The Need for Parental Support for Migrant Parents in Transition Into Sweden: A Perspective.

Migration is a stressful experience and research shows that newly arrived migrants in Sweden suffer from different challenges and struggle to relate to parenting in a new culture that is different from their own. The Swedish Child Health Services (CHS) focuses on promoting health among children, as well as supporting parents in parenting. Although this is a goal, migrant parents participate at lower rates in parental support groups. This paper aims to discuss how the Swedish CHS can support these families and address the need for improvement in the parental support offered to migrant parents during transition into their host country. In addition, this paper also aims to review and discuss the advantages of using a community-based participatory research approach together with the Swedish CHS to identify and apply culturally appropriate support programs to increase health literacy among migrant parents. The Swedish government decided to place greater emphasis and resources on supporting parents and promoting equal health among families in Sweden, with special emphasis on migrants and other vulnerable groups. This report from the Swedish government indicates the importance of creating knowledge about new ways, methods, and actions that may be needed to increase this support. One suggestion of this paper is to provide culturally appropriate healthcare work using a community-based participatory research approach, where migrant parents themselves are actively involved in the development of support programs. This approach will not only provide migrant families knowledge and support, it will also build on their needs and the challenges they can share, and receive support to overcome.

Health and capabilities: a conceptual clarification.

There are great health disparities in the world today, both between countries and within them. This problem might be seen as related to the access to various kinds of capabilities. It is not fully clear, however, what the exact relation is between health and capabilities. Neither Amartya Sen nor Martha Nussbaum has explicitly formulated a theory of health to go with their theories of capabilities. This paper attempts to present a clarification of the conceptual relation between health and capabilities. Health, it is argued, should be seen as a holistic multi-dimensional phenomenon, made up of basic abilities and subjective well-being, and of fundamental states and processes. Using this theory, the paper shows how health is related to Nussbaum's ten capabilities. It is argued that health, in the senses described, is a necessary part of all ten capabilities. Moreover, some of the capabilities on Nussbaum's list, such as thinking and imagining, and practical reasoning, refer to health. Finally, it is shown that even though health is part of all capabilities, health cannot itself primarily be seen as a capability. An acceptable degree of health is required as a functioning for any theory of human flourishing to be reasonable.

Everyday life when growing up with a mother with an intellectual or developmental disability: Four retrospective life-stories.

Background: The voices of those who have grown up in a family with maternal intellectual or developmental disability (IDD) are valuable for gaining an understanding of their situation, which is essential in order to be able to support these families and avoid potentially detrimental situations.Aim: The study aim was to describe the experience of having grown up in a family where the mother has an IDD, with a focus on everyday life and perceived health consequences in adult life.Method: A qualitative method with retrospective narrative interviews and narrative content analysis was chosen. In-depth interviews were performed with four women who had experiences of a childhood with maternal IDD.Findings: Four themes emerged: Living under adverse circumstances; Dealing with one's everyday life situation; Receiving insufficient support and wishing for more; and The echo from childhood into adult life. The findings revealed a distressing childhood, characterized by neglect, abuse, anxiety, and overburdening responsibilities, and also endeavors to keep the family situation a secret, while at the same time wanting the adult world to react.Discussion: The findings can hopefully stimulate occupational therapists and other professionals to more effectively identify the situation of these children and provide support to prevent adverse future health conditions and poor well-being.

Existential loneliness: An attempt at an analysis of the concept and the phenomenon.

BACKGROUND: According to ethical guidelines, healthcare professionals should be able to provide care that allows for the patients' values, customs and beliefs, and the existential issues that are communicated through them. One widely discussed issue is existential loneliness. However, much of the debate dealing with existential loneliness concludes that both the phenomenon and the concept are quite vague. AIM: To clarify what constitutes existential loneliness, and to describe its lived experiences. A further aim was to provide a definition of existential loneliness that can function as a tool for identifying the phenomenon and for differentiating it from other kinds of loneliness. METHOD: A literature review including theoretical and empirical studies. Different search strategies were used to gather the articles included in the study. The analysis of the empirical studies had an interpretative approach. The articles were also analysed with the aim of providing a definition of existential loneliness. This was done by means of criteria such as language, uniqueness, theory and usefulness. This study is not empirical and does therefore not require an ethics review. RESULTS: The analysis resulted in two main characteristics. The first one was perceiving oneself as inherently separated (disconnected) from others and from the universe. The second one brings out emotional aspects of EL, such as isolation, alienation, emptiness and a feeling of being abandoned. The empirical findings were divided into two categories: experiences of EL and circumstances in which EL arises. A definition of EL is also suggested, based on the two main characteristics identified. CONCLUSION: In order to meet patients' needs, it is an ethical duty for healthcare staff to be able to recognise experiences of EL, that is, to communicate with the patients about these experiences in an appropriate manner. This in turn demands knowledge about existential issues and skills to deal with them.

Behavior Change or Empowerment: On the Ethics of Health-Promotion Goals.

One important ethical issue for health promotion and public health work is to determine what the goals for these practices should be. This paper will try to clarify what some of these goals are thought to be, and what they ought to be. It will specifically discuss two different approaches to health promotion, such as, behavior change and empowerment. The general aim of this paper is, thus, to compare the behavior-change approach and the empowerment approach, concerning their immediate (instrumental) goals or aims, and to morally evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these two goal models, in relation to the ultimate goal of health promotion. The investigation shows that the behavior-change approach has several moral problems. First of all, it is overly paternalistic and often disregards the individual's or group's own perception of what is important-something that also increases the risk of failed interventions. Furthermore, it risks leading to 'victim blaming' and stigmatization, and to increased inequalities in health, and it puts focus on the 'wrong' problems, i.e., behavior instead of the 'causes of the causes'. It is thereafter shown that the empowerment approach does not have any of these problems. Finally, some specific problems for the empowerment approach are discussed and resolved, such as, the idea that empowering some groups might lead to power over others, the objection that the focus is not primarily on health (which it should be), and the fact that empowered people might choose to live lives that risk reducing their health.

The Characteristics of Local Support Systems, and the Roles of Professionals, in Supporting Families where a Mother has an Intellectual Disability.

BACKGROUND: There might be a need for support for families where the mother has an intellectual disability, in order to counteract the effects of potential parental inadequacy and other detrimental aspects of the family situation. The purpose of this study was to describe how professionals characterized such support and the collaboration required. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Focus group interviews involving 29 professionals were conducted and analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Five themes were identified: The roles and activities of the professionals involved; ways in which needs of support are identified; problems in identifying mothers with an intellectual disability; how professionals coordinate their support and work together; and the dilemma concerning legislative actions. CONCLUSIONS: By identifying both fruitful and problematic aspects of professional support, the findings may be used to enhance future support. More efficient chains of information and improved inter-sector collaboration between professions may further enhance the support practices.

Venkatapuram's Capability theory of Health: A Critical Discussion.

The discussion about theories of health has recently had an important new input through the work of Sridhar Venkatapuram. He proposes a combination of Lennart Nordenfelt's holistic theory of health and Martha Nussbaum's version of the capability approach. The aim of the present article is to discuss and evaluate this proposal. The article starts with a discussion of Nordenfelt's theory and evaluates Venkatapuram' critique of it, that is, of its relativism, both regarding goals and environment, and of the subjectivist theory of happiness used. Then the article explains why Nordenfelt's idea of a reasonable environment is not a problem for the theory, and it critiques Venkatapuram's own incorporation of the environment into the concept of health, suggesting that this makes the concept too wide. It contends, moreover, that Venkatapuram's alternative theory retains a problem inherent in Nordenfelt's theory, namely, that health is conceived of as a second-order ability. It is argued that health should, instead, be defined as first-order abilities. This means that health cannot be seen as a capability, and also that health cannot be seen as a meta-capability of the kind envisioned by Venkatapuram. It is, furthermore, argued that the theory lacks one crucial aspect of health, namely, subjective wellbeing. Finally, the article tries to illustrate how health, in the suggested alternative sense, as first-order abilities, fits into Nussbaum's capability theory, since health as an 'actuality' is part of all the 'combined capabilities' suggested by Nussbaum.

Empowerment in healthcare policy making: three domains of substantive controversy.

This paper distinguishes between the uses of empowerment across different contexts in healthcare policy and health promotion, providing a model for the ethical and political scrutiny of those uses. We argue that the controversies currently engendered by empowerment are better understood by means of a historical distinction between two concepts of empowerment, namely, what we call the radical empowerment approach and the new wave of empowerment. Building on this distinction, we present a research agenda for ethicists and policy makers, highlighting three domains of controversy raised by the new wave of empowerment, namely: (1) the relationship between empowerment and paternalistic interferences on the part of professionals; (2) the evaluative commitment of empowerment strategies to the achievement of health-related goals; and (3) the problems arising from the emphasis on responsibility for health in recent uses of empowerment. Finally, we encourage the explicit theorisation of these moral controversies as a necessary step for the development and implementation of ethically legitimate empowerment processes.

Does Amphetamine Enhance Your Health? On the Distinction between Health and "Health-like" Enhancements.

It is an imperative within health care, medicine, and public health to restore, preserve, and enhance health. Therefore, it is important to determine what kinds of enhancement are increases in health and what kinds are not. Taking as its point of departure two conceptions of health, namely, "manifest health" and "fundamental health," the paper discusses various means used to enhance ability and well-being, and if those means, such as wheelchairs, implants, medicines, stimulants, or narcotics, enhance health. The fact that some means that enhance ability or well-being are not usually considered health enhancing, for example, narcotics, constitutes a problem. The paper ends with a discussion of some suggestions about how to distinguish between those enhancements that are health related and those that are not. One plausible idea holds that an enhancement is health related when the substance, or aid, increases ability or well-being, is integrated into the body, and does not harm the individual's fundamental health.

A qualitative approach to assessing work ability.

PROBLEM: We often need to be able to assess the extent to which individuals have or lack work ability. For this we need instruments. Most of the instruments available have flaws. They either lack validity or they use roundabout methods when collecting information about the individual's work ability. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to present a conceptual model for constructing a questionnaire that can be used for assessing work ability. METHODS: The methods used are philosophical, i.e. analytical and deductive. A conceptual theory is provided, and based on the resulting definition of the concept of "work ability" conclusions are drawn regarding how to assess work ability. RESULTS: When constructing quantitative instruments, we can increase validity through using a more strict definition of work ability. However, such an approach will only solve some of the problems noted above. The proposal is, instead, to create a qualitative questionnaire, founded on a definition of "work ability", which focuses on the concrete problems concerning the work ability of the individual. Finally, a sketch of such an instrument is provided, with questions covering all the relevant aspects of work ability. CONCLUSION: The qualitative questionnaire proposed is believed to be superior to more traditional (quantitative) instruments for assessing a person's work ability, as well as for finding solutions to her problems concerning work ability.

Health and morality: two conceptually distinct categories?

When seeing immoral actions, criminal or not, we sometimes deem the people who perform them unhealthy. This is especially so if the actions are of a serious nature, e.g. involving murder, assault, or rape. We turn our moral evaluation into an evaluation about health and illness. This tendency is partly supported by some diagnoses found in the DMS-IV, such as Antisocial personality disorder, and the ICD-10, such as Dissocial personality disorder. The aim of the paper is to answer the question: How analytically sound is the inclusion of morality into a theory of health? The holistic theory of Lennart Nordenfelt is used as a starting point, and it is used as an example of a theory where morality and health are conceptually distinct categories. Several versions of a pluralistic holistic theory are then discussed in order to see if, and if so, how, morality can be conceptually related to health. It is concluded that moral abilities (and dispositions) can be seen as being part of the individual's health. It is harder to incorporate moral virtues and moral actions into such a theory. However, if immoral actions "cluster" in an individual, and are of a severe kind, causing serious harm to other people, it is more likely that the person, for those reasons only, be deemed unhealthy.

The concept of work ability.

INTRODUCTION: The concept of "work ability" is central for many sciences, especially for those related to working life and to rehabilitation. It is one of the important concepts in legislation regulating sickness insurance. How the concept is defined therefore has important normative implications. The concept is, however, often not sufficiently well defined. AIM AND METHOD The objective of this paper is to clarify, through conceptual analysis, what the concept can and should mean, and to propose a useful definition for scientific and practical work. RESULTS Several of the defining characteristics found in the literature are critically scrutinized and discussed, namely health, basic standard competence, occupational competence, occupational virtues, and motivation. These characteristics are related to the work tasks and the work environment. One conclusion is that we need two definitions of work ability, one for specific jobs that require special training or education, and one for jobs that most people can manage given a short period of practice. Having work ability, in the first sense, means having the occupational competence, the health required for the competence, and the occupational virtues that are required for managing the work tasks, assuming that the tasks are reasonable and that the work environment is acceptable. In the second sense, having work ability is having the health, the basic standard competence and the relevant occupational virtues required for managing some kind of job, assuming that the work tasks are reasonable and that the work environment is acceptable. CONCLUSION These definitions give us tools for understanding and discussing the complex, holistic and dynamic aspects of work ability, and they can lay the foundations for the creation of instruments for evaluating work ability, as well as help formulate strategies for rehabilitation.

Health promotion and disease prevention: logically different conceptions?

The terms "health promotion" and "disease prevention" refer to professional activities. But a "health promoter" has also come to denote a profession, with an alternative agenda compared to that of traditional public health work, work that by some is seen to be too medically oriented, too reliant upon prevention, risk-elimination and health-care. But is there really a sharp distinction between these activities and professions? The main aim of the paper is to investigate if these concepts are logically different, or if they are just two extremes of one dimension. The central concepts, health promotion and disease prevention, are defined, and it is concluded that health promotion and disease prevention are logically distinct concepts, although they are conceptually related through a causal connection. Thus, logically, it is possible to promote health without preventing disease, even if this is not so common, in practice, but it is not possible to prevent disease without promoting health. Finally, most health promoting interventions target basic health, not manifest health, and often also thereby reduce future disease.

Health promotion or disease prevention: a real difference for public health practice?

It appears that there are two distinct practices within public health, namely health promotion and disease prevention, leading to different goals. But does the distinction hold? Can we promote health without preventing disease, and vice versa? The aim of the paper is to answer these questions. First, the central concepts are defined and the logical relations between them are spelt out. A preliminary conclusion is that there is a logical difference between health and disease, which makes health promotion and disease prevention two distinct endeavours. However, since disease is defined in relation to health, as those kinds of internal processes and states that typically lead to ill health, the difference is smaller than it might appear. Second, in order to answer the practical question whether it is possible to promote health without preventing disease, and vice versa, several kinds of public health interventions are discussed. The conclusion is that while health promotion and disease prevention can be distinguished conceptually, they can hardly be distinguished in practice. Most general measures do both at the same time.

Empowerment: a conceptual discussion.

The concept of 'empowerment' is used frequently in a number of professional areas, from psychotherapy to social work. But even if the same term is used, it is not always clear if the concept denotes the same goals or the same practice in these various fields. The purpose of this paper is to clarify the discussion and to find a plausible and useful definition of the concept that is suitable for work in various professions. Several suggestions are discussed in the paper, for example control over life or health, autonomy, ability, self-efficacy, self-esteem, and freedom, and it is concluded that there are two plausible complementary uses, one as a goal and one as a process or approach. Empowerment as a goal is to have control over the determinants of one's quality of life, and empowerment as a process is to create a professional relation where the client or community takes control over the change process, determining both the goals of this process and the means to use.

A two-dimensional theory of health.

The starting point for the contemporary debate about theories of health should be the holistic theory of Lennart Nordenfelt, claims George Khushf, not the refuted theory of Christopher Boorse. The present paper is an attempt to challenge Nordenfelt and to present an alternative theory to his and other theories, including Boorse's. The main problems with Nordenfelt's theory are that it is relativistic, that it leads to counter-intuitive results as to what goals can count as healthy, that it focuses on the wrong kind of abilities, that it makes measuring health extra difficult, and that it does not give us a sufficient account of health, at most a necessary one. The alternative theory proposed is two-dimensional. First, health is to have developed the abilities and dispositions that members of one's culture typically develop, and be able to use them, in acceptable circumstances; and second, health is to experience positive moods and sensations, the kinds that have internal causes. The theory solves the problems attached to Nordenfelt's theory by not being individual relativistic, by eliminating the goals in the definition, by giving an alternative interpretation of "ability," by making health easier to measure, and by adding the dimension of well-being that, together with health as ability, not only gives us a necessary, but also a sufficient, account of health.

Empowerment: a goal or a means for health promotion?

Empowerment is a concept that has been much used and discussed for a number of years. However, it is not always explicitly clarified what its central meaning is. The present paper intends to clarify what empowerment means, and relate it to the goals of health promotion. The paper starts with the claim that health-related quality of life is the ultimate general goal for health promotion, and continues by briefly presenting definitions of some central concepts: "welfare", "health" and "quality of life". Several suggestions as to what empowerment is are then discussed: autonomy, freedom, knowledge, self-esteem, self-confidence, and control over health or life. One conclusion of this discussion is that empowerment can be seen as a complex goal which includes aspects of the three central concepts welfare, health and quality of life. To the extent that the empowerment goals aimed at are health-related, it is concluded that empowerment is a legitimate goal for health promotion. But empowerment is not only a goal, it can also be described as a process or as an approach. This process, or approach, in a fundamental way involves the participants in problem formulation, decision making and action, which means that the experts have to relinquish some of their control and power.

The goals of health work: Quality of life, health and welfare.

Health-related quality of life is the ultimate general goal for medicine, health care and public health, including health promotion and health education. The other important general goal is health-related welfare. The aim of the paper is to explain what this means and what the consequences of these assumptions are for health work. This involves defining the central terms "health", "quality of life" and "welfare" and showing what their conceptual relations are. Health-related quality of life has two central meanings: health-related well-being, which constitutes quality of life, and health as ability, which contributes causally to quality of life. Four meanings of health-related welfare are put forward: general well-being, health as ability, other inner properties of the individual, and external factors. States and processes covered by these categories contribute causally to health-related quality of life. Finally, using these distinctions, some more specific goals for medicine and health care, on the one hand, and for public health and health promotion, on the other, are outlined. In the former fields work is primarily directed towards changing the health-related quality of life of the individual through direct measures, "manipulating" the individual, whereas public health work and health promotion primarily use indirect measures and further health through various sorts of health-related welfare changes, e.g. through changing the environment.