Evaluation of a brief child-focused group-based intervention for anxiety-disordered children

This paper presents a pilot study of a brief, group-based, cognitive-behavioural intervention for anxiety-disordered children. Five children (aged 7 to 13 years) diagnosed with a clinically significant anxiety disorder were treated with a recently developed 6-session, child-focused, cognitive-behavioural intervention that was evaluated using multiple measures (including structured diagnostic interview, self-report questionnaires and behaviour rating scales completed by parents) over four follow-up occasions (posttreatment, 3-month follow-up, 6-month follow-up and 12-month follow-up). This trial aimed to (a) evaluate the conclusion suggested by the research of Cobham, Dadds, and Spence (1998) that anxious children with non-anxious parents require a child-focused intervention only in order to demonstrate sustained clinical gains; and (b) to evaluate a new and more cost-effective child-focused cognitive-behavioural intervention. Unfortunately, the return rate of the questionnaires was poor, rendering this data source of questionable value. However, diagnostic interviews (traditionally the gold standard in terms of outcome in this research area) were completed for all children at all follow-up points. Changes in diagnostic status indicated that meaningful treatment-related gains had been achieved and were maintained over the full follow-up period. The results would thus seem to support the principle of participant-intervention matching proposed by Cobham et al. (1998), as well as the utility of the more brief intervention evaluated.

The development of an observation tool for use with parents with psychiatric disability and their preschool children

Community-based treatment and care of people with psychiatric disabilities has meant that they are now more likely to engage in the parenting role. This has led to the development of programs designed to enhance the parenting skills of people with psychiatric disabilities. Evaluation of these programs has been hampered by a paucity of evaluation tools. This study's aim was to develop and trial a tool that examined the parent-child interaction within a group setting, was functional and easy to use, required minimum training and equipment, and had acceptable levels of reliability and validity. The revised tool yielded a single scale with acceptable reliability. It had discriminative validity and concurrent validity with non-independent global ratings of parenting. Sensitivity to change was not investigated. The findings suggest that this method of evaluating parenting is likely to have both clinical and research utility and further investigation of the psychometric properties of the tool is warranted.

The effect of non-standard employment on work-family balance

Across the last four decades, the structure of the Australian labour market has changed profoundly as non-standard forms of employment have become more prevalent. According to many researchers, the growth of non-standard work has been driven by employee preferences, particularly among married women, for greater flexibility to balance paid work with domestic responsibilities and other non-work related pursuits. In contrast, other researchers argue that the increasing prevalence of non-standard employment reflects employer demands for greater staffing flexibility. From this perspective, non-standard forms of employment are considered to have a negative effect on work-family balance. This paper explores whether non-standard employment is associated with improved or poorer work-to-family conflict and tests whether experiences vary by gender. It concentrates on three common forms of non-standard employment: part-time employment, casual and fixed-term work contracts and flexible scheduling practices (such as evening work, weekend work and irregular rostering). Analysis is based on 2299 employed parents from the first wave of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics on Australia (HILDA) project. Results show that few scheduling measures are significant determinants of work-family balance. However, part-time employment is associated with reduced work-to-family strain for both men and women, even after controlling for various other employment and household related characteristics. Casual employment, in contrast, incurs the cost of poorer work-family balance for men. Surprisingly, HILDA data show that overall men experience greater work-to-family strain than women.