Co-Parenting with Shared Custody May Put Less Stress on Kids

{ http://ift.tt/2wLhI2D

When parents divorce often the most important issue, and perhaps the most difficult negotiation, involves the children. Parents typically have strong views on legal and physical custody of the children and how the arrangements should be structured.

New research finds that children who live full time with one parent are more likely to feel stressed than children in shared custody situations. Perhaps surprisingly, this finding persists regardless of the level of conflict between the parents or between parent and child.

Investigators from Stockholm University’s Demography Unit believe habitation with each parent is important because children who spend most of the time away from one parent may lose contact with friends, relatives and even struggle with resources like money.

Previous research has also shown that children may worry about the parent they rarely meet, which can make them more stressed, said Dr. Jani Turunen, a child and adolescent mental health researcher at Stockholm and Karlstad Universities.

Investigators explain that the understanding that children who live full time with one parent are worse psychologically than children in shared physical custody has been previously shown, However, the new study is the first to look specifically at stress.

Shared physical custody is not to be confused with shared legal custody. Shared legal custody only gives both parents the legal right to decisions about the child’s upbringing, school choices, religion, and so on. Shared physical custody means  the child actually lives for equal, or near equal, time with both parents, alternating between separate households.

Researchers analyzed data from the Surveys of Living Conditions in Sweden, ULF, from 2001-2003, combined with registry data. Sweden is a country that is often considered a pioneer in emerging family forms and behaviors like divorce, childbearing and family reconstitution.

Turunen believe the progressive Swedish environment may help other countries deal with comparable issues. Her paper appears in the Journal of Divorce & Remarriage.

In the survey, a total of 807 children with different types of living arrangements answered questions about how often they experience stress and how well, or badly, they get along with their parents. The parents were also queried on how well they get along with their former partner.

Researchers discovered children living with only one of the parents have a higher likelihood of experiencing stress several times a week, than children in shared physical custody. This generally applied even if the parents have a poor relationship, or if the children don’t get along with either of them.

Study results conflict with a previous concern that shared physical custody could be an unstable living situation, which can lead to children becoming more stressed. However, many of the earlier concerns were built on theoretical assumptions, rather than empirical research, says Turunen.

What probably makes children in shared physical custody less stressed is that they can have an active relationship with both their parents, which previous research has shown to be important for children’s well-being.

As the relationship between the child and both of its parents becomes stronger, the child finds the relationship to be better and the parents can both exercise more active parenting.

In other words, living with both parents does not mean instability for the children. It’s just an adaptation to another housing situation, where regular relocation and a good contact with both parents equals stability, Turunen said.

Source: Stockholm University

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via Psych Central News http://ift.tt/2iUcuqu

August 31, 2017 at 08:13AM

Human Stem Cells Fight Parkinson's Disease in Monkeys

{ http://ift.tt/2vM7ISf

LONDON (Reuters)—Scientists have successfully used “reprogrammed” stem cells to restore functioning brain cells in monkeys, raising hopes the technique could be used in future to help patients with Parkinson’s disease.

Since Parkinson’s is caused by a lack of dopamine made by brain cells, researchers have long hoped to use stem cells to restore normal production of the neurotransmitter chemical.

Now, for the first time, Japanese researchers have shown that human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS) can be administered safely and effectively to treat primates with symptoms of the debilitating disease.

So-called iPS cells are made by removing mature cells from an individual—often from the skin—and reprogramming them to behave like embryonic stem cells. They can then be coaxed into dopamine-producing brain cells.

The scientists from Kyoto University, a world-leader in iPS technology, said their experiment indicated that this approach could potentially be used for the clinical treatment of human patients with Parkinson’s.

In addition to boosting dopamine production, the tests showed improved movement in affected monkeys and no tumors in their brains for at least two years.

The human iPS cells used in the experiment worked whether they came from healthy individuals or Parkinson’s disease patients, the Japanese team reported in the journal Nature on Wednesday.

“This is extremely promising research demonstrating that a safe and highly effective cell therapy for Parkinson’s can be produced in the lab,” said Tilo Kunath of the MRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, who was not involved in the research.

The next step will be to test the treatment in a first-in-human clinical trial, which Jun Takahashi of Kyoto University told Reuters he hoped to start by the end of 2018.

Any widespread use of the new therapy is still many years away, but the research has significantly reduced previous uncertainties about iPS-derived cell grafts.

The fact that this research uses iPS cells rather human embryonic stem cells means the treatment would be acceptable in countries such as Ireland and much of Latin America, where embryonic cells are banned.

Excitement about the promise of stem cells has led to hundreds of medical centers springing up around the world claiming to be able to repair damaged tissue in conditions such as multiple sclerosis and Parkinson’s.

While some treatments for cancer and skin grafts have been approved by regulators, many other potential therapies are only in early-stage development, prompting a warning last month by health experts about the dangers of “stem-cell tourism”.

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via Scientific American: Mind & Brain http://ift.tt/n8vNiX

August 31, 2017 at 07:27AM

Walking the Dog for Happiness As Well As Health

{ http://ift.tt/2wV95my

A new U.K. study suggests that people who regularly walk their dogs do so in a pursuit of happiness, rather than to improve physical health or obtain other social benefits.

Experts plan to use this new knowledge to promote the positive emotional outcome from the task. They hope this new perspective will motivate individuals to perform the physical activity which brings physical health benefits to the owner and the pet.

The new focus is necessary as public health professionals note that dog-walking interventions with messages focused on health or social benefits have not been particularly successful.

In the most in-depth study of dog owner’s perceptions of dog-walking to date, University of Liverpool researchers conducted 26 interviews and assessed personal written reflections of dog walking experiences.

The investigators found that while owners may say the reason they go walking is to benefit the dog, the importance of their own improved happiness and well-being is clear.

These feelings of happiness, however, are contingent on the owner believing that their dog is enjoying the walk too. Anything that threatens this, such as behavior problems, a perception that they have a “lazy” dog, or their dog is too old, reduces their motivation to walk.

Increased physical activity and social interactions with other dog owners were found to be secondary bonuses but were rarely motivating.

Dr. Carri Westgarth, a research fellow at the University of Liverpool, said, “The factors that motivate dog walking are extremely complex, yet we know they can strongly motivate human health behavior.”

“It is crucial to understand why owners walk their dogs if we are to be able to effectively promote owners to walk their dogs more.”

With more than eight million dogs in households across the U.K.  (and nearly 10 times that in the United States), dog walking is a popular everyday activity. Dog owners are generally more physically active than non-owners, yet some rarely walk with their dog at all.

An owner briskly walking their dog for at least 30 minutes each day easily exceeds the 150 minutes recommended minimum physical activity per week. If all dog owners did this it would dramatically boost population levels of physical activity.

“It’s clear from our findings that dog walking is used to meet the emotional needs of the owner as well as the needs of the dog. This may explain why pilot dog-walking interventions with messages focused on health or social benefits have not been particularly successful,” Westgarth said.

“Possible key points for future interventions to increase dog walking are to promote how it may increase the dogs, and thus the owner’s, happiness.”

The paper appears in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

Source: University of Liverpool

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via Psych Central News http://ift.tt/2iUcuqu

August 31, 2017 at 07:09AM

Podcast: What Does Binge Eating Disorder Feel Like?

{ http://ift.tt/2eHbHdj

In this episode of the Psych Central Show, hosts Gabe Howard and Vincent M. Wales discuss Binge Eating Disorder. At his heaviest, Gabe weighed 550 pounds. He describes in detail how he went from a “normal-sized” guy to being morbidly obese, his return to being “normal-sized,” and addresses the question of whether he was, in fact, addicted to food. During the second half of the show, our hosts welcome Lisa, a woman who was with Gabe during this period of his life. She shares her experience of what it was like being with someone with binge eating disorder and how he finally confronted it.

*

Show Highlights:

*

[1:13]     What is Binge Eating Disorder?

[5:27]     Is Binge Eating Disorder Really a food addiction?

[11:23]   Gabe’s Friend, Lisa, describes what Gabe was like at 550 pounds.

[12:34]   Gabe confronts binge eating disorder.

[13:45]   Gabe describes his gastric bypass surgery experience.

Listen as Our Hosts Talk About Binge Eating Disorder

“One of the things I remember very specifically about being so heavy was just the difficulty that I had doing things.” ~ Gabe Howard

Proud Sponsor of The Psych Central Show

 

About The Psych Central Show Podcast Hosts

Gabe Howard is an award-winning writer and speaker who lives with bipolar and anxiety disorders. In addition to hosting The Psych Central Show, Gabe is an associate editor for PsychCentral.com. He also runs an online Facebook community, The Positive Depression/Bipolar Happy Place, and invites you to join.  To work with Gabe, please visit his website, gabehoward.com.

 

 

Vincent M. Wales is a former suicide prevention counselor who lives with persistent depressive disorder. In addition to co-hosting The Psych Central Show, Vincent is the author of several award-winning novels and the creator of costumed hero Dynamistress. Visit his websites at http://ift.tt/2fH3c3L and www.dynamistress.com.

 

 

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via World of Psychology http://ift.tt/2jgn2Ba

August 31, 2017 at 06:34AM

'Tapping, Groping, and Many Puppies,' Today's Comic by Ida ... - Vice - VICE

{ http://ift.tt/2vMiZBU

'Tapping, Groping, and Many Puppies,' Today's Comic by Ida Neverdahl

The Norwegian cartoonist illustrates her thoughts about getting man-handled, falling into a pile of puppies, and listening to the rain at the end of a long day.

Check out Ida Eva Neverdahl's Tumblr, blog, and Instagram.

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via hypnotherapy - Google News http://ift.tt/2pSzDSF

August 31, 2017 at 05:38AM

The Night King Is the Most Boring Villain in 'Game of Thrones' - VICE - VICE

{ http://ift.tt/2vuQj5d

It you're not caught up with Game of Thrones, read at your own risk.

The Night King is the unambiguous, all powerful, night supremacist we've seen so many times before, and I get it already: the menacing look, super persistent "keeping it moving" strut, and talent for drafting the undead. He's the Eye of Sauron from the Lord of the Rings, minus the whole stuck-in-a-mountain thing.

And Lord of the Rings was trash for that very reason; one of my many petty, minor controversial opinions. It was a tired fantasy with a tired story structure: All powerful enemy killing clans and making plans while other human(ish) heroes meanwhile squabble about the insignificant. They discover the threat before it's too late. Then opposing sides come together in kumbaya-fist-bump-moment and beat said enemy. Some people die and shit along the way too.

In recent seasons of Game of Thrones, the more complex bad guy and good guy chess pieces are being removed from the board, pushing the Night King to the forefront. He's always been symbolic of that same, tired LOTR formula. Everyone (OK, really just Jon Snow) talks about how powerful he is, but all we've seen him do is ride a horse, watch his undead army trudge along, be scared of water, expose his Javelin skills, and get a zombie dragon to rip through a wall (which, if we're being real, credit goes to Jon Snow for making that happen). With his additional screen time, things are looking familiar and predictable in this space of all-to-familiar, and all-to-predictable fantasy sloths.

Firstly, we should already know why Game of Thrones was great; it challenged expectations and overturned fantasy conventions. According to the rules of basic story structure as mentioned above, every narrative runs in three acts. The first introduces the characters and crew, ex. the Starks, Arryns, Freys, Greyjoys, Lannisters, Targaryens, and the outside threat, the White Walkers. Along with that comes their motivations and positions on the board; some want to survive, others want power, but it all comes down to the Iron Throne. Act Two delves into conflict territory—shitty people being shitty people—rape, sacrifice, betrayal, really good guys getting killed, castration, and really bad guys getting killed. Meanwhile, in the background, the largely ignored threat gets closer and closer. While I'll get to Act Three later, it's those moments in between Acts One and Two that gave GoT its premium status in television.

The narrative didn't care about who you loved as a fan; it didn't care for your comfort or satisfaction as a viewer. Nothing would be attractive as it is in a standard fantasy. Good people would die in horrible, ugly ways. Many were punished for their naivety—much like the expectations of a viewer whose own naivety was bred from classic narratives like the LOTR or Harry Potter. And the bad people, they would last and grow in power because fuck you and your satisfaction. This was the consequence of living in the world of Westeros, where much like our real world, where power trumps decency (RIP Ned).

Enter the growing era of the Night King—where season seven brings us Act Three. The stone-faced, ancient force who has the very boring goal of destroying the main players on the board. It's one dimensional and basic on a level that makes it hard to even call the Night King a villain. He's more like a force of nature. We still don't know if he hurts, feels, or can partake in the concept of betrayal. The White Walkers are simply a movable danger like a tornado that can wipe out all in its path. Which is trash in comparison to the evils of Acts One and Two, where we see the likes of Ramsay Bolton, Petyr Baelish, and Joffrey Baratheon.

Ramsay was a bastard whose insecurities became wrapped up in his own fucked up sadism. The need to torture/rape victims like Sansa Stark and Theon Greyjoy afforded him a feeling of power and status. Every rejection was a brand new excuse to shit on someone weaker. You understood it, but you hated him for the same reasons.

Joffrey was just a sociopath, the product of the entire Lannister house (and to a lesser extent, his drunk, bullying "father," the late King Robert Baratheon). He just benefitted from the gene pool of an inherently evil family.

But once again, like a Donald Trump, you understood it but still hated him.

Then there was Lord Petyr Baelish, the shadiest dude in the whole damn realm. He wanted power without the attention that power brought. He's that guy moving the pieces on both sides of a chess board when heads are turned; but at the same time, he feared death, which explained why he'd opted to pull the strings rather than get his hands dirty. You hated these characters, but you also felt helpless as viewers when they found the successes that the writers afforded them.

So, as we move into Act Three in the final season, most of these nuanced characters are killed off. Everyone is suddenly coming together, moving to their sides on the chess board. Forget about ethical ambiguity: You're now either on the good half or the bad. We've got people who should damn well die suddenly experiencing stupidly near-death escapes like in the case of Jaime Lannister and the magnificent seven. Or Jon and his chosen ass with his nine lives crawling out of sub zero waters. All that satisfying shit the show refused to give viewers is now coming in droves as this very boring, very tired force of nature called the Night King approaches.

Every cliché you could think of happened in season seven, and the ever growing rise of the eye of Sauron—slightly improved edition—is a reminder that Game of Thrones is fighting against its original mandate. I don't mind the occasional bit of narrative satisfaction, but I also want to feel uncomfortable again. And I want to see the Night King talk some smack for a change, have some interesting motivation, and wipe out the masses—I mean, throw in a zombified Little Finger to stir up some shit among the Night King's commanders or something. It's the only way I can feel justified in my view that the Lord of the Rings and everything in its wake was trash and that the Game of Thrones will be so much better.

Follow Noel Ransome on Twitter.

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via hypnotherapy - Google News http://ift.tt/2pSzDSF

August 31, 2017 at 05:38AM

How keeping a dream diary could boost your creativity

{ http://ift.tt/2vuyqU3

By Alex Fradera

For me, dreams and creativity have always been wound tightly together. As a teenager leafing through my dad’s Heavy Metal comic strip anthologies, it was Little Nemo in Slumberland (about a character who has fantastic dreams) that stunned me the most. When I became a psychology researcher, I was fascinated with altered states and formed a short-lived dream research group with my fellow PhD students – somnambulant life seemed so mysterious, and the then-received wisdom that dreams were just brain static was becoming untenable. Today, outside of my science hours, I perform improvisational theatre, most intensively with The Dreaming, a surrealistic troupe mimicking dream-logic. And in recent years, I’ve made my sporadic dream-logging into a habit (tip: keep a voice recorder by your bed and capture everything you can without worrying about sense or structure). Could this habit make me more creative? According to new research published in the Journal of Creative Behavior, it could.

Together with my own sense that dreams feed creativity, there are a number of anecdotes that press the same message: Mendeleev’s discovery of the periodic table, Elias Howe’s conception of the lock-stitch sewing machine, Descarte’s road to the scientific method and James Cameron’s ideas for The Terminator, were all apparently inspired by dreams. What’s more, evidence suggests that greater dream recall is correlated with measures of creativity. This could simply be because creative people remember their dreams better (maybe finding them more interesting). To show that dream recall actually benefits creativity you really need an experimental setup, which is just what Mauricio Sierra-Siegert and his team at the Colegiatura Colombiana attempted.

The researchers asked their undergraduate sample to twice complete a measure of creativity, 27 days apart. The measure, the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking, involves working ambiguous visual fragments into full pictures, which judges then rate for their creative content. For example, someone might work a couple of isolated curves into the number eight, a snowman, or an intricate snaking hydra with faces depicting different political figures.

In the days between the assessments, 55 of the participants spent time each morning writing up the dream content they could remember from the night before. A 32-strong control group wrote instead about a vivid event from the previous day.

At the beginning and end of the study, the participants also reported how often they remembered their dreams. Those in the dream condition who started out remembering the fewest dreams – the bottom third of the group – showed an increase, from remembering one dream a month to one a week on average, suggesting that the dream diary exercise had been effective (the lowest scorers on dream recall in the control group also showed an increase during the course of the study, perhaps due to “regression to the mean”, but their increase was not as great as that shown by participants in the dream condition).

Did keeping a dream diary lead to a creativity boost? The Torrance test of creativity can be scored in terms of “raw” features like the volume of ideas, degree of extra details, and abstractness of titles of the drawings, and although the dream loggers showed an improvement in these raw scores, so did the control group (and indeed, so too did a third, non-intervention group who simply took the test twice, suggesting a benefit to performance owing simply to practice).

But the test can also be scored by evaluating more closely the content of the images, rating qualities such as the degree of emotional expressiveness, presence of narrative to the imagery, humour, richness of imagery and presence of fantasy. These are the sort of creative elements commonly associated with dreams, and indeed, the dream-logging participants showed improvements in their creative content scores whereas the control participants did not.

By repeatedly bringing their waking-state attention back to the workings of dream consciousness, Sierra-Siegert and his colleagues suggest the participants in the dream diary condition were encouraging a “cross-fertilization” between the two modes, making more accessible the creative leaps and elaboration common to dreams. Repeated referral to dream content similarly characterised the explorative leaps of the surrealists, and many of our most distinctive film-makers, from David Lynch to Christopher Nolan, blend or explore elements across these boundaries to create their work. If you desire to be creative along these lines, it seems worth paying attention to what your dream life has to offer.

Alex Fradera (@alexfradera) is Staff Writer at BPS Research Digest

—Minding the Dreamer Within: An Experimental Study on the Effects of Enhanced Dream Recall on Creative Thinking

{ All Hypnosis Feeds

via BPS Research Digest http://ift.tt/2bxzvQM

August 31, 2017 at 05:05AM