Childhood Cancer: Impact On The Family (the Downstate Series Of Research In Psychiatry And Psychology)

The past decade has brought extraordinary gains in the outlook for children stricken with cancer. Though cancer remains a leading cause of death for children and young adults, more victims of child­ hood cancer today will survive than will die. The therapeutic advances and the optimism they instill have prompted researchers and clinicians to analyze the impact of cancer upon young patients and their famil,ies and to devise more effective intervention strategies. Hope and survival, juxtaposed with the continuing high mortality associated with certain forms of the illness, add new challenges to management of the psychosocial aspects of cancer. To respond to these challenges we need research as rigorous as that which continues to make inroads in treating the physical illness. This specific concern for the needs of children suffering from cancer and their families has paralleled an increasing sensitivity on the part of the medical community and the public at large to the limitations of specialized, high technology health care practices. Front Matter....Pages i-xiii Introduction: Psychosocial Challenges in Childhood Cancer....Pages 1-2 Psychogenic Etiology and Prognosis of Cancer—Current Status of Theory....Pages 3-29 Psychogenesis, Stress, Immunity and Cancer Etiology and Prognosis: Discussion of Dr. Fox’s Paper....Pages 31-34 Complexity of Cancer Etiologies: Panel Discussion....Pages 35-41 Clinical Cancer Research: Patient, Parent and Physician Interactions....Pages 43-81 Documentation of Effectiveness of Psychosocial Interventions: Discussion of Dr. Miller’s Paper....Pages 83-86 The Staffing Conference in Pediatric Oncology....Pages 87-103 Not Everyone is Ready to Bring it up in the Classroom: Discussion of Dr. Van Eys’ Paper....Pages 105-108 Therapeutic Strategies at Psychosocial Crisis Points in the Treatment of Childhood Cancer....Pages 109-128 The Crisis of Survival: Discussion of Mrs. Christ’s and Ms. Adams’ Paper....Pages 129-131 Human Responses to Cancer: An Ecological Approach....Pages 133-148 Is a Marriage between Psychoanalysis and Systems Theory Ecologically Sound? Some Psychoanalytic Perspectives on Human Responses to Cancer in Children: Discussion of Dr. Kaplan’s Paper....Pages 149-158 Cross-Cultural Perspectives to Childhood Cancer....Pages 159-171 Importance of Cultural and Religious Experience: Discussion of Dr. Flomenhaft’s Paper....Pages 173-176 Home Care for the Child with Cancer....Pages 177-198 Feasibility and Desirability: Discussion of Drs. Martinson, Nesbit and Kersey’s Paper....Pages 199-201 Coping with Survivorship in Childhood Cancer: Family Problems....Pages 203-211 Not Easily Forgotten? Discussion of Dr. Koocher’s Paper....Pages 213-215 The Elusive Neuropsychiatric Symptoms....Pages 217-245 Damage to the Developing Brain and Subtle Psychiatric Consequences: Implications of the Case of Milton: Discussion of Dr. Christ’s Paper....Pages 247-252 Psychological Issues and Future Directions: General Discussion....Pages 253-296 Back Matter....Pages 297-302 The past decade has brought extraordinary gains in the outlook for children stricken with cancer. Though cancer remains a leading cause of death for children and young adults, more victims of childƯ hood cancer today will survive than will die. The therapeutic advances and the optimism they instill have prompted researchers and clinicians to analyze the impact of cancer upon young patients and their famil, ies and to devise more effective intervention strategies. Hope and survival, juxtaposed with the continuing high mortality associated with certain forms of the illness, add new challenges to management of the psychosocial aspects of cancer. To respond to these challenges we need research as rigorous as that which continues to make inroads in treating the physical illness. This specific concern for the needs of children suffering from cancer and their families has paralleled an increasing sensitivity on the part of the medical community and the public at large to the limitations of specialized, high technology health care practices