancement and salary disparity for women MFT faculty are discussed.     

An Ethical Analysis of the Second Amendment: The Right to Pack Heat at Work

We examine the issues concerning the legality and ethicality of the Second Amendment right to bear arms balanced by the employer's duty to provide a safe workplace for its employees. Two court rulings highlight this balancing act: McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago et al. and District of Columbia v. Heller. “Stand Your Ground” and “Castle Doctrine” laws in the recent Trayvon Martin shooting on February 26, 2012 are also applicable. Various ethical frameworks examine the firearms debate by viewing the Second Amendment from three perspectives. These include a pro‐gun perspective drawing upon libertarianism and fundamental rights; a moderate gun perspective drawing upon consequentialism and stakeholder theory; and finally, an anti‐gun perspective drawing upon a Public Health Ethics and peace ethics approach. We explore the issue of gun control from a business perspective as employers face ethical decisions in responding to legislation that allows guns in the workplace and/or in employer parking lots while still being responsible to provide a safe workplace for their employees. We make recommendations regarding how companies should manage by proactively avoiding legal challenges to employees' rights to own and carry guns into the workplace. This includes emphasis on enhanced security, Human Resource policies and monitoring rapidly changing laws.     

Adolescents at risk of mental health problems in the COVID-19 pandemic: A prospective population-based study of the effects of government mandates and school closures

There is increasing evidence that the COVID-19 pandemic has had substantial mental health impacts for adolescents. Yet, few definitive studies have investigated which adolescents were at higher risk of poor mental health and well-being during the pandemic. Data were drawn from the Childhood to Adolescence Transition Study, a prospective cohort study of students in Australia (N = 1211). Prevalence of mental health outcomes (depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, self-harm and good subjective well-being) was estimated in school Years 5–12, where Years 11 (2020) and 12 (2021) coincided with the pandemic. The age- and sex-adjusted relative risk of each mental health outcome for each priority group during the pandemic were estimated. During the pandemic, over 50% of study participants reported depressive symptoms, and one quarter reported anxiety symptoms. There was a decrease in good subjective well-being compared with pre-pandemic years, while self-harm prevalence remained similar. History of mental health problems, school disengagement and frequent peer victimisation increased the risk of experiencing mental health problems during the pandemic. Schools play a central role in maintaining the mental health and good subjective well-being of students, and this is particularly important during periods of social disruption, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.