Thus far, histories about autism have pointed to descriptions of parents of autistic children with the claim that Kanner abstained from assigning them causal significance. Understanding the theoretical context in which Kanner's practice was embedded is essential to sorting out how he could have held such seemingly contrary views simultaneously.
This thesis illustrates that Kanner held an explicitly descriptive frame of reference toward his eleven child patients, their parents, and autism. Adolf Meyer, his mentor at Johns Hopkins, trained him to make detailed life-charts under a clinical framework called psychobiology. By understanding that Kanner was a psychobiologist by training, I revisit the original definition of autism as a category of mental disorder and restate its terms. This history illuminates the theoretical context of autism's discovery and has important implications for the first definition of autism amidst shifting theories of childhood mental disorders and the place of the natural sciences in defining them.
Pediatric anxiety disorders are highly prevalent and while pharmacological intervention seems to be an effective treatment, the validity of reported adverse side effects remains unclear. <br/><br/>Objective: To analyze the nature of evidence regarding adverse side effects in the pharmacological treatment of pediatric anxiety disorders. <br/><br/>Approach: A search using Google Scholar, PubMed, and PsychInfo was conducted for meta-analyses of pharmacological treatment of pediatric anxiety disorders as well as randomized controlled trials. The focus was on adverse events.<br/><br/>Results and Conclusion: Reportings of a limited number of adverse events were found among resources available to clinician and patient informed sources to inform pharmacological treatment of pediatric anxiety disorders. Only a small fraction of adverse side effects were found in the research literature. This finding raises concerns about making informed decisions to treat pediatric anxiety disorders with pharmacotherapy.
The ethics of forensic professionalism is often couched in terms of competing individual and societal values. Indeed, the welfare of individuals is often secondary to the requirements of society, especially given the public nature of courts of law, forensic hospitals, jails, and prisons. We explore the weaknesses of this dichotomous approach to forensic ethics, offering an analysis of Psychology's historical narrative especially relevant to the national security and correctional settings. We contend that a richer, more robust ethical analysis is available if practitioners consider the multiple perspectives in the forensic encounter, and acknowledge the multiple influences of personal, professional, and social values. The setting, context, or role is not sufficient to determine the ethics of forensic practice.