Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy essays

Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy essays Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, MSBP, also known as Factitious Syndrome by Proxy, is potentially a fatal form of child abuse. The American Psychiatric Associations DSM-IV describes MSBP as Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy is a mental disorder in which a person falsely reports or causes symptoms to another person under his or her care. Falsely claim a child has experienced serious symptoms, such as seizures; Contaminate test results to make a child appear ill; Physically harm the child to produce symptoms. The victim will get better when separated from the perpetrator. The diagnose MSBP has a long history, a rocky future, and fuels disagreements among medical professionals and the public. MSBP is a mental disorder in which a person falsely reports or causes symptoms to another person under his/her chare. The caregiver almost always the mother and the victim; MSBP is considered a form of child abuse. Victims will generally undergo needless and painful medical test. They may become seriously ill, injured or die as a result of the actions of the caregiver. Most children who are victims of MSBP develop emotional problems that can last a lifetime. In 1794, at the age of 74 Baron Munchausen married a 17 year old. After the Baron had retired to bed, his bride continued to dance the night away with another man. Within a year, the new bride gave birth to a son. It was whispered that the Munchausen child would live only a short time. The child died before his first birthday under suspicious circumstances. Charcot, about a century later wrote about an unusual behavior pattern among young men. In 1877, these men would self-inflict injuries or falsify medical documents, attempting to gain hospitalization and treatment. Charcot called the condition mania operative passiva. In 1951, Richard Asher first used the term Munchausen Syndrome to describe a pattern of self-abuse, where indi...

How I Get the Best Out of FundsforWriters Newsletter

How I Get the Best Out of FundsforWriters Newsletter Hopes FFW is a great newsletter and completely deserves its reputation as a great resource for writers. The newsletter is one of a handful. In every edition there is at least one publication I think â€Å"I like the sound of that – Ill send them an LOI or a pitch!† But theres a problem, a catch-22 if you like: Hopes newsletter is way too popular! When I first subscribed to FFW as soon as Id read it I would start researching the publications – check out their style, recent articles etc. But my pitches usually bombed even though I had a really good rate of acceptance from other publications Id researched. The penny dropped when I noticed one publication Id just read about in FFW had closed their doors for submission due to a sudden increase in pitches before I got further than the research. Of course! We were all pitching the same editors at the same time. As soon as I clicked on to this, I changed my approach not just with FFW but with all the newsletters I receive which list magazine submission details. Suddenly my rate of success with these editors vastly improved. I use a staggered approach now. Heres what I do: 1) I read FFW as soon as it appears in my inbox but only for the Editors Thoughts and the Featured Article. Its always good to get new ideas and encouragement. 2) I look at time-sensitive notices like competitions. I admit these are low priority for me as Im too busy with non-fiction work to do much story writing. I also ignore grants because not many of them apply to the UK where I live. 3) This is the important bit: I file FFW newsletter in a special email folder and ignore it for about six months. That way, if theres a flurry of pitches from eager writers, I miss the crush. These publications have usually been around for a while, so theres no rush! I have a stack of about two years of FFWs and other newsletters ready to use now. 4) I then pick an FFW from the back catalog and choose publications to pitch. The choice can be random – might be from six months earlier, or four months, or even a year. It really doesnt matter as long as its old. Its almost stupidly simple but what a difference this has made to the acceptances Ive seen! Now I have a level playing field to pitch to rather than trying to shout to be heard after the sudden interest has died down. Ive found that if youre good enough you wont miss the boat. As long as the publications keep running, theyll always need new articles. For instance, just recently I pitched a piece to Little India – the largest overseas Indian magazine in the world which Hope wrote about at the end of May last year. Despite being a big publication, I heard back from them within 24 hours accepting my pitch and the article was published in April this year. Im quite certain that had I pitched the editor back in May I probably wouldnt have heard from him at all. Sometimes, it seems, the last shall be first.