Treatment of noncustodial fathers: Gender issues and clinical dilemmas

This article addresses issues involved in the treatment of fathers who do not have custody of their children. It reviews literature on demographic trends and discusses fathers' reactions to loss of child custody. Assessment and treatment guidelines are offered so that clinical practice may become more responsive to the needs of the population. Gender concerns, particularly as they relate to transference and countertransference, are also discussed.     

Psychopathology in pathological gamblers seeking treatment

High rates of psychiatric symptoms have been reported in pathological gamblers. This study of psychiatric comorbidity in pathological gamblers is the first to use structured psychiatric interviews assessing DSM-III-R Axis I and II disorders. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM III-R (SCID-P, SCID-II) was administered to 40 (25 male, 15 male) pathological gamblers seeking outpatient treatment in Minnesota for gambling, and 64 (41 male, 23 female) controls. High lifetime rates of Axis I (92%) but not Axis II (25%) psychopathology were found in pathological gamblers as compared to controls. No differences between male and female gamblers were found in rates of affective, substance use or personality disorders. Females had higher rates of anxiety disorders and histories of physical/sexual abuse. Possible associations between psychiatric disorders and pathological gambling are discussed along with gambler typologies and implications for future research.The authors wish to gratefully acknowledge the assistance of: Gary Christenson, M.D., Carol Peterson, Ph.D., William Meller, M.D., Thomas Mackenzie, M.D.     

Couple Therapy as a Method for Treating Male Exhibitionism: "Flashing"

The exhibiting of the genitals by males has previously been defined as symptomatic of narcissism and infantile sexuality. Viewed as a developmental anomaly of emotional life, treatment has been focused upon stimulating personal development by working out the problems which have inhibited maturation. Results have been discouraging. As an alternative, defining the problem as symptomatic of disturbances in basic relationships and treating the current central relationships as the focus offers a strong opportunity for inducing satisfactory changes.     

Sources of Influence in the Family Therapy Field: Publication Trends in Three Major Journals1

The institutional sources of all articles published in the three major marriage and family therapy journals through 1978 are identified. The journals reviewed include: Family Process, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, and the American Journal of Family Therapy. While no single center emerges as dominating the published family therapy literature, a small number of institutions clearly have exerted a profound impact on the literature of the field. Moreover, the absolute number of centers influencing the field is rapidly increasing, and these centers are becoming particularly influential in the newer journals in the field.     

Risk Comparisons, Conflict, and Risk Acceptability Claims

Despite many claims for and against the use of risk comparisons in risk communication, few empirical studies have explored their effect. Even fewer have examined the public's relative preferences among different kinds of risk comparisons. Two studies, published in this journal in 1990 and 2003, used seven measures of "acceptability" to examine public reaction to 14 examples of risk comparisons, as used by a hypothetical factory manager to explain risks of his ethylene oxide plant. This study examined the effect on preferences of scenarios involving low or high conflict between the factory manager and residents of the hypothetical town (as had the 2003 study), and inclusion of a claim that the comparison demonstrated the risks' acceptability. It also tested the Finucane et al. (2000) affect hypothesis that information emphasizing low risks-as in these risk comparisons-would raise benefits estimates without changing risk estimates. Using similar but revised scenarios, risk comparison examples (10 instead of 14), and evaluation measures, an opportunity sample of 303 New Jersey residents rated the comparisons, and the risks and benefits of the factory. On average, all comparisons received positive ratings on all evaluation measures in all conditions. Direct and indirect measures showed that the conflict manipulation worked; overall, No-Conflict and Conflict scenarios evoked scores that were not significantly different. The attachment to each risk comparison of a risk acceptability claim ("So our factory's risks should be acceptable to you.") did not worsen ratings relative to conditions lacking this claim. Readers who did or did not see this claim were equally likely to infer an attempt to persuade them to accept the risk from the comparison. As in the 2003 article, there was great individual variability in inferred rankings of the risk comparisons. However, exposure to the risk comparisons did not reduce risk estimates significantly (while raising benefit estimates), and Conflict-Claim respondents found the risk of the hypothetical factory less acceptable than No-Conflict respondents. Results suggest that neither risk comparisons nor risk acceptability claims are automatically anathema to audiences, but they may have tiny or unintended effects on audience judgments about risky situations.