Suchergebnisse

David Pitcher explores how the parents of adopters respond to the role of adoptive grandparent and describes adoptive family life from the perspective of three generations. The research involved both a quantitative study (n = 236) and a qualitative study of six white British families, in which grandparents, parents and children were interviewed. The study concludes that grandparents are significant, not primarily for practical support but in their symbolic function. It is proposed that the concept of grandparents being 'fun' that has developed in contemporary British culture enables them to represent approval and acceptance. For parents, they are significant as 'approving witnesses' to this new family. The account concludes by suggesting how the three-generational perspective described can contribute to the assessment and support of adoptive families. Further studies could test whether this pattern can be seen in other cultural contexts or family types.

This article by David Pitcher describes research undertaken to understand the needs of grandparents who take on the care of their grandchildren following abuse or neglect. Thirty-three families were interviewed between February and April 1999. Most of them had substantial involvement with social services in placement, assessment and support. The study concluded that many grandparent carers experience a sense of isolation from their families and friends, and feel that social services have left them to get on without clear channels for help. It also revealed the real delight many carers have in their grandchildren, and suggested that this is a special quality of these placements. The article ends by describing local developments that have resulted from the study.

Cultural confusion is a common experience among children in foster care. But it can be especially severe for Muslims when their faith, traditional values and way of life are disrespected and when this is exacerbated by removal from familiar home environments. This article describes the experiences of young people affected by this and critically examines how their situation matches the definitions of good practice in agencies and professionals seeking to help them. Four issues emerged: the child's confusion surrounding separation and moving to somewhere strange; identifying the right placement; intervening in a way that offers children future choices; and the ever-present risk of discrimination. In each of these situations, well-meaning and firmly established fostering practices can be insensitive to the needs and wishes of Muslim children. This confounds their understanding of their self, depresses their sense of social belonging and demands they adjust in order to survive. The article makes recommendations to support Muslim adolescents entering care and to improve the practice of the professionals and agencies responsible for them. The dearth of specialist therapeutic services is highlighted, along with suggestions for future research.

This book takes an in-depth look at what goes on 'inside' kinship care. It explores the dynamics and relationships between family members involved in kinship care, and covers issues such as safeguarding, assessment, therapy, permanence and placement breakdown. It is essential reading for social workers, therapists, counsellors and psychologists

Abstract
Neuroimaging studies identify multiple face-selective areas in the human brain. In the current study, we compared the functional response of the face area in the lateral prefrontal cortex to that of other face-selective areas. In Experiment 1, participants (n = 32) were scanned viewing videos containing faces, bodies, scenes, objects, and scrambled objects. We identified a face-selective area in the right inferior frontal gyrus (rIFG). In Experiment 2, participants (n = 24) viewed the same videos or static images. Results showed that the rIFG, right posterior superior temporal sulcus (rpSTS), and right occipital face area (rOFA) exhibited a greater response to moving than static faces. In Experiment 3, participants (n = 18) viewed face videos in the contralateral and ipsilateral visual fields. Results showed that the rIFG and rpSTS showed no visual field bias, while the rOFA and right fusiform face area (rFFA) showed a contralateral bias. These experiments suggest two conclusions; firstly, in all three experiments, the face area in the IFG was not as reliably identified as face areas in the occipitotemporal cortex. Secondly, the similarity of the response profiles in the IFG and pSTS suggests the areas may perform similar cognitive functions, a conclusion consistent with prior neuroanatomical and functional connectivity evidence.