Planning for Emotional Labor and Secondary Traumatic Stress in Child Welfare Organizations

This analysis provides an emergent framework that emphasizes a neglected component of both direct practice with families and organizational development. Human emotions, both beneficial (positive emotional labor) and harmful (negative emotional labor), have received short shrift in leadership development, supervision, direct practice preparation and supports, and workforce stabilization, and professionalization. Significantly, a key indicator of negative emotional labor—secondary traumatic stress (STS)—often has been ignored and neglected, despite the fact that it may be endemic in the workforce. STS typically results from traumatic events in practice, but it also stems from workplace violence. Often undetected and untreated, STS is at least a hidden correlate and perhaps a probable cause of myriad problems such as questionable practice with families, life-work conflicts, undesirable workforce turnover, and a sub-optimal organizational climate. Special interventions are needed. At the same time, new organizational designs are needed to promote and reinforce positive emotional labor. Arguably, positive emotional labor and the positive organizational climates it facilitates are requisites for harmonious relations between jobs and personal lives, desirable workforce retention, and better outcomes for children and families. What’s more, specialized interventions for positive emotional labor constitute a key component in the prevention system for STS. A dual design for positive emotional labor and STS (and other negative emotional labor) prevention/intervention is provided herewith. Early detection and rapid response systems for STS, with social work leadership, receive special attention. Guidelines for new organizational designs for emotional labor in child welfare are offered in conclusion.

Calmodulin -regulated processes and intracellular calcium in the heat stress response of mammalian cells

Three approaches were used to examine the role of Ca$\sp{2+}$- and/or calmodulin (CaM)-regulated processes in the mammalian heat stress response. The focus of the first approach was on the major Ca$\sp{2+}$-binding protein, CaM, and involved the use of CaM antagonists that perturbed CaM-regulated processes during heat stress. The second approach involved the use of a cell line and its BPV-1 transformants that express increased basal levels of CaM, or parvalbumin--a Ca$\sp{2+}$-binding protein not normally found in these cells. The last approach used Ca$\sp{2+}$ chelators to buffer Ca$\sp{2+}$-transients.^ The principle conclusions resulting from these three experimental approaches are: (1) CaM antagonists cause a temperature-dependent potentiation of heat killing, but do not inhibit the triggering and development of thermotolerance suggesting some targets for heat killing are different from those that lead to thermotolerance; (2) Members of major HSP families (especially HSP70) can bind to CaM in a Ca$\sp{2+}$-dependent manner in vitro, and HSP have been associated with events leading to thermotolerance. But, because thermotolerance is not affected by CaM antagonists, and antagonists should interfere with HSP binding to CaM, the events leading to triggering or developing thermotolerance were not strongly dependent on HSP binding to CaM; (3) CaM antagonists can also bind to HSP70 (and possibly other HSP) suggesting an alternative mechanism for the action of these agents in heat killing may involve direct binding to other proteins, like HSP70, whose function is important for survival following heating and inhibiting their activity; and (4) The signal governing the rate of synthesis of another major HSP group, the HSP26 family, can be largely abrogated by elevated Ca$\sp{2+}$-binding proteins or Ca$\sp{2+}$ chelators without significantly reducing survival or thermotolerance suggesting if the HSP26 family is involved in either end point, it may function in (Ca$\sp{2+}$) $\sb{\rm i}$ homeostasis. ^