Moving Toward Universal Definitions and Assessment of Relational Problems

Foran, Heather M.; Heyman, Richard E.; Beach, Steven R. H.; Kaslow, Nadine J.; Cordaro, Anthony R.; Wamboldt, Marianne Z.; Reiss, David

doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199783267.013.10

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Vignettes depicted patients presenting with relatively mild RPM, which included instances of IPV (i.e., physical and psychological partner violence) that met minimum definitional requirements for an RPM, as well as relationship distress with a spouse or intimate partner. Relationship distress is not a form of IPV; it was included because it is an important risk factor for IPV ( Stith et al, 2008 ) and is associated with negative mental health outcomes (e.g., depression, anxiety, and alcohol use disorder; Foran et al, 2015 ; Whisman, 2007 ). Less prevalent forms of IPV (e.g., sexual partner violence) were not included due to concerns about survey length.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intimate partner violence (IPV) is defined as any behavior within a relationship that causes—or has reasonable potential to cause—physical, sexual, or psychological harm to a partner ( Foran et al, 2015 ; WHO, 2012). Globally, it is estimated that 35% of ever-partnered women have experienced lifetime IPV (WHO, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…WHO guidelines recommend that health professionals screen for IPV when assessing or treating individuals with mental health symptoms (WHO, 2013). Identification of IPV by global mental health professionals (i.e., clinicians who are involved in the assessment and treatment of individuals living with mental health symptoms) may lead to more accurate IPV prevalence data ( Ellsberg & Heise, 2005 ), and help enhance our understanding of IPV risk factors and mental health consequences ( Foran et al, 2015 ). Additionally, IPV assessment in mental health settings may contribute to improved case conceptualizations and referrals to care.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluating the Relationship Between Intimate Partner Violence-Related Training and Mental Health Professionals’ Assessment of Relationship Problems

Burns

Kogan

Heyman

et al. 2021

J Interpers Violence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health problem associated with increased risk of developing mental health conditions. Assessment of IPV in mental health settings is important for appropriate treatment planning and referral; however, lack of training in how to identify and respond to IPV presents a significant barrier to assessment. To address this issue, the World Health Organization (WHO) advanced a series of evidence-based recommendations for IPV-related training programs. This study examines the relationship between mental health professionals’ experiences of IPV-related training, including the degree to which their training resembles WHO training recommendations, and their accuracy in correctly identifying relationship problems. Participants were psychologists and psychiatrists ( N = 321) from 24 countries who agreed to participate in an online survey in French, Japanese, or Spanish. They responded to questions regarding their IPV-related training (i.e., components and hours of training) and rated the presence or absence of clinically significant relationship problems and maltreatment (RPM) and mental disorders across four case vignettes. Participants who received IPV-related training, and whose training was more recent and more closely resembled WHO training recommendations, were more likely than those without training to accurately identify RPM when it was present. Clinicians regardless of IPV-related training were equally likely to misclassify normative couple issues as clinically significant RPM. Findings suggest that IPV-related training assists clinicians in making more accurate assessments of patients presenting with clinically significant relationship problems, including IPV. These data inform recommendations for IPV-related training programs and suggest that training should be repeated, multicomponent, and include experiential training exercises, and guidelines for distinguishing normative relationship problems from clinically significant RPM.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating the Relationship Between Intimate Partner Violence-Related Training and Mental Health Professionals’ Assessment of Relationship Problems

Burns

Kogan

Heyman

et al. 2021

J Interpers Violence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Beach et al ( 2016) described DSM-IV' s and ICD-10' s inclusion of criteria-free codes for relational problems and the process of expanding criteria for DSM-5 and the proposed ICD-11. As noted in Beach et al (2016) and Foran et al (2016), whereas DSM' s exclusive focus is on mental health diagnoses, the ICD encompasses all medical problems (including mental health), given its mandate for worldwide clinical, health system, and public health usefulness. Thus, the ICD necessitates a more holistic approach as well as a more explicit recognition of the variety of contexts and cultures in which the ICD is used.…”

Section: Relational Problems In the Dsm-5 And Proposed Icd-11mentioning

confidence: 99%

Relational disorders and beyond.

Heyman¹

2019

APA Handbook of Contemporary Family Psychology: Family Therapy and Training (Vol. 3).

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this chapter, we describe a program of research to develop and test criteria that could be used reliably and validly in the field-including by those practitioners without a mental health backgroundfor diagnosing relational problems. We also describe the inclusion of these criteria, in modified form, in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013) and in proposals for the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11; World Health Organization, 2016). MENTAL DISORDERS, RELATIONAL PROBLEMS, AND THE DSMFor decades, the DSM's editors have displayed ambivalence about relational problems. Consider how DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013) defines what constitutes a mental disorder:A mental disorder is a syndrome characterized by clinically significant disturbance in an individual' s cognition, emotion regulation, or behavior that reflects a dysfunction in the psychological, biological, or developmental processes underlying mental functioning. Mental disorders are usually associated with significant distress in social, occupational, or other important activities. (p. xiv) Now consider how the DSM-5 introduces relational problems: Key relationships, especially intimate adult partner relationships and parent/ caregiver child relationships, have a significant impact on the health of the individuals in these relationships. These relationships can be health promoting and protective; neutral; or detrimental to health outcomes. In the extreme, these close relationships can be associated with maltreatment or neglect, which has significant medical and psychological consequences for the affected individual. (p. 715) On the one hand, relational problems appear to fit the definition of a mental disorder. On the other hand, the DSM-5 implicitly adopts an ecological perspective on functioning (e.g., Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Mental disorders, according to DSM-5 delineation, can exist only within an individual; disorders in the microsystem (i.e., relational problems) may cause or exacerbate individuals' mental disorders and individuals' mental disorders may cause or exacerbate relational problems, but mental disorders and relational problems operate at different ecological levels-they are separable but intertwined. Some (e.g., Kinghorn, 2013) have argued that this is less a philosophical stance than a

show abstract

“…With about the same prevalence for lifetime experience of both psychological and physical IPV. The public health burden of these problems and their sequelae are tremendous (Foran et al, 2013). Studies of the antecedents of physical IPV have found communication and problem-solving disputes (and the accompanying emotionality in these disputes) to be the most common proximal precipitants (Langhinrichsen-Rohling et al, 2012; O’Leary & Slep, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Couple Conflict Behavior: Disentangling Associations With Relationship Dissatisfaction and Intimate Partner Violence

Heyman

Malik

Baucom

2022

Journal of Family Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates associations between (a) relationship satisfaction and intimate partner violence (IPV: psychological, physical, and sexual) and (b) observed couple communication behavior. Mixed-sex couples ( N = 291) were recruited via random digit dialing. Partners completed the Quality of Marriage Index (Norton, 1983), the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (Straus et al., 1996), and one female-initiated and one male-initiated 10-min conflict conversations. Discussions were coded with Rapid Marital Interaction Coding System, 2nd Generation (Heyman et al., 2015). As hypothesized, lower satisfaction was associated with more hostility ( p =.018) and less positivity ( p < .001); more extensive IPV was associated with more hostility ( p < .001). For negative reciprocity, there was a dissatisfaction × IPV extent × conversation-initiator interaction ( p < .006). Results showed that conflict behaviors of mixed-sex couples are related to the interplay among gender, satisfaction, and the severity of couple-level IPV. Theoretical and clinical implications are discussed.

show abstract

Moving Toward Universal Definitions and Assessment of Relational Problems

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Evaluating the Relationship Between Intimate Partner Violence-Related Training and Mental Health Professionals’ Assessment of Relationship Problems

Evaluating the Relationship Between Intimate Partner Violence-Related Training and Mental Health Professionals’ Assessment of Relationship Problems

Relational disorders and beyond.

Couple Conflict Behavior: Disentangling Associations With Relationship Dissatisfaction and Intimate Partner Violence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About