abstract: The present study examined the behaviors of parents and children during a free play interaction in 20 children with high-functioning autism (HFA) and 20 matched, typically developing children. Observational coding was used to measure sensitive versus controlling parenting behaviors as well as children's responsivity and interest and investment in play. The study also documented whether the child or the parent primarily directed the play interaction. Finally, the study examined the influence of parenting stress on parents' behaviors during play. Group differences in behaviors were assessed along with associations between parent and child behaviors. Further, sequential analyses were conducted to identify whether parent behaviors temporally facilitated children's responses and interest during a play interaction. Results demonstrated group differences in parental sensitivity, parenting stress, child responsivity, and proportion of child-directed play. Parental sensitivity was also associated with child interest and investment as well as the proportion of child-directed play. Finally, sequential analyses demonstrated a temporal association between completely child-directed play and child interest and investment, and between parental sensitivity and child responsivity. These results extend the existing literature on the behaviors of children with autism and those of their parents within play settings, and have important implications for parent-focused play interventions. / Dissertation/Thesis / M.S. Family and Human Development 2013

Tėvai realizuodami savo tėvų valdžią, turi užtikrinti vaiko teisių ir pareigų įgyvendinimą, t.y. veikti vaiko interesais. Tačiau tėvams gyvenant atskirai ar nutraukiant santuoką iškyla klausimas, kuris iš tėvų galės suteikti tinkamesnes sąlygas savo vaikui. Svarbiausias kriterijus nustatant vaiko gyvenamąją vietą yra vaiko interesas – tai vaiko teisės ir pareigos, numatytos ir garantuotos įstatymuose, bendrieji ir individualieji vaiko poreikiai, kuriuos užtikrina vaiko tėvai (ar įstatyminiai vaiko atstovai) įgyvendindami savo tėvų (ar kitų įstatyminių atstovų) teises ir vykdydami pareigas vaikų atžvilgiu. Ši sąvoka nukreipia į kitus teisės aktus, kuriuose išdėstytos vaiko teisės ir pareigos – vaiko intereso sąvokos elementai. Sprendžiant vaikų gyvenamosios vietos klausimą nustatomi objektyvieji kriterijai: kiekvieno iš tėvų galimybės ir pastangos užtikrinti teisės normose įtvirtintų pagrindinių vaiko teisių ir pareigų įgyvendinimas, kiekvieno iš tėvų šeimos aplinkos sąlygos, vaiko norai ir pažiūros, kurių visuma įvertinama vaiko interesų atžvilgiu. Kadangi vaiko interesas individualizuojamas konkrečiu atveju konkrečiam vaikui, nustatant būtent jam svarbius jo turinio elementus, nėra galimybės sudaryti svarbiausių kriterijų katalogo, nes nustačius tokį kriterijų sąrašą gali būti pažeistas tas pats vaiko interesas, jeigu į šį sąrašą nepatektų aplinkybė užtikrinanti tik konkrečiam vaikui reikalingą intereso elementą. Nėra baigtinio sąrašo vaiko intereso elementų – nėra... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Parents should secure implementation of child’s liberties and duties using their parenting rights. It means to protect child’s interests and to be able to assure proper dwelling- place when they decide to separate or seek divorce. Child’s interests are the most important criterions deciding child’s dwelling-place. It involves responsibilities and duties guaranteed by law, general and individual children needs that have to be ensured by parents. This concept points to other law instruments where you can find responsibilities and duties setting elements. Child’s dwelling-place is appointed using objective criterions like parents ability to assure proper home environment, child’s wishes and opinions, parents’ ability to follow responsibilities dictated by law. Every child’s interests are personalized for each child based on important elements and no such catalog of criterion can be created and if such catalog would be created it could violate child’s interests if specific element would not be part of the catalog. There is no final list with elements of child’s interests and there is no catalog evaluating criterions. It is purposeful to use 2002 Lithuanian Supreme Court ruling number 35deciding child’s dwelling-place.

No description available.

La protection de l’enfant constitue une préoccupation majeure de notre droit, afin que le mineur ne soit pas victime d’un dommage. Cette protection est en premier lieu assurée par la famille. Il peut donc paraître surprenant que l’enfant soit victime de sa famille, ce d’autant plus que les parents doivent agir dans l’intérêt de l’enfant. La notion d’enfant victime de sa famille n’existe pas en tant que tel dans notre droit. La victime supporte souvent un dommage causé par un tiers et non par un membre de sa propre famille. L’étude des situations où l’enfant pourrait subir une atteinte à ses droits de la personnalité, en raison d’une action ou d’une omission de l’un des membres de sa famille, a toutefois permis la conceptualisation de la notion d’enfant victime de sa famille. Il a ainsi été possible de qualifier les différentes réalités rencontrées, en fonction de leurs ressemblances ou de leurs dissemblances. Cette analyse empirique a conduit à déterminer des catégories d’enfants victimes de leurs familles auxquelles correspondent un régime de protection. Elle a notamment eu pour conséquence la recherche de nouveaux instruments de protection adaptés aux spécificités des hypothèses étudiées. Ce processus de catégorisation a permis l’accès à la juridicité des réalités sociales et familiales appréhendées. Il a également été l’occasion de mettre en évidence les fondements de la notion d’enfant victime, dans le sens où le droit a consacré des situations classiques d’enfants victimes de leurs familles. L’apparition de nouvelles réalités sociales a cependant rendu nécessaire le renouvellement de la notion d’enfant victime de sa famille, afin de pallier les limites des fondements de la notion et de garantir la représentation effective de ce phénomène dans le discours juridique. / The child protection represents a major cause for concern of our law, so that the minor doesn’t sustain damage. This protection is firstly performed by the family. So, it may seem surprising that the child is victim of his family, as far as parents must act in the interests of the child. The notion of child victim of his family doesn’t exist as such in our law. The victim often endures an injury caused by a third person and not by a family member. The study of situations where the child may suffer an infringement of his personality rights, due to act or omission of one of the family members, allowed conceptualization of the notion of child victim of family. It was thus possible to characterize the different realities encountered, according to their similarities or dissimilarities. This empirical analysis led to ascertain categories of child victims of their families and the corresponding legal system. It had especially as a consequence new protection instruments research, appropriate to specifics assumptions studied. This process allowed social or family realities encountered getting to legal validity. It was also an opportunity to bring out foundations of the concept of child victim of family, in so far as law has hallowed situations of child victims of their families. However, emergence of new social realities necessitated the renewal of the concept of child victim of family, in order to alleviate the limits of the foundations of the notion and to guarantee effective representation of this phenomenon in legal speech.