Suchergebnisse

Front Cover -- Change in Emotion and Mental Health -- Change in Emotion and Mental Health -- Copyright -- Dedications -- Contents -- Contributors -- Endorsements -- On the importance of studying change in emotion and mental health -- References -- I - Change in emotions from a fundamental perspective -- 1 - Changing feelings: Individual differences in emotional inertia -- Definition, quantification, and meaning of emotional inertia -- Emotional inertia and psychological flexibility -- Individual differences in emotional inertia -- How can we advance scientific understanding of emotional inertia -- Improving the assessment and modeling of emotional inertia -- Broadening the demographic scope of research on emotional inertia -- Building a mechanistic account of individual differences in emotional inertia -- Stability versus context dependence of emotional inertia -- Conclusion -- References -- 2 - If it changes, it must be an emotion process: Micro or macro -- Microemotion processes -- Macroemotion processes -- Conclusion -- Recommendations for future research -- References -- 3 - Changing the emotion process: The role of emotion regulation -- Fundamental concepts -- Emotion generation -- Emotion regulation -- Difficulties in the emotion regulation process -- Identification stage -- Selection stage -- Implementation stage -- Monitoring stage -- Adaptive and maladaptive emotion regulation -- Emotion regulation in nonsuicidal self-injury -- Emotion regulation flexibility -- Emotion regulation interventions -- Transdiagnostic interventions -- Digital mental health treatment -- Key directions for future research -- Individual differences -- Combination and sequencing of strategies -- Mediation in clinical trials -- Moderation in clinical trials -- Just-in-time adaptive interventions -- References -- 4 - Changes and stabilities in emotional memories.

Background: Several studies have been published on the effects of psychotherapy in routine practice. Complementing traditional views summarised as 'dose-effect models', Stiles et al. put forward data consistent with the responsive regulation model underlining the importance of the client's active participant role in defining length of treatment. One may ask what level of change reached by a patient is considered to be the 'good enough level' (GEL) and if it is related to the duration of psychotherapy. Aims: The main objective of the present feasibility trial was to monitor the patient's session-by-session evolution using a self-report questionnaire in order to define the GEL, i.e. the number of sessions necessary for the patient to reach significant change. Method: A total of N=13 patients undergoing psychotherapy in routine practice participated in the study, completing the Outcome Questionnaire - 45.2 (OQ-45), which assesses the symptom level, interpersonal relationships and social role after every psychotherapy session. The data was analysed using multi-level analyses (HLMs). Results: High feasibility of fine-grained assessment of effects of psychotherapy in routine practice in Switzerland was shown; response rates being acceptable; however, detailed analysis of the GEL was not feasible within the short study time-frame. Conclusions: Reflections on the political context of monitoring in the specific case of routine psychiatric practice in Switzerland are discussed.

Background: Over the last two decades an increasing number of countries have legalized euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (EAS) leading to considerable debate over the inherent ethical dilemmas. Increasing numbers of people with personality disorders, faced with unbearable suffering, have requested and received assistance in terminating their lives. EAS in people with personality disorders has, however, received very sparse attention from clinicians and researchers. In this paper, we examine the literature on the practice and prevalence of EAS in people with personality disorders to date and discuss the associated challenges for research and practice. Methods: Narrative review of the literature combined with the authors' collective experience and knowledge of personality disorders. Results: In six of the eight countries where EAS is currently legal, mental disorders are accepted as disorders for which EAS may be granted. In four of these countries, EAS in minors with mental disorders is also accepted. Our literature search resulted in 9 papers on the subject of EAS in people with personality disorders. These studies suggest that most clinicians who grant EAS have indeed perceived their patients' suffering as chronic, unbearable and untreatable without prospect of improvement. The majority of patients with personality disorders had tried some form of psychotherapy, but very few had received any of the relevant evidence-based treatments. The decision to grant EAS based on a perception of the patient's illness as being untreatable with no prospect of improvement, could, thus, in many cases fail to meet the due care criteria listed in EAS laws. People with personality disorders more often wish for death for extended periods of time than people without these disorders. However, there is ample empirical data to show that suicidal tendencies and behaviour can be treated and that they fluctuate rapidly over time. Conclusions: In light of our findings, we believe that the current legislation and practice of EAS for people with personality disorders is based on an inadequate understanding of underlying psychopathology and a lack of awareness about the contemporary treatment literature. Moreover, we assert that this practice neglects the individual's potential for having a life worth living.

Background Over the last two decades an increasing number of countries have legalized euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (EAS) leading to considerable debate over the inherent ethical dilemmas. Increasing numbers of people with personality disorders, faced with unbearable suffering, have requested and received assistance in terminating their lives. EAS in people with personality disorders has, however, received very sparse attention from clinicians and researchers. In this paper, we examine the literature on the practice and prevalence of EAS in people with personality disorders to date and discuss the associated challenges for research and practice. Methods Narrative review of the literature combined with the authors' collective experience and knowledge of personality disorders. Results In six of the eight countries where EAS is currently legal, mental disorders are accepted as disorders for which EAS may be granted. In four of these countries, EAS in minors with mental disorders is also accepted. Our literature search resulted in 9 papers on the subject of EAS in people with personality disorders. These studies suggest that most clinicians who grant EAS have indeed perceived their patients' suffering as chronic, unbearable and untreatable without prospect of improvement. The majority of patients with personality disorders had tried some form of psychotherapy, but very few had received any of the relevant evidence-based treatments. The decision to grant EAS based on a perception of the patient's illness as being untreatable with no prospect of improvement, could, thus, in many cases fail to meet the due care criteria listed in EAS laws. People with personality disorders more often wish for death for extended periods of time than people without these disorders. However, there is ample empirical data to show that suicidal tendencies and behaviour can be treated and that they fluctuate rapidly over time. Conclusions In light of our findings, we believe that the current legislation and practice of EAS for people with personality disorders is based on an inadequate understanding of underlying psychopathology and a lack of awareness about the contemporary treatment literature. Moreover, we assert that this practice neglects the individual's potential for having a life worth living.

Over the last two decades an increasing number of countries have legalized euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (EAS) leading to considerable debate over the inherent ethical dilemmas. Increasing numbers of people with personality disorders, faced with unbearable suffering, have requested and received assistance in terminating their lives. EAS in people with personality disorders has, however, received very sparse attention from clinicians and researchers. In this paper, we examine the literature on the practice and prevalence of EAS in people with personality disorders to date and discuss the associated challenges for research and practice. Narrative review of the literature combined with the authors' collective experience and knowledge of personality disorders. In six of the eight countries where EAS is currently legal, mental disorders are accepted as disorders for which EAS may be granted. In four of these countries, EAS in minors with mental disorders is also accepted. Our literature search resulted in 9 papers on the subject of EAS in people with personality disorders. These studies suggest that most clinicians who grant EAS have indeed perceived their patients' suffering as chronic, unbearable and untreatable without prospect of improvement. The majority of patients with personality disorders had tried some form of psychotherapy, but very few had received any of the relevant evidence-based treatments. The decision to grant EAS based on a perception of the patient's illness as being untreatable with no prospect of improvement, could, thus, in many cases fail to meet the due care criteria listed in EAS laws. People with personality disorders more often wish for death for extended periods of time than people without these disorders. However, there is ample empirical data to show that suicidal tendencies and behaviour can be treated and that they fluctuate rapidly over time. In light of our findings, we believe that the current legislation and practice of EAS for people with personality disorders is ...