Supervision as a Liminal Space: Towards a Dialogic Relationship

This article explores the underlying power dynamics and themes in the relationship between the supervisor and supervisee and the challenges these pose for establishing clinical supervision as a dialogic relationship based in Gestalt therapy principles. Illustrated by two examples from a supervisee perspective, themes of 'shame' and the need to attend holistically to the supervisee in their work and personal contexts in the 'here and now' are explored. These examples are discussed in relation to principles of contact, figure and ground, and the polarity of isolation and confluence. Clinical supervisors have an obligation to ensure that the supervisee practises in a way that is 'safe' for the client, themselves and for their employing agencies or professional associations. Supervisors have a further obligation to remain in relationship with the supervisee, as they are engaged in these complex and challenging discussions. The more recent development in the discourse about clinical supervision is the relational emphasis which is discussed in Gestalt therapy (Clarkson & Aviram, 1995; Hycner, & Jacobs, 1995) and applications of concepts such as 'creative adjustment' to clinical supervision (Yontef, 1996). This view enables clinical supervision to be considered as occurring in a liminal space or 'creative void' where learning occurs based in who the supervisee is in the present. Such a view of clinical supervision honours the quality of process and the personhood of the supervisor and supervisee within the inevitable tensions

A Comparison between African and Indian Transnational Migrant Families

UID/ANT/04038/2013This article discusses the potential role of parenting double bind interactions on the shifts in the balance and forms of coexistence between autonomy and relatedness across generations, using three case-studies conducted among Punjab (Sikh), Indo-Mozambican (Muslim) and Cape Verdean (Christian) migrant families settled in Portugal. Although the double bind construct has been applied mostly on psychological dysfunctional families, the comparative analysis shows that double binds within the mother–child relationship should be reconceptualised as potentially adaptive and creative responses to changing multilayered demands rather than as an inability to resolve a conflicting impasse. By adjusting, through caregiving, culture-specific developmental goals and practices to unequal balances between autonomy and relatedness in their current migration context, the mothers we worked with represent a stark contrast with official political discourse which tends to view migrant mothering as simply based on intergenerational continuity.publishersversionpublishe

Alternative dispute resolution services : a nonauthoritative guide; Consulting services practice aid, 99-1

https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_news/1166/thumbnail.jp

The Social Construction of Motherhood: Breastfeeding as a Topic for Feminist Research

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/51203/1/436.pd

A preliminary analysis of the Soar architecture as a basis for general intelligence

In this article we take a step towards providing an analysis of the Soar architecture as a basis for general intelligence. Included are discussions of the basic assumptions underlying the development of Soar, a description of Soar cast in terms of the theoretical idea of multiple levels of description, an example of Soar performing multi-column subtraction, and three analyses of Soar: its natural tasks, the sources of its power, and its scope and limitsPeer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/29595/1/0000684.pd

Barriers to Research on Research Ethics Review and Conflicts of Interest

R esearch on research ethics-regarding both the governance and practice of the ethical review of human subjects research-has a tumultuous history in North America and Europe. Much of the academic literature focuses on issues to do with regulating the conduct and quality of ethics review of research protocols by ethics committees (research ethics boards (REBs) in Canada and institutional review boards (IRBs) in the United States). 1 In addition, some of the literature attends to issues particular to the review of qualitative research, 2 and still other literature addresses the challenges posed by and the need for research on REBs/IRBs. 3 It is this third group of literature within which our article is situated. In 2009, we initiated an empirical bioethics project to advance REBs' understanding and management of conflicts of interest in their ethics review of research projects. Because we were interested in the experience of the REB as a group-not specifically of individual members-our plan to conduct interviews meant that an REB had to review and approve the proposed project. We obtained approval from one of the REBs at our university in early 2010. However, as we also wished to interview REBs in medical centers, we were obliged to submit our project through Canada's provincial multicenter process (also known as a multisite review). This necessitated a second full application to a central REB (which was based in a hospital), as well as to the dozen REBs we hoped to recruit as "participants" in our study. We were interested in learning from the experiences of REBs that dealt mainly with clinical research, from those that reviewed psychosocial, behavioral and public health research, as well as from REBs that reviewed non-health related research. This second review process proved much more complicated and time consuming. Moreover, it involved unduly demanding and inappropriate requests due to 1) an apparent "clinical trial bias" on the part of some REBs (i.e., a bias against qualitative research based on the view that all research projects require the same level of risk analysis and protections as clinical trials), and 2) structural elements imposed by the multicenter process (e.g., substantial paperwork, requirement to have local respondents, and ethics review at all participating medical centers)