Welcome to issue 28 numbers 2/3 of the journal.
In the first paper Diogo Carreiras, Mariana Guilherme, Marina Cunha, and Paula Castilho discuss the measurement of self-disgust in adolescence. Their paper provides details of the adaptation and validation of a new instrument for the Portuguese adolescent population. Self-disgust is a complex emotion related to feeling aversion or revulsion about internal and personal physical attributes, personality, functioning and behaviours. It is a highly relevant but under-explored aspect of the lives of many young people with SEMH. This study involved 540 adolescents (n = 308 females, 57%), with ages between 13 and 18 years. The data suggest that the MSDS-A provides s a valid measure to assess self-disgust in adolescents, with important implications for clinical contexts and research.
In the second paper Megan Bowes, Mark Forshaw and Rachel Tarling discuss their investigation of the health behaviours and health beliefs in individuals with social, emotional and mental health (SEMH) difficulties. Given that individuals with SEMH difficulties often exhibit negative health behaviours it is perhaps surprising that little qualitative research aiming to understand why exists. Their present study aimed to uncover reasons for poor health behaviours in individuals at a specialist SEMH college. Participants seemed aware of the potential severity of ill-health following negative health behaviours, yet this only appeared to influence behaviour when they believed themselves as susceptible to the illness. Coping with adversity and social influence were key barriers in reducing unhealthy behaviours, with perceived barriers outweighing any potential health benefits. Participants engaging in unhealthy behaviours appeared to minimise the potential risks associated with each behaviour. The authors conclude that students with SEMH difficulties perform negative health behaviours for various reasons including social influence, enjoyment and coping with adversity. Addressing these factors may help to improve the health behaviours of this cohort.
In the next paper Emma Condliffe presents an analysis of young people’s experience of isolation rooms/booths in UK mainstream secondary schools. Internal isolation has become a mainstay of behaviour management across UK Schools. However, despite the extensive use of isolation rooms/booths, the supporting evidence-base for such measures remains scant. In contrast, there is growing concern about the impact such punitive spaces have on wellbeing. Unstructured interviews were conducted with five participants aged 11-18 with repeated experiences of spending time in isolation rooms/booths. The findings highlight the impact of isolation on young people’s wellbeing and add to the evidence-base for further understanding IRBs, whilst questioning their appropriateness as a legitimate, psychologically safe sanction in schools.
In paper four Sarah Kew-Simpson, Rebecca Williams, Dennis Kaip, Nigel Blackwood, and Hannah Dickson report on an exploratory qualitative analysis of clinicians’ perceptions of the mental health needs of young people in alternative provision educational settings. They suggest that 1 in 2 young people who are educated in Alternative Provision (AP) educational settings have social, emotional and mental health difficulties. However, the extent to which the mental health needs of these young people are currently being met by Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) is less clear. Findings from semi-structured interviews conducted with 15 CAMHS practitioners who had worked with young people educated in AP settings suggest that young people educated in AP settings have complex mental health needs for which they are currently not receiving adequate support, due to shortcomings within AP schools and numerous external barriers to care. Implications for clinicians and service commissioners include a need for further integration between CAMHS and education services, and better quality support across AP settings.
In paper five Gaye Tyler-Merrick, and Sivanes Phillipson discuss the feasibility of TOGETHER which is a collaborative educator-parent programme for teaching social and emotional competence in young children. This programme was designed to build a more collaborative relationship between educators and parents so that they could, together, develop children’s social and emotional competence skills by using positive behaviour support strategies in an Australian early years setting. The results indicated an increase in educator and parent positive responses to young children’s appropriate behaviour and a decrease in their challenging behaviour. The findings also showed inconsistencies between educators in implementing the strategies. Educators and parents developed a more collaborative relationship.
In the next paper Rebecca Jones, Jana Kreppner, Fiona Marsh, and Brettany Hartwell present the outcomes of a systematic review of children and young people’s (CYP) perceptions and experiences of punitive behaviour management policies and practices in secondary schools. The findings highlight CYP’s thoughts on the fairness and consistency of punitive consequences, the impact of these on academic development and emotional wellbeing, and the limited long-term effectiveness of such approaches. CYP explain their need to feel listened to, understood and supported with their behaviour and emotions. Implications of these views for school staff, educational professionals and education policy makers are outlined.
In the final paper Linda Plantin Ewe, Mona Holmqvist, and Sven Bolte report on a study of teachers’ relational competence. This study examined whether teachers’ professional development of their relational competence with students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and/or autism spectrum disorder (ASD) modifies teachers’ and students’ perceptions of their teacher-student relationships. The findings suggest that enhancing teachers’ understanding of relational competence concerning neuro diverse (ND) students will not only improve their own perceptions of their teacher student relationships but also those of ND female students. Nonetheless, directing teachers’ focus towards one student group (ND students) risks diminishing teachers’ attention towards other student groups, potentially explaining the poorer follow-up results among neuro typical boys. This finding warrants further investigation, as it indicates a challenge for teachers to establish sufficient relational engagement with all students.