Exploring changes in health visitors' knowledge, confidence and decision-making for women with perinatal mental health difficulties following a brief training package

Rationale and objective: Perinatal Mental Health (PMH) is an issue that spans the spectrum of pregnancy and childbirth and is now acknowledged to be significant on a global level. Health visitors (HVs) are increasingly expected to extend their knowledge and to understand and identify PMH in the antenatal period and across the spectrum from mild/moderate to severe. While training has been shown to enable HVs to identify post-natal depression (PND) effectively and reduce the proportion of women at risk, the mechanisms underpinning this success are unclear. This paper reports on the findings of a mixed methods study aimed at examining the impact of a single half day training session on perinatal mental health problems (PMHP) on HVs knowledge, confidence and empowerment in relation to managing PMH. Methods: Findings from data gathered by Likert Scales and focus group discussions are presented. Results: Training can empower HVs to identify PMHP beyond PND and plays a vital role in promoting confidence. Conclusions: This research highlights the potential that training of this type has on service provision and delivery. In a resource-limited service, the feasibility of a brief training package has demonstrated positive results for health visitors, childbearing women and their families

Exploring the impact of group work and mentoring for multiple heritage children's self-esteem, well-being and behaviour

Findings are reported from a study of an innovative Multiple Heritage Service in Sheffield (UK) which provides, inter alia, individual mentoring for young people and school-based group sessions on cultural heritage, dealing with racism and enhancing well-being. Groupwork, undertaken between November 2005 and December 2006, was evaluated by a before/after design with 43 children aged from eight to fifteen attending five different groups (response rate 77 per cent), using three well-established and validated measures. There were improvements on the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale from 31.415 to 33.024 (p =0.005) with more improvement among younger children and boys (p=0.004 and p=0.001); and well-being as measured by the GHQ12 improved from 1.460 to 0.8378 (p=0.111) with more improvement among older children (p=0.026). On the third measure, of problem behaviour (the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire) there was an improvement from 12.4 to 12.1 (p=0.716) but there was no improvement at all for girls. Mentoring was evaluated by telephone interviews between June and October 2006 with 14 mothers whose children had just completed, or were nearing completion of, mentoring (response rate 70 per cent). Overall the mothers’ evaluations were highly positive: two-thirds commended the service on the positive impact on their children’s well-being and happiness (including all the mothers of daughters); a half reported positive impacts on identity; mothers commended the positive role model effect same-sex mentors had on their children’s behaviour; but only a third said mentoring had boosted their children’s self-esteem

The Virtues of Redundancy in Legal Thought

Redundancy has a bad reputation among legal intellectuals. When someone says, for example, that the ninth and tenth amendments are redundant, we can be pretty sure that this person attaches little importance to these constitutional provisions. Listen to one of the definitions of redundant provided by the Oxford English Dictionary: superabundant, superfluous, excessive. \u27 In this essay, the author proposes that legal theorists pay serious attention to the concept of redundancy used by engineers. He explains how redundancy--in this special sense--is essential to any intellectual enterprise in which we try to reach action-guiding conclusions, including the enterprise of law. The author describes the virtues of redundancy in legal thought

Rethinking the Disclosure Paradigm in a World of Complexity

In a prior article, Professor Schwarcz examined the factors that differentiate Enron\u27s questionable use of off-balance sheet special purpose entities, (SPEs) from the trillions of dollars of legitimate securitization and other structured-finance transactions that use SPEs. The presence of meaningful differences, Professor Schwarcz argued, may inform regulatory schemes by providing a basis to distinguish which such transactions should be allowed or restricted. In that connection, Professor Schwarcz encountered the dilemma that some structured transactions are so complex that disclosure to investors of the company originating the transaction is necessarily imperfect - either oversimplifying the transaction, or providing detail and sophistication beyond the level of even most institutional investors and securities analysts. In this article, Professor Schwarcz focuses on solutions to this dilemma, arguing that complexity forces a rethinking of the long-held disclosure paradigm of securities law

Rethinking the Disclosure Paradigm in a World of Complexity

In a prior article, Professor Schwarcz examined the factors that differentiate Enron\u27s questionable use of off-balance sheet special purpose entities, (SPEs) from the trillions of dollars of legitimate securitization and other structured-finance transactions that use SPEs. The presence of meaningful differences, Professor Schwarcz argued, may inform regulatory schemes by providing a basis to distinguish which such transactions should be allowed or restricted. In that connection, Professor Schwarcz encountered the dilemma that some structured transactions are so complex that disclosure to investors of the company originating the transaction is necessarily imperfect - either oversimplifying the transaction, or providing detail and sophistication beyond the level of even most institutional investors and securities analysts. In this article, Professor Schwarcz focuses on solutions to this dilemma, arguing that complexity forces a rethinking of the long-held disclosure paradigm of securities law

‘Just be confident girls!’: Confidence Chic as Neoliberal Governmentality

In our injurious patriarchal cultures, unconfidence is almost inescapable when inhabiting womanhood. However, recently the promotion of self-confidence has surfaced as the site for expanded, heightened and more insidious modes of regulation, often spearheaded by those very institutions invested in women’s insecurities. This notably includes consumer women’s magazines. Contemporary publications are marked by an intensified preoccupation with taking readers ‘from crisis to confidence’, offering even dedicated sections (e.g. ‘confidence revolution’ and ‘Bye-bye body hang-ups’ in Cosmopolitan UK) and issues—see, for example, Elle UK’s January 2015 ‘Confidence Issue: A Smart Woman’s Guide to Self-Belief’. Clearly, this sector is a fundamental player in the confidence movement-market, bringing together a range of interested parties, not least ‘love your body’ (LYB) advertisers like Dove (see Gill and Elias 2014), and enjoying an extensive audience reach, both in terms of numbers and geography—a reach increased to unprecedented degrees by online versions

Key competencies: Views from the gym floor.

The release of The New Zealand Curriculum (2007) will inevitably yield challenges and possibilities for teachers of Physical Education in both primary and secondary schools. In this paper I describe the vision and key competencies embedded in this new curriculum and discuss their relationship to Physical Education. Drawing on the voices of secondary school students, I interrogate the opportunities that students envisage for developing key competencies in Physical Education. I propose that students can, and do, afford significant insight into how teachers may enact key competencies in curriculum learning and that it is critical thinking that will enable both students and teachers to understand and relate to the movement culture in meaningful and relevant ways

Beyond the Financial Crisis:Addressing Risk Challenges in a Changing Financial Environment

The Financial Crisis has not only highlighted the importance of addressing issues such as liquidity risk – it has also brought to the fore the need to focus on unregulated instruments such as hedge funds, which are of systemic importance to the financial industry. Risk is an area which, owing to its increasing significance, requires greater focus. A move to risk based strategies is evidenced by the growing popularity of risk based regulation and meta regulatory strategies. Given the presence of an unregulated hedge fund industry however, such attempts do not suffice on their own. Further, the systemic nature of risk exacerbates the problem of such unregulated institutions. This paper aims to address complexities and challenges faced by regulators in identifying and assessing risk, problems arising from different perceptions of risk, and solutions aimed at countering problems of risk regulation. It will approach these issues through an assessment of explanations put forward to justify the growing importance of risks, well known risk theories such as cultural theory, risk society theory and governmentality theory. These theories will be considered against a background of themes such as dynamism, evolutionism, developments in science and industry, cultural attitudes to risk, and the need to be responsive and reflexive to changes which have arisen in modern society. Theoretical models and hybrids of a responsive model of regulation such as Enforced self regulation and meta regulation, which have the potential to address the problems relating to risk will be addressed. By virtue of the pro cyclical nature of risk, the inability of Basel 2 to address risk cycles were revealed during the Northern Rock Crisis. Other flaws and deficiencies inherent in Basel 2, a form of meta regulation, will be highlighted. The relevance of internal control systems to an efficient system of regulation, the reasons for which meta regulation is not only considered to be the most responsive form of regulation, but also one which assigns central role to internal control systems will be discussed. The contested nature of risk and the difficulties attributed to its quantification, raise questions about its ability to function effectively as a regulatory tool. If risks could be eliminated in their entirety however, then regulation would serve no purpose. This paper aims generally therefore to direct attention to those areas which could be addressed, namely institutional risks, and measures whereby such risks, even though impossible to eliminate, could be minimize

Addressing Risk Challenges in a Changing Financial Environment:the Need for Greater Accountability in Financial Regulation and Risk Management

The need for continuous monitoring and regulation is particularly attributed to, and justified by, the inevitable presence of risks and uncertainty – both in terms of certain externalities and indeterminacies which are capable of being reasonably quantified and those which are not. Amongst other goals, this paper aims to address complexities and challenges faced by regulators in identifying and assessing risk, problems arising from different perceptions of risk, and solutions aimed at countering problems of risk regulation. It will approach these issues through an assessment of explanations put forward to justify the growing importance of risks, well known risk theories such as cultural theory, risk society theory and governmentality theory. “Socio cultural” explanations which relate to how risk is increasingly becoming embedded in organisations and institutions will also be considered as part of those factors attributable to why the financial environment has become transformed to the state in which it currently exists. A consideration of regulatory developments which have contributed to a change in the way financial regulation is carried out, as well as developments which have contributed to the de formalisation of rules and a corresponding “loss of certainty”, will also constitute focal points of the paper. To what extent are risks capable of being quantified? Who is able to assist with such quantification – and why has it become necessary to introduce other regulatory actors and greater measures aimed at fostering corporate governance and accountability into the regulatory process? These questions constitute some of the issues which this paper aims to address