The article reports on the findings of a study designed to explore the thoughts, feelings and fantasies of white South African therapists working interracially. The research was couched within an expanded understanding of Pedersen's Model for training in multicultural psychotherapy. More specifically, it investigates how therapists' therapy-hindering ('anti-client') statements reflect aspects of racial prejudice in South Africa and South African psychology, how their therapy-facilitating ('pro-client') statements reflect racial sensitivity, and how these competing attitudes are negotiated when therapists reflect on them. The contribution of the study is the explication of both positive and negative therapist self-talk in interracial contexts. Implications of the findings are discussed and the development of an Anti-client-Pro-client Model for counsellor sensitivity training is recommended as an extension of the framework promulgated by Pedersen (1985Pedersen ( , 2000.

This article focuses on factors that should be considered when determining whether post-divorce relocation is likely to be beneficial or detrimental to the psychological well-being of children. The article is a reflection on psychological literature and legal cases as opposed to an empirical study. The central arguments of the article are that (a) a continuing shared parental responsibility model rivals the traditional primary caregiver model, (b) downplaying a child's emotional attachment to a non-relocating parent places that child at emotional risk, (c) depriving children of ready access to non-custodian parents to whom they are attached may violate children's rights, and (d) the 'best interests of the child' standard has advantages in the evaluation process. Implications of these argu ments are discussed and a framework for relocation evaluations is offered. While acknowledging the need to protect parents' mobility rights, the 'best interests of the child' is recognised as the principle of paramount importance. In relocation cases, individualised decisions as to a child's best interests necessitate consideration of various factors, which are explicated.

No abstract

No abstract

In post-divorce and post-separation contexts, overnight visitation is being recommended with increasing frequency for non-resident parents. However, there is confusion as to whether sleepover access serves the best interests of young children. My purpose in this paper is to raise awareness and to encourage debate on children's needs regarding overnight contact during early developmental phases. I review available research and reflect critically on emerging trends with reference to attachment theory, practical experience, parental and gender rights, cultural considerations, and adversarial legal contexts. I suggest that insistence on overnight contact in highly contested matters may be a form of overkill that serves parental and legal demands more than the best interests of children, and conclude that individual cases should be assessed with reference to, amongst other things, processes of separation, reunion, and attachment.