Search results for ‘Subject term:"mental health problems"’ Sort:
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Evidence of potentially harmful psychological treatments for children and adolescents
- Author:
- MERCER Jean
- Journal article citation:
- Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 34(2), 2017, pp.107-125.
- Publisher:
- Springer
This paper applies the concept of potentially harmful psychotherapies (PHTs; Lilienfeld, Perspectives on Psychological Science 2(1):53–70, 2007) to concerns about potentially harmful treatments for children and adolescents (PHTCs). The author proposes that such treatments can be identified by methods derived from the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study and from the NIS-4 study of abuse and neglect, as well as by their plausibility or congruence with established child development theory and research. Five psychological treatments for children and adolescents that have been reported as harmful are examined, using evidence from published materials, journalists' reports, legal documents and Internet sites. Details of treatment and outcomes are compared to relevant ACE and NIS-4 criteria and to plausibility, and empirical support for the treatments is examined. The examined treatments use methods that would be considered adverse childhood experiences or abusive or neglectful care events if they occurred outside a therapeutic setting. Most, but not all, lack empirical support of effectiveness and are incongruent with established information about child development. Risks associated with PHTCs can thus be identified through close examination before children are exposed to them and harmed. Prevention or reduction of PHTC use may be possible. Public and professional education about PHTCs are essential parts of child protection in this context and are arguably an ethical obligation of both social workers and psychologists. (Edited publisher abstract)
Dyadic developmental psychotherapy is not 'evidence-based': comments in response to Becker-Weidman and Hughes
- Authors:
- MERCER Jean, et al
- Journal article citation:
- Child and Family Social Work, 15(1), February 2010, pp.1-5.
- Publisher:
- Wiley
This article refutes a recent claim that Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy (DDP), a mental-health intervention for children, is an evidence-based treatment (EBT), and that practitioners should not confuse evidence based practice (EBT) with empirically supported therapies - EBTs. A common definition of EBP is ‘integration of the best research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values’, whereas EBTs have been defined by some authors as interventions shown to produce therapeutic change by research using well-designed controlled clinical trials. This paper examines the meaning of the EBT term and the accuracy of the claim, concluding that DDP does not meet the criteria that would allow it to be called evidence-based. Noting other problems with this previous research, and identifying ways in which the original authors could provide better support for their claim, the authors suggest that while DDP may provide potential advantages for some families, more detailed case history is required.
Holding therapy and dyadic developmental psychotherapy are not supported and acceptable social work interventions: a systematic research synthesis revisited
- Authors:
- PIGNOTTI Monica, MERCER Jean
- Journal article citation:
- Research on Social Work Practice, 17(4), July 2007, pp.513-519.
- Publisher:
- Sage
This article re-examines material discussed in a systematic research synthesis by Craven and Lee. The authors find that two of the interventions for foster children discussed by Craven and Lee were erroneously classified as supported by evidence of efficacy, and one, holding therapy, is shown to be potentially physically harmful to children. Detailed evidence is offered to show that holding therapy and dyadic developmental psychotherapy are not appropriately categorized as supported and acceptable interventions.