Development of a measure of coping with multiple sclerosis caregiving

Development of a self-report measure of coping specific to multiple sclerosis (MS) caregiving is needed to advance our understanding of the role of coping in adaptation to caring for a person with MS and to contribute to a lack of empirical data on MS caregiving. A total of 213 MS caregivers and their care recipients completed a Coping with MS Caregiving Inventory (CMSCI) and measures of adjustment (psychological distress), appraisal and illness. A subsample (n = 64) also completed the Ways of Coping Checklist (WCC) and additional adjustment measures (depression, caregiving impact. dyadic adjustment, and relationship conflict and reciprocity). Factor analyses revealed 5 factors: Supportive Engagement, Criticism and Coercion, Practical Assistance, Avoidance, and Positive Reframing. Subscales had internal reliabilities comparable to similar scales and were empirically distinct. Preliminary construct validation data are consistent with recent MS caregiving research that links passive avoidant emotion-focused coping with poorer adjustment, and relationship-focused coping caregiving research that links greater reliance on positive relationship-focused coping and less reliance on criticism with better adjustment. Results extend this research by revealing new relations between coping and adaptation to MS caregiving. Convergent validation data suggest that although the inventory differs from the WCC, it does share certain conceptual similarities with this scale.

'The utility of human security': Which humans? What security? A reply to Thomas & Tow

Thomas & Tow's evaluation of the utility of human security is an important contribution to an ongoing debate about what security is and for whom security should be provided. In particular, the authors' engagement with the human security agenda is important given the centrality of this approach to recent attempts to rethink security. This article argues, however, that Thomas & Tow's approach to the human security agenda is problematic for two central reasons. First, their attempt to narrow security to make this approach amenable to state policymakers risks reifying the sources of insecurity for individuals everywhere. Second, the conception of human security they put forward appears largely inconsistent with the normative concerns inherent in the human security agenda.

Public Intellectuals, Book Culture and Civil Society

Introduction: the rise and rise of the public intellectual My starting point is the remarkable rise to prominence of public intellectuals – and talk about public intellectuals – over the last decade in Australia. Since 1997, especially, this has occurred around Indigenous questions with the result that issues such as the stolen generations, genocide, the apology and reconciliation have also gained new prominence. This is undeniably a good thing. New ways of thinking about history and the nation and new kinds of public ethical discourse have been put into circulation. History as battleground is preferable to the great Australian silence. And yet – my starting point is also the ambivalent effects and meanings of these recent developments, not least the way that the debates have centred so much around the figure of the 'public intellectual', the way that certain kinds of intellectuals and intellectual discourse have come to dominate the mainstream representation of the issues.

Public policy and the prevention of substance-use disorders

Drug prevention has traditionally focused on influencing individual attitudes and behaviours. In particular, efforts have been directed towards adolescents in the school setting. However, evaluations of school-based drug education have identified limited success. There is increasing recognition that drug abuse is one of a number of risk behaviours, including truancy, delinquency and mental health problems, which share common antecedents that begin in the early years of childhood. Furthermore, these behaviours are shaped by macroenvironmental influences including the economic, social, cultural, and physical environment. Drug prevention needs to adopt a broader perspective: with greater collaboration in related programmes such as crime prevention and suicide prevention; with greater attention to the macroenvironmental influences on problem behaviours; and with greater attention to healthy development in the first years of childhood. (C) 2002 Lippincott Williams Wilkins.