Cognitive Development of Very Low Birth Weight Children from Infancy to Pre-school Age

The survival of preterm born infants has increased but the prevalence of long-term morbidities has still remained high. Preterm born children are at an increased risk for various developmental impairments including both severe neurological deficits as well as deficits in cognitive development. According to the literature the developmental outcome perspective differs between countries, centers, and eras. Definitions of preterm infant vary between studies, and the follow-up has been carried out with diverse methods making the comparison less reliable. It is essential to offer parents upto-date information about the outcome of preterm infants born in the same area. A centralized follow-up of children at risk makes it possible to monitor the consequences of changes in the treatment practices of hospitals on developmental outcome. This thesis is part of a larger regional, prospective multidisciplinary follow-up project entitled “Development and Functioning of Very Low Birth Weight Infants from Infancy to School Age” (PIeniPAinoisten RIskilasten käyttäytyminen ja toimintakyky imeväisiästä kouluikään, PIPARI). The thesis consists of four original studies that present data of very low birth weight (VLBW) infants born between 2001 and 2006, who are followed up from the neonatal period until the age of five years. The main outcome measure was cognitive development and secondary outcomes were significant neurological deficits (cerebral palsy, CP, deafness, and blindness). In Study I, the early crying and fussing behavior of preterm infants was studied using parental diaries, and the relation of crying behavior and cognitive and motor development at the age of two years was assessed. In Study II, the developmental outcome (cognitive, CP, deafness, and blindness) at the age of two years was studied in relation to demographic, antenatal, neonatal, and brain imaging data. Development was studied in relationship to a full-term born control group born in the same hospital. In Study III, the stability of cognitive development was studied in VLBW and full-term groups by comparing the outcomes at the ages of two and five years. Finally, in Study IV the precursors of reading skills (phonological processing, rapid automatized naming, and letter knowledge) were assessed for VLBW and full-term children at the age of five years. Pre-reading skills were studied in relation to demographic, antenatal, neonatal, and brain imaging data. The main findings of the thesis were that VLBW infants who fussed or cried more in the infancy were not at greater risk for problems in their cognitive development. However, crying was associated with poorer motor development. The developmental outcome of the present population was better that has been reported earlier and this improvement covered also cognitive development. However, the difference to fullterm born peers was still significant. Major brain pathology and intestinal perforation were independent significant risk factors for adverse outcome, also when several individual risk factors were controlled for. Cognitive development at the age of two years was strongly related with development at the age of five years, stressing the importance of the early assessment, and the possibility for early interventions. Finally, VLBW children had poorer pre-reading skills compared with their full-term born peers, but the IQ was an important mediator even when children with mental retardation were excluded from the analysis. The findings suggest that counseling parents about the developmental perspectives of their preterm infant should be based on data covering the same birth hospital. Neonatal brain imaging data and neonatal morbidity are important predictors for developmental outcome. The findings of the present study stress the importance of both short-term (two years) and long-term (five years) follow-ups for the individual, and for improving the quality of care.

The Construction of ‘Disciplinary’ Violence Against Children — Social Workers’, Police Officers’ and Parents’ Rationales

This dissertation examines parental disciplinary violence against children in authority records and in the criminal procedure in Finland. The main aim is to analyze disciplinary violence, how it is defined, and how it is constructed as a crime by social workers, the police, and parents. This dissertation consists of four sub-studies and a summary article. In the first sub-study, I examine how disciplinary violence appears in child welfare documents and analyze the decision-making processes and measures taken by the child welfare workers. The second sub-study, utilizing police interview data, examines police officers’ perceptions of disciplinary violence, its criminalization, and its investigation. In addition to this analysis of police officers’ own perceptions, in the third sub-study, I use reports of crime and pre-trial investigation documents to look at what a typical suspicion of disciplinary violence coming to the attention of the police is and examine the decision-making processes of the police. Utilizing authority data, the fourth sub-study analyzes how parents rationalize the use of disciplinary violence to the authorities investigating these suspicions. The research provides findings that are unprecedented in Finland. Firstly, it was shown that social workers’ decision-making processes in suspicions of disciplinary violence follow three pathways of reasoning, with many factors taken into consideration; and in less than one-third of the cases, a request for criminal investigation has been made to the police. Secondly, it was verified that police officers hold different perceptions of disciplinary violence, and these perceptions have multiple effects on the investigation of these cases and the construction of disciplinary violence as a crime. Thirdly, the analysis of the reports of crime and pre-trial investigation documents showed that almost two-thirds of the cases of disciplinary violence had been sent to a prosecutor by the police and, thus, defined as a crime. However, in many cases, acts of disciplinary violence were often seen as ‘educational, petty one-off incidents’ and a possible trial and punishment for the perpetrator were seen as unreasonable. Fourthly, it was found that parents often try to neutralize and rationalize the violence they have used against their children, for example, either by denying the victim, the criminal intent, or the entire act, or relying on the necessity of the forbidden act. The dissertation concludes that disciplinary violence is defined and constructed in authority policies and practices, first and foremost, by the severity of the act, the nature of the act as continuous or singular, the perceived harm caused by the act to a child, and the perceptions of authorities regarding physical punishment of children. The asymmetrical power setting present in disciplinary violence and parents’ legitimized right to raise and discipline their children partly seem to explain why criminal-law processing of these suspicions of violence and understanding these as crimes is difficult. Finally, this research calls for more coherent and consistent authority practices and policies, achieved by educating authorities and increasing awareness on disciplinary violence, questions the need for a concept like ‘disciplinary’ violence, and suggests more emphasis on unambiguous perceptions of a child’s best interest.