• There are TWO parts to this assignment.

Part 1 – Critical Theory and the Feminist Perspective
For your initial post to this discussion:
• Identify a family-related problem.
• Briefly explain how to apply both of the following:
• Critical theory.
• Feminist perspective.
• Analyze what makes each perspective unique in its exploration of the issue you have identified.
• Your initial post must cite at least two references and be at least 250 words in length, not counting the reference list or a repetition of the discussion topic. Cite your sources in APA 6th edition format

Part 2 – Critical Theory and the Feminist Perspective
Respond to the initial posts of at least two other learners. When responding, evaluate the clarity of the other learners’ summaries:
•What areas are unclear?
•What information needs more elaboration?
•What suggestions for improvement would you offer?
Your response should be at least 150 words in length and contain at least one reference to a journal article. Cite your sources in APA 6th edition format.
1st Learner Post:
written by Axelsson, Granlund, and Wilder (2013) focused on engagement in family activities for children with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD) in comparison to children with typical development. This quantitative study analyzes the data collected from questionnaires by using Mann–Whitney U-test and Spearman’s rank correlation test.The overall results of this study found that children with typical development were more engaged in the activities that their families participated in. The p-value of this study was set to P < 0.05. Which makes the results very significant in this area in showing that there is a definite difference in the two groups of children. This information could be used to help parents to increase the involvement of children with PIMD.
The second article focused on the neurocognitive outcomes in children with four chronic illnesses. Moser, Veale, McAllister, and Archer (2013) research the measures in which the intellectual and cognitive characteristics.The data collected was taken from age appropriate achievement tests for each child. The study looked at many areas in combination with academic performance, educational status, educational measurement, learning, achievement, developmental delay, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, behavioral disorders, IQ, cognition, school problems, absenteeism, school attendance, anxiety, learning regression, or developmental regression. The p-value listed in this study was P < 0.01. Therefore, one would be able to consider the results found in this study to be very reliable for use and in determining how well students with the listed problems will be able to function in the classroom.
Axelsson, A. K., Granlund, M., & Wilder, J. (2013). Engagement in family activities: a quantitative, comparative study of children with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities and children with typical development. Child: Care, Health & Development; 39(4), 523-534. doi:10.1111/cch.12044.
Moser, J. J., Veale, P. M., McAllister, D. L., & Archer, D. P. (2013). A systematic review and quantitative analysis of neurocognitive outcomes in children with four chronic illnesses. Pediatric Anethesia, 23 (11), 1084-1096. doi:10.1111/pan.12255
2nd Learner Post:
Women survivors of child abuse: Don’t ask, don’t tell
This study explored the experiences of women survivors: child abuse disclosure, general practitioners service use and thoughts on being asked about their abuse experiences. A “cross-sectional study containing quantitative and qualitative questions was conducted with 108 women child abuse survivors” (Lee, Lee, & Kulkarni, 2012). The quantitative approach was used to demonstrate cumulative responses (Lee, Lee, & Kulkarni, 2012). The researcher utilized “IBM SPSS Statistics version 20.20 and it was used for Descriptive analyses such as percentages and means” (Lee, Lee, & Kulkarni, 2012). The researcher used a scale to measure their responses. The scale used was “the Comprehensive Child Maltreatment Scale for Adults (CCMS-A), and it is a self-report instrument, which requires participants to report child abuse experiences retrospectively” (Lee, Lee, & Kulkarni, 2012). This scale contains five subscales: sexual abuse, physical abuse, psychological maltreatment, neglect and witnessing family violence, and a total score (Lee, Lee, & Kulkarni, 2012). This results were that “the rates of child abuse inquiry by general practitioners and disclosures by women survivors remain low and the majority of women survivors reporting feeling relieved and none offended when asked about their child abuse experiences, general practitioners should consider asking women who present to their practice about such experiences: This may facilitate early intervention” (Lee, Lee, & Kulkarni, 2012). Based on the results of this study, “it is recommended that general practitioners consider asking patients about their child abuse history if they present with related symptoms such as depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress, poor general health or gastrointestinal and gynaecological issues” (Lee, Lee, & Kulkarni, 2012) . This could be the “first step to providing child abuse survivors with the opportunity to access appropriate intervention for long standing issues related to their experiences”(Lee, Lee, & Kulkarni, 2012).
http://btci.edina.clockss.org/cgi/reprint/7/4/322.pdf
A Critical Review of Quantitative Analyses of Children Exposed to Domestic Violence: Lessons for Practice and Research
This article” reviews 5 quantitative meta- and mega-analyses on the effects of childhood exposure to domestic violence”. (Fowler & Chanmugam, 2007) This article research and practice implications “are derived from quantitative analyses that may assist child welfare professionals, domestic violence advocates, and researchers interested in providing effective intervention and services to childhood exposure to domestic violence (CEDV) (Fowler & Chanmugam, 2007) ” . This study reviews several different quantitative studies to determine the effects domestic violence has on children who are exposed. These studies varied because “measurements of the independent and dependent variables under study are affected by definitional issues, by the reporter of the data, and by the recruitment setting of the sample” (Fowler & Chanmugam, 2007). The researchers used regression, correlation, t-test, and it was determining that in each of the studies present in this article defining the independent and dependent variable correctly was the greatest problem. Each researcher defined the independent and dependent variable differently. Therefore, the research is not clearly defined by definition. One bias is” the systematic screening for the presence of domestic violence by child welfare professionals and systematic screening of child abuse by domestic violence service providers are both challenging because of the clinical trust issues and parent–child dynamics involved” (Fowler & Chanmugam, 2007). Parents do not want to lose their children, and children fear losing their parents (Fowler & Chanmugam, 2007). Therefore, this research is best used when understanding the independent and dependent variables.
Thelma Farrar
References
Fowler, D., & Chanmugam, A. (2007, October). Review of Quantitative Analyses of. Brief Treatment & Crisis Intervention, 7(4), 322.
Lee, A., Coles, J., Lee, S. J., & Kulkarni, J. (2012). Women survivors of child abuse: Don’t ask, don’t tell. Australian Family Physician, 41(11), 903-6.
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1237134615?accountid=458