RISULTATI RICERCA

La teoria che adottiamo sull’abbandono è determinante per l’impo¬stazione del percorso adottivo e per la possibilità che esso si configuri come un’occasione offerta al bambino di superare i propri traumi; per il buon esito dell’adozione è indispensabile che il percorso adottivo si costituisca come una opportunità per gli adottati di trovare adulti in grado di comprendere il loro dolore e di rispecchiare correttamente la loro esperienza. Il contributo si focalizza su due aspetti tra loro correlati; le motivazioni che conducono i genitori biologici ad abbandonare un figlio e l’impostazione con i bambini adottati di un corretto atteggiamento di aiuto a trovare una spiegazione all’abbandono. Sulla base della considerazione che i bambini adottati sono più vulnerabili ai problemi psicologici, presentano difficoltà scolastiche maggiormente significative dei loro pari non-adottivi, e accedono ai servizi di salute mentale, in una percentuale sensibilmente maggiore rispetto al resto della popolazione, viene proposto un modello di adozione che affianchi alla riparazione, la dimensione non meno importante della elaborazione. Compito dell’adozione è quindi, non solo quello di fornire al bambino le buone cure genitoriali che non ha avuto, ma permettergli, attraverso un lungo e continuo percorso di elaborazione, di sentirsi integrato e recuperare la continuità del proprio sé.

Il contributo pone a confronto due riferimenti teorici l’approccio narrativo di Sluzki e le teorie del significato personale di Guidano e Ugazio al fine di esplorare le storie portate in seduta da soggetti con disturbi fobici e con disturbi alimentari psicogeni. Dall’analisi effettuata emergono specifiche differenze, tra i due gruppi di pazienti, nell’utilizzo di elementi semantico-lessicali, differenze che richiamano la peculiarità dei significati personali che le teorie di riferimento considerano tipici dei due quadri clinici considerati.

Il presente articolo illustra una metodica consolidata di trattamento terapeutico della coppia in crisi (conflitto perdurante, disturbi della comunicazione, sintomi manifesti in uno dei partner, ecc.) gestita con il coinvolgimento di due terapeuti in équipe e articolata in quattro fasi. Presenta la prima fase di consultazione iniziale considerata delicato momento di impostazione e affronta il tema fondante del contratto terapeutico individuando condizioni che favoriscono od ostacolano il percorso di trattamento. Giustifica la seguente fase di sedute in formato di coppia, la terza fase cruciale delle sedute individuali e la quarta fase di sedute con la ripresa del formato di coppia che sfocia nel termine della terapia. Illustra quindi le ragioni relazionali individuate che sottostanno solitamente alla crisi di coppia: eccessivo legame con le famiglie di origine, rottura del contratto implicito, autonomizzazione di uno dei partner non sopportata dall’altro e propone scelte terapeutiche utili al superamento della crisi. Presenta criteri per la impostazione della terapia a partire dalla parificazione che superi le attribuzioni immobilizzanti (sano, malato; sensato, squilibrato; innocente, colpevole; ecc.) facendo leva sulla progressiva responsabilizzazione di ambedue i partner allo scopo di orientarli ad un recupero di benessere condiviso o di acquisizione di capacità di scelta per la separazione. Propone aspetti tecnici di conduzione di seduta e presenta casi che illustrano la metodica ed il percorso.

The essay tries to clarify some relations between negative liberty and the free market. The main conclusion is that negative liberties can be guaranteed only if the market is appropriately limited. This conclusion is reached by the following steps: (i) there is only one liberty essential to the market and this is the liberty to exchange goods and services; this is a positive (not a negative) liberty, more precisely a legal power; to have this power means to be able to acquire, transfer and renounce negative liberties; (iv) all negative liberties can be acquired, transferred and renounced if the market is not limited.

The essay discusses a central problem of modern moral philosophy: «Is it possible to argue rationally about good life?». Kantian ethics, of which Habermas is the main exponent, gives a negative answer to this question, limiting the sphere of moral philosophy to that of «right». Habermas conceives «good» and «values» in a subjectivistic way, putting them beyond the reach of rational reasoning. Anyhow it is possible to argue instead that values are transcendent with respect to the subject (Ricoeur, Joas, Taylor), and that consequently it does exist a form of «practical reeasoning» which, while not linked to abstract universalism, it is a learning process internal to values themselves (Taylor). The general meaning of this critique to Habermas is not to reject deontological universalistic ethic, but to define the relationships between good and right without giving up the rationality this ethics purports.

The Habermas Denninger debate makes it possible to sum up the fundamental issues of Hebermasian philosophy of law and, at the same time, to draw some underlying traits of the constitutional debate which is currently taking place in Germany. The contribution to the symposium held for Denninger’s 65th birthday is discussed in the second paragraph. In the third paragraph of this note, finally, two texts are considered: Denninger final reply and Habermas’ essay Kulturelle Gleichbehandlung- und die Grenzen des Postmodernen Liberalismus. If apparently the debate between Denninger and Habermas ended with Denninger’s reply, in fact the problems he took up keep on interesting Habermas and this shows very clearly in his most recent works.

NATO’s persistence (and enlargement) after the end of bipolarity is today a major riddle of international relations theory. Attempts to justify the endurance of what has often been called a «Relic of the Cold War» so far have been led by two main schools of thought, namely Waltzian Structural Realism and the New Liberal Institutionalism. Although both approaches offer valuable aids to understanding today’s Euro-American relations, neither of them can provide a full explanation of the survival of the Atlantic Alliance after 1989-91. The aim of this article is to analyse these two perspectives, identify their shortcomings and their strong points, and synthesize the latter into an alternative theoretical framework. More specifically, building on Robert Gilpin’s hegemonic theory, the author offers an interpretation which posits the Atlantic Alliance as the chief institutional provider of security as a public good within the current US-led international system. In order to substantiate these assertions, he then analyses the evolution of NATO’s attitude towards the external environment as it results from the two Strategic Concepts elaborated by the North Atlantic Council after 1989.

The de-construction of British policy over Palestine mandate is a key issue to understand the ways in which a one-hundred-years conflict has not yet been solved. Divide at impera policy cannot explain by itself the different views between Zionism and Arab nationalism on the purposes of British mandate. While Arab representatives denied any locus standi to Balfour declaration and the charter of the mandate, Zionism tried to utilise the patronage of British imperialism to build up a Jewish state in Palestine. Inside Jewish nationalism there were different points of view on how the final purpose should be achieved. Revisionist Zionism, the right-wing party, criticized both official gradualist policy and the Jewish representative in front of the public opinion (Öffentlichkeit), the British mandatory and the League of Nations. That policy expressed, on the one hand, a special view of the mandate (an orientalistic one) and, on the other hand, a state doctrine which can be linked with Jellinek’s view of politics and Schmitt’s criticism towards the League of Nations’ system.

For quite some time now, regions and territorial autonomy in industrial societies are becoming topics of ever more importance in both politics and social sciences. New regional movements, emerging multinational states as well as various types of institutional reforms, political and administrative devolution and, last but not least, economic regionalization attest to the growing relevance of the meso-level, especially in Europe. Nevertheless, at the same time, regional identity is often conceived in a clearly negative way, i.e. as a backward-looking, retrogressive or even ethnic-centred phenomenon, and therefore deemed a factor of division, which not only endangers the nation states, but also is a threat to European integration. The article tries to figure out the risks and chances which new concepts of regional identity imply. It develops the thesis that regional identities, at least within the supranational framework of the European Union and in terms of facilitating regional development, are more likely to be a factor of modernisation than a menace. The article also tries to demonstrate how, and to what extent, the process of creating, promoting and changing regional identities can be influenced by different politics, and finally by politicians, questioning the widely accepted theory of path dependency.

The essay puts forward a re-interpretation of the issue of citizenship and migration in the light of the consequentialist cosmopolitism paradigm. This requires that we adopt a multilevel conception of political subjectivity and consequently that we recommend policies both of fair distribution of visas at the state level and of allocation of state responsibilities at the international level. Such normative appreciation of the migratory phenomenon requires, in the end, the adoption of specific global governance mechanisms to deal with it.