1) Hejsan! Vilken bra sida:)..

Jag undrar vad det kan vara för fel om man är trött hela tiden. Jag är inte trött så jag somnar, men är trött generellt och har får pressa mig själv till att orka prata med folk ibland. Jag jobbar med människor och på grund av tröttheten blir jag väldigt disträ och klarar inte att konsentrera mig och det fungerar inte när man skall lyssna på någon annans problem. Jag vet att det inte beror på sömn för jag sover som regel 8-9 timmar varje natt. Någon annan sa också att det kan bero på att man har för lite B12 i kroppen. Vad kan det vara annars?? Tusen tack för svar:-)

/Pia

Winnicott formulated and developed the idea of the good-enough mother. The good-enough mother is a mother whose conscious and unconscious physical and emotional attunement to her baby adapts to her baby appropriately at differing stages of infancy.

Three key aspects of the environment identified by Winnicott are holding, handling and object-presenting. The mother may thus hold the child, handle it and present objects to it, whether it is herself, her breast or a separate object. The good-enough mother will do this to the general satisfaction of the child. The good-enough mother tries to provide what the infant needs, but she instinctively leaves a time lag between the demands and their satisfaction and progressively increases it. As Winnicott states: "The good-enough mother...starts off with an almost complete adaptation to her infant's needs, and as time proceeds she adapts less and less completely, gradually, according to the infant's growing ability to deal with her failure" (Winnicott, 1953). The good enough mother stands in contrast with the "perfect" mother who satisfies all the needs of the infant on the spot, thus preventing him/her from developing.

The good-enough mother's behaviour can be described as the graduated failure of adaptation. Her failure to satisfy the infant needs immediately induces the latter to compensate for the temporary deprivation by mental activity and by understanding. Thus, the infant learns to tolerate for increasingly longer periods both his ego needs and instinctual tensions.

Winnicott sees the micro-interactions between the mother and child as central to the development of the internal world. After the early stage of connection with the mother and illusions of omnipotence comes the stage of relative dependence (objective reality) where children realize their dependence and learn about loss. The mother's failure to adapt to every need of the child helps them adapt to external realities. As the infant develops, the good-enough mother, unconsciously aware of her infant's increasing ego-integration and capacity to survive, will gradually fail to be so empathic. She will unconsciously "dose" her failures to those that can be tolerated, and the infant's developing ego is strengthened, the difference between "me" and "not-me" clarifies, omnipotence is relinquished, a sense of reality begins to emerge, mother can be increasingly seen as a separate person, and the capacity for concern can develop. This way the mother helps the child to develop a healthy sense of independence. Failure in this stage may result in the formation of a False self.

The trick of the good-enough mother is to give the child a sense of loosening rather than the shock of being 'dropped'. This teaches them to predict and hence allows them to retain a sense of control. Rather than sudden transition, this letting go comes in small and digestible steps, in which a transitional object may play a significant part.

The final phase of development, to independence, is never absolute as the child is never completely isolated. The mother's role is thus first to create illusion that allows early comfort and then to create disillusion that gradually introduces the child into the social world. Winnicott recognized that the child needs to realize that the mother is neither good nor bad nor the product of illusion, but is a separate and independent entity.

Barn som växer upp i familjer med ensamstående föräldrar är dubbelt så vanligt som sina motsvarigheter för att utveckla allvarliga psykiska sjukdomar och missbruk senare i livet, enligt en viktig ny studie.

Forskare har i åratal diskuterat huruvida barn från splittrade familjer studsar tillbaka, eller om det är större risk att barn vars föräldrar vistelse tillsammans för att utveckla allvarliga känslomässiga problem.

Studien visar att ekonomiska svårigheter kan spela en roll, men andra experter säger att forskning stöder också uppfattningen att kvaliteten på föräldraskap kan vara en faktor.

I studien används det svenska nationella register, som täcker nästan hela befolkningen och innehåller omfattande socioekonomiska och hälsoinformation.

Forskarna fann att barn med ensamstående föräldrar var dubbelt så stor risk som andra att utveckla en psykisk sjukdom som depression eller schizofreni, att ta livet av sig eller försöker begå självmord, och att utveckla ett alkohol-relaterade sjukdomar.

Flickor var tre gånger större risk att bli missbrukare om de levt med en ensam förälder, och pojkar var fyra gånger högre risk.

Hela området är mycket omdebatterad och jag tycker det är mkt intressant att läsa om med tanke på att over 50 % av föräldrarna går separata vägar. Läs hela Artikeln här.

BTW, risken att ett skilsmässobarn skiljer sig som vuxen är dubbelt så hög jämfört med barn som inte upplevt en skilsmässa. Det visar två färska undersökningar. Läs mer.

Hur kan jag hjälpa mitt barn att utveckla en god självkänsla?

Min dotter fyller snart 8 år. Tack på förhand ;)

A:
Development (and maintenance ) of self esteem starts from a very young age and continues on into adulthood. By the time a child is latency age (5-9) much of the groundwork has already been laid down by parents and peers become increasingly more involved in one's self esteem.

Most adolescents have many struggles with self-esteem as they begin to obtain the cognitive ability to become more introspective and developmentally prepare for life on their own. It is very helpful for parents to understand child development in order to better assess their child's abilities and balance the parental need to be both supportive (nurturing) and demanding (increasing responsibility and accomplishments).

When discussing "self esteem" I think it helps to define two separate aspects. 1) self esteem 2) confidence. Many use these terms interchangeably but they are not one in the same.

1. Self-esteem = one's own inner feelings about themselves, their abilities, their attributes and their worth. The ability to feel good about one's self. LOVE
In general, when a person feels they are loved, liked, and cared for by those around them (friends, family, even acqaintances) they will develop growing self-esteem. "I am worthwhile". On the other hand, when a person feels unloved or rejected they will have diminishing self-esteem. "My boyfriend left me for another girl and I feel so ugly."

2. Confidence= the outward projection of behaviors, attitudes, appearances, and abilities. The ability to take on new challenges and appear capable to others. COMPETENCY
In general, when a person meets new challenges successfully they will develop growing confidence. "I always new that I could be famous". On the other hand, when a person is too anxious to bother taking new challenges or tries things too difficult resulting in failures they will have diminished confidence. "My mom never let me ride my bike outside the yard because she said it was too dangerous."

Parents should find ways to always remain fond of their children. Unconditional love (or the next best thing). Encourage relationships that enhance the love/adoration that is recieved. Discourage those that appear problematic or emotionally abusive.

Parents should struggle to find the right balance of pressing their child to "go for it" when there is a good chance for success and not be overly anxious about their child's ability/safety. At the same time, parents should avoid exaggerating pressure in areas the child is either unlikely to accomplish or has no desire or gain in accomplishing. With parental guidance and knowledge of a child's abilities, achievements and failures should appear more like a well balanced gungbräda. than an erratic one in which there is high risk of injury...Dr. Lacy

Att fa barn är en omvälvande process och man upptäcker tidigt att barnuppfostran är en svår men viktig del av vardagen. Jag tror att bli föräldrar är en av de största omvälvningarna som vuxna människor går igenom. Det tog mig några månader att komma in i mammarollen. Vår son ar idag 6 månader gammal och jag lär mig ngt nytt varje dag.

Barn kommer till världen fullständigt utlämnade och kräver av oss som föräldrar kärlek, uppmärksamhet och omtanke. Det låter självklart, men när man stupar av trötthet är det värt att påminna sig själv.

Barnuppfostran är ett omdiskuterat ämne och idag finns fler råd, uppfattningar och debatter om barnuppfostran än någonsin tidigare. Som forälder kan man lätt känna sig förvirrad om vad som ar "rätt"och "fel."

Alla barn har sina individuella behov och alla familjer har sin unika sammansättning. Men jag tror att en del saker är ändå av grundläggande betydelse för samspel och uppfostran:

• Den positiva inställningen till barnet.
• Förmågan och viljan att förmedla kärlek och glädje.
• Respekten för barnet och barnets känslor.

Uppfostran handlar om att stödja barnets utveckling. Även gränssättning, konsekvenser och rutiner måste ses i ljuset av detta.l

Visst låter det enkelt men vi vet alla att vi inte klarar att vara lika uppmärksamma hela tiden. Ibland saknas det energi, ibland räcker inte tiden till.

Det bästa ar nog att följa sin egen intuition och föregå med gott exempel. Jag tror även att det är väldigt viktigt som förälder att mitt i all barnuppfostran ta tid för dig själv och relationen. Hur ni som individer mår och er relation till varandra präglar barnet. Känner ni er tillfreds med er själva så har ni också mer att ge till ert barn.

Har du tips och idéer om barnuppfostran?

Lämna gärna en kommentar eller en fraga.

Some theorists propose that the concept of “mental illness” as we know it is a false paradigm.  One may view society as individuals playing within a collective game.  Each of individual is trying to maximize their potential and gain with minimal effort or suffering.  Some individuals understand and play the rules of the game better than others.  Problems therefore arise. 

 "The struggle for definition is veritably the struggle for life itself. In the typical Western two men fight desperately for the possession of a gun that has been thrown to the ground: whoever reaches the weapon first shoots and lives; his adversary is shot and dies. In ordinary life, the struggle is not for guns but for words; whoever first defines the situation is the victor; his adversary, the victim. For example, in the family, husband and wife, mother and child do not get along; who defines whom as troublesome or mentally sick?...[the one] who first seizes the word imposes reality on the other; [the one] who defines thus dominates and lives; and [the one] who is defined is subjugated and may be killed."…Szasz

 Mental health disorders are medical metaphors describing incidents when the individual’s desires or behaviors are in conflict with society or nature.  Problems of living such as depression, anxiety, and even psychosis exist to be sure.  However, it is false to liken them to traditional medical diseases that should be “treated” by a medical doctor. Psychiatrists are similar to “soul doctors”, the successors of priests or shamans, who deal with the spiritual “problems in living” that have troubled people forever. 

 While people behave and think in ways that are very disturbing, this does not mean they have a disease.  Society’s definition of mental illness sometimes seems like a matter of semantics.  Thomas Szasz, one of the leading psychiatrists of this view, wrote: "If you talk to God, you are praying; If God talks to you, you have schizophrenia. If the dead talk to you, you are a spiritualist; If you talk to the dead, you are a schizophrenic."

 Through various Mental Health Acts or laws, psychiatry has slowly become a social control system, which disguises itself under the claims of scientificity.    

It should be noted that Szasz’s views have been rejected by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and the psychiatric establishment.  His views are often inappropriately lumped in with less astute psychiatry deniers such as the Scientologists.  While I disagree with much of his views, there is something compelling about them especially for any psychiatrist who has ever worked in military, forensic or disability evaluations. Dr. Lacy