Edward Shils’ Turn Against Karl Mannheim: The Central European Connection

This paper traces Edward Shils’ transition, during World War II, from enthusiasm to harsh criticism of Karl Mannheim, the Hungarian-born sociologist of knowledge. While serving in London, Shils drew upon a direct and explicit intellectual assault on Mannheim by fellow emigrés to England. Even while Shils maintained regular contact with Mannheim, Shils was exposed to an often vituperative dismissal of Mannheim’s work by Karl Popper and Friedrich Hayek, in the pages of the London School of Economics (LSE) journal Economica. After the war, when both Popper and Shils joined the LSE faculty—Hayek’s affiliation dated to 1931—Shils’ encounter with their critiques was deepened. And in these early postwar years, Shils became close friends with yet another emigré Mannheim critic, Michael Polanyi. Combined, these sustained and sophisticated criticisms helped wrest Shils from his interwar, Mannheim-friendly intellectual coordinates. The implications for Shils’ later propagation of the “mass society theory” label are considered.     

Factors that predict how women label their own childhood sexual abuse

Despite the psychological impact of child sexual abuse, many victims do not acknowledge that their experiences were "abuse". This study sought to identify factors that predict how women label their own experiences of childhood sexual abuse. This cross-sectional study was conducted in a family medicine clinic with adult female patients. Subjects completed structured interviews about their childhood environment and their sexual abuse history. Logistic regression analysis showed that labeling of abuse was dependent upon intercourse (beta = 7.43, p = .006), the frequency of abuse by the first perpetrator (beta = 5.08, p = .024), and paternal overprotection (beta = 6.69, p = .010). Findings suggest that the severity of abusive acts is most important and an over-protective father may enhance the victim's acknowledgment that sexual touching is abusive.     

Parenting a 6-Year Old Is Not What I Planned in Retirement: Trauma and Stress among Grandparents Due to the Opioid Crisis

ABSTRACT

There is little research about trauma, financial stress, and social service needs emanating from the experience of parenting grandchildren caused by the opioid crisis in the United States. We conducted a qualitative study with 15 grandparents who currently or in the past had custodial care of their grandchildren. We also interviewed nine issue-related stakeholders in Eastern Massachusetts. Specific inquiries centered on events leading up to a change in guardianship, stressors related to legal, financial, and family issues, and system-wide response to the grandparents’ needs. Results indicate that the opioid crisis presents distinct challenges for the grandparent-led families and for the systems that serve the new family arrangement. Crisis triggers a change in guardianship and continues throughout the years. The continued crises stem from events related to the parent’s opioid use disorder (OUD) and from expenses related to raising a young family, especially when the grandchild has adverse childhood experiences. Our analysis shows that systems break down on a number of levels, and the fluidity of custodial arrangements due to parents’ OUD status does not map onto existing support or benefit systems. Policy responses must focus on the immediate and long-term needs of grandparent caretakers, especially since the opioid crisis is likely to continue.