“It’s like a problem that doesn’t exist”: The emotional well-being of mothers caring for a child with brain injury.

Background: Although research has shown that significant burden and adverse psychological impact are associated with caring for a child with brain injury, limited knowledge exists concerning the qualitative experience and impact of this burden.
Objective: To provide an account of the experiences of mothers who care for a childhood survivor of brain injury.
Research design: Postal survey.
Methods and procedures: A self-report questionnaire was sent to a consecutive sample of mothers (n=86) of children (aged 8-28) with acquired brain injury, registered with a UK children’s brain injury charity. Five essay style questions enabled mothers to reflect on and describe at length their caring experiences, with particular emphasis placed on the perceived impact on emotional well-being.
Main outcomes and results: Thematic analysis identified five key themes: Perpetually Anxious, The Guilty Carer, The Labour of Caring, A Self-Conscious Apologist and Perpetually Grieving. Collectively, these themes highlight two core processes shaping mothers’ caring experiences and concomitant mental well-being. Firstly, the collective and enduring nature of caregiver burden over time. Second, the crucial role played by socio-cultural values in perpetuating caregiver burden.
Conclusions: Societal norms, particularly those relating to the nature and outcome of brain injury and motherhood, serve to marginalise mothers and increase feelings of isolation. Findings suggest the value of peer support programs as an effective means of providing appropriate social support.

"To be accepted as normal": Public understanding and misconceptions concerning survivors of brain injury.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To determine the views held by the general public in Northern Ireland towards survivors of brain injury. RESEARCH DESIGN: Qualitative semi-structured interviews. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Interviews were conducted with 16 members of the general public. Ten questions addressed issues such as the role of survivors of brain injury in society, the challenges they face and the characteristics ascribed to them. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: When asked to describe someone with a brain injury participants typically used negative labels and identified the most common problems as relating to physical, cognitive, emotional and social functioning. There was a general failure to recognize that brain injury was a 'hidden' disability, with most participants expecting some outward manifestation. Relatively few previous studies have employed a qualitative approach to explore how the public perceives survivors of brain injury. CONCLUSION: Members of the public have an increasing awareness of the challenges faced by survivors of brain injury. However, in spite of this, perceptions of aggressiveness, dependency and unhappiness were still evident, suggesting potential problems in reintegrating survivors of brain injury with their communities.

Self-generated expressions of residual complaints following brain injury

Following brain injury there is often a prolonged period of deteriorating psychological condition, despite neurological stability or improvement. This is presumably consequent to the remission of anosognosia and the realisation of permanently worsened status. This change is hypothesised to be directed partially by the socially mediated processes which play a role in generating self-awareness and which here direct the reconstruction of the self as a permanently injured person. However, before we can understand this process of redevelopment, we need an unbiassed technique to monitor self-awareness. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 individuals with long-standing brain injuries to capture their spontaneous complaints and their level of insight into the implications of their difficulties. The focus was on what the participants said in their own words, and the extent to which self-knowledge of difficulties was spontaneously salient to the participants. Their responses were subjected to content analysis. Most participants were able to say that they had brain injuries and physical difficulties, many mentioned memory and attentional problems and a few made references to a variety of emotional disturbances. Content analysis of data from unbiassed interviews can reveal the extent to which people with brain injuries know about their difficulties. Social constructionist accounts of self-awareness and recovery are supported.

Sticks, Stones and Words: Emotional Harm and the English Criminal Law

This article discusses the rule that criminal liability does not normally attach for the causing of emotional harm or mental distress in the absence of proof of a 'recognised psychiatric injury'. It considers what is involved in the diagnosis of psychiatric injury, and to what extent the difference between such injury and 'ordinary' mental distress is one of degree rather than one of kind. It reviews the situations in which the law already criminalises the infliction of emotional harm without proof of psychiatric injury, and assesses the policy arguments for drawing the distinction in the normal case. The article concludes that the law can and should adopt a more flexible approach to cases of this sort.