Living with type 1 diabetes as experienced by young adults.

AIM: Describe young adults` (19-30 years) experiences of living with Type 1 Diabetes (T1D). BACKGROUND: Young adulthood is characterized by adaption to adult roles, gradual separation from parental support and leaving the parental home. Living with T1D in young adulthood raises challenges and concerns. DESIGN: This study has a qualitative design. METHODS: Semistructured interviews with 12 young adults living with T1D for 3-14 years, analysed with qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The analysis revealed contradictory ways of handling the illness, as is illuminated in two main categories (a) and five subcategories (b). Handling the situation and dealing with different opinions (a), (b) managing daily life, emotional roller coaster and general attitudes, own views and apprehensions, ignorance and lack of motivation. Most participants were motivated, had knowledge and were in control of their long-term illness. Planning and structure were an essential part of their daily life. The participants were anxious about losing control of their bodies, the situation, die or be a burden to other people.

Risk behaviour in Swedish adolescents: is shared physical custody after divorce a risk or a protective factor?

BACKGROUND: The increase in shared physical custody in Sweden has been dramatic; 20 years ago only a small percentage of adolescents lived in shared physical custody, but currently ∼30% of the adolescents whose parents have separated or divorced divide their residence between parents. We hypothesized that living in shared physical custody or in a single-parent family is associated with a higher prevalence of adolescent risk behaviour than living in a two-parent family. METHODS: Data on 15-year-old adolescents from the 2005/2006 to 2009/2010 Swedish Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) survey were analysed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Adolescents living in shared physical custody had slightly higher rates of risk behaviour compared with adolescents from two-parent families, but significantly lower rates than their counterparts from single-parent families. Their odds of being a smoker or having been drunk were 60 and 50% higher, respectively, than those of their counterparts in two-parent families. CONCLUSION: Shared physical custody after marriage break-up seems to constitute a health protective factor for adolescents' health and problem behaviour. In order to deepen our understanding of the positive and negative aspects of shared physical custody, our study should be followed by qualitative analyses and longitudinal studies of adolescents' experiences.

Shared physical custody after family split-up: implications for health and well-being in Swedish schoolchildren.

AIM: In Sweden, shared physical custody following a parental separation has emerged as means for children to keep close relationships with both parents. Previous studies show that children benefit from regular contact with both parents, who share responsibility for their social, emotional and economic welfare. In this study, we investigate any associations between family arrangements, that is, two-parent, single and shared physical custody families and child health outcomes and whether this association was modified by parent-child communication. METHODS: Data on 11- to 15-year-old children from the 2005/2006 and 2009/2010 Swedish Health Behaviour in School-aged Children survey were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Children in shared physical custody were more likely than children in two-parent families to report multiple health complaints (OR 1.26) and low well-being (OR 1.71). When variables of parent-child communication were entered in the model, the initial differences remained between children living in shared physical custody and those living in two-parent families. CONCLUSION: Children in shared physical custody and single-parent families are more at risk of negative outcomes compared with children in two-parent families. This association was not modified by parent-child communication in children in shared custody families, indicating that the communication equals that in two-parent family children.

Health outcomes among Swedish children: the role of social capital in the family, school and neighbourhood.

AIM: The aim of the study was to explore the extent to which Swedish children's perceptions of social capital in the family, school and neighbourhood predicted health complaints and well-being. METHODS: The study used data from the Swedish Health Behaviour in School-aged Children survey. The sample consisted of 3926 children aged 11-15 years. Correlations and hierarchical multiple linear regression were performed. RESULTS: Higher degrees of family, school and neighbourhood social capital corresponded to lower levels of health complaints and higher levels of well-being. Social capital in these three spheres had a cumulative effect on children's health and well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Social capital in the family, school and neighbourhood matters for children's health and well-being and the contributions from each context seem to be additive. Besides the family context, investments for improving child health should primarily be in the school, focusing on social relations and on creating safe and cohesive school environments. Neighbourhood social capital is also of importance and so must be taken into consideration when planning child health promotion interventions.