The effects of written paradoxical directives on problem resolution and level of intimacy in selected married couples

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of written paradoxical directives on problem resolution and level of intimacy in selected married couples.;The population selected was married couples participating in selected churches in the geographical region of Williamsburg, Virginia. Volunteer couples completed a survey questionaire stating one problem in their relationship they would like to see changed. The sample consisted of 32 married couples with 11 couples randomly assigned to paradoxical directive and attention-placebo treatment groups and 10 couples to a no-treatment control group.;Couples in the paradoxical group were sent a four-paragraph paradoxical letter encouraging them to continue or exaggerate the stated problem. Couples in the attention-placebo group received structurally identical letters but without the paradoxical component. The control group received no letter.;It was hypothesized that couples in the paradoxical group would show greater (1) perceived problem relief, (2) perceived problem-solving ability, (3) level of perceived intimacy, (4) level of expected intimacy, (5) favorable perception of the mate, and (6) quality of the relationship than couples in the attention-placebo and control groups.;It was concluded that no statistical evidence existed to support the hypotheses.;Further study is needed to investigate the effectiveness of paradoxical directives on marital problem-solving and the several dimensions of intimacy

RESTORATION AS CARING PRACTICE: A RELATIONAL PERSPECTIVE ON ECOLOGICAL RECOVERY

Ecological restoration is defined by the Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) as “the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged or destroyed” (9). In practice, restoration typically involves the removal of pollution, human-made structures (like dams or roads), invasive species, and other impediments to ecological health. Removing the sources of ecological impairment is coupled with the reintroduction of flora, fauna, and the physical structures that are necessary for healthy ecosystem function. The potential for restoration to dominate nature is a concern of environmental ethicists. In theory, domination might stem from the technology used in restoration or the presence and expression of human intentions and ideals. But are such concerns apparent in restored sites? Theoretical concerns about domination of nature and other issues in restoration must be grounded in the realities of ecological restoration as it is practiced. Connecting theory to practice allows us to better understand how the concerns of the philosopher can be perceived and addressed by the practitioners of restoration. I argue that the ethics of care, and my care perspective that I develop, provide unique insights into the issue of domination in restoration. I apply the relational context and alternative perspectives on autonomy, the self, and universal versus contextual moral principles that care brings to the issues in restoration. In doing so, I argue that my care perspective gives a better account of ecosystem autonomy (as it relates to domination), questions the ecosystems as moral entities with a unified set of interests, and a way to understand partiality or favoritism as a morally acceptable way to make difficult decisions in restoration