The biological processes of body system functioning and of development and maturation can be influenced both positively and negatively by other determinants of health such as personal health practices, the physical and social environments, education, and economic and social status.
These risk factors influence child development in a variety of direct and indirect ways, interacting with environments that also affect health. Many of these biological/ genetic risk factors also respond to interventions that can minimize their impact and effects. For example, programs that promote healthy child development or remedial programs that help children get ready for school can minimize the impact of biological risk factors related to cognitive development.
Social Environment
Biological and genetic risk factors may also limit the kinds of environments in which some children can participate. For example, some schools and recreational facilities may not be able to accommodate children with disabilities. A child with a biological/ genetic risk factor in an inappropriate environment may have her/his health further impaired.
A chronic health problem may also lead to emotional difficulties. By itself, a chronic medical illness is not associated with emotional, behavioural, or learning problems; it can, however, lead to difficulties in everyday living that impair the child's ability to participate fully in the community (Cadman et al., 1986). In addition, the actions and reactions of people in the child's social environment can moderate the impacts of the child's limitations and enhance the degree to which the child can cope within the environment.
Of course i didn't write it!!! ;o)
I did trawl the net looking for answers to the question tho, isn't that the idea? I was just getting the best answer i could. Now i'm off to polish my halo..... Byeeee!
2007-01-16 00:51:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by katie 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Homosexuality has been appropriate to genetics with information from study scientists, yet saying that there's a unmarried gay gene is overly simplistic for something so complicated as sexual orientation. If it were a unmarried gene, then same twins might want to share the same sexual orientation. They do, however, share the same sexual orientation at a cost almost double that of fraternal twins so there's a distinct genetic element. same twins are literally not 100% same. they don't share the same fingerprints... fingerprints are determined in utero. Even the area of the fetus contained in the womb has been shown to have an result on the fetus. Sexual orientation has been appropriate to both genetics and different organic and organic factors. those different organic and organic factors are maximum likely enthusiastic about fetal progression which maximum likely has some link to hormones. There hasn't ever been a medical study that changed into not careworn with funding from a particular pastime team that has determined that sexual orientation is a decision, becasue it isn't.
2016-12-02 08:55:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Jensen (1999) conducted a meta-analysis (a review of many studies) and reported that living in an individualist society, which is one which values the individual and independence, could cause some of the difficulties that have been identified in adolescence.
Doi (1973) suggested that in this society the need to develop autonomy and independence quickly is higher that in a collectivist society due to the nature of the culture.
Gilani (1995) compared Asian and White British families and the relationships with teenage daughters. In Asian families, the girls were expected to conform to family values rather than establish independence.
Claes (1998) found that in Italian families during adolescences the parent-child relationship remained strong compared to Candian youths who had a stronger relationship with their peers.
Tupuola (1993) interviewed adolescents who were born in Samoa and moved to New Zealand and they identified that the concept of 'Adolescence' was completely new to them. This can be supported by evidence from Mead, an athropologist. Tupuola also identified that in Samoa a child becomes an adult when the wider community decides he/she is mature.
Chisholm and Hurrelmann (1995) believed that the transition from being a child to being an adult in a more "pluralized and fragmented" society is delayed, owing to the complexities of greater choice.
Wilson (1987) thought that youths who live in the cities may turn to illegal activities because of the lack of job choice and many of the jobs on offer are undesirable linked with lower community standards.
Identity formation can be hard for those belonging to ethnic minorities. Berry (1997) suggested 4 routes that one can take if they are part of an ethnic minority:
1. Assimilation - this is where the youth identifies with the dominant culture and rejects their ethnic origins.
2. Integration - which is where both the dominant and ethnic culture is identified with
3. Separation - a youth might focus only on their ethnic culture and reject the dominant culture
4. Marginality - remaining on the fringes of both cultures
White and Burke (1987) found that adolescents who followed the route of integration were better adjusted.
Phinney and Alipurnia (1990) found that ethnic minority college students who had resolved their identity issues had higher self-esteem than those who hadn't.
Barriers have been identified that may prevent an adolescent resolving ethnicity:
- a lack of suitable ethnic role models
- ethnic minority groups are often presented as negative
In many non-industrialized rural communities individuals move abruptly from childhood to adulthood with the use of 'rites of passage' which usually have religious symbolism as well.
There is also historical change to consider. Shaffer (1993) claimed that adolescence is an invention of the 20th century. This is because when it became illegal to employ children it created a new section of society which was isolated from those who were younger and adults. G. Stanley Hall who was writing at the beginning of the 20th century was the first one to identify this period of development.
Gross (1996) argued that the concept of a teenager was even more recent, suggesting that the idea was coined in the 1950s.
Hope this helps!
2007-01-16 03:45:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by lilli 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Biological: puberty
Psychological: growing up, becoming an adul, having responsibilities etc,
Social: Friends, the social "norm"
Is that what your talking about or am I completely off the ball!?
2007-01-16 00:52:57
·
answer #4
·
answered by Girl 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
You physical, cultural and the way the people try to tell you you are, when your young, Sorry but who says young has no E lol
2007-01-19 20:19:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by tboyd322001 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Katie....KATIE!
Come on 'Fess-up' you didn't write that stuff. You copied it didn't you? Eh!
2007-01-16 01:41:03
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋