Early support has been acknowledged to be needed in the phase of transition to parenthood, and increasing knowledge is available on the factors enhancing this transition. The issue is to translate the knowledge into practices of preventive care. In this article, our aim is to map out recent research on supporting parents in maternity and child health care and to analyse how the subject of family support has been studied. The data consist of 98 scientific articles published in peer-reviewed journals during 2000-09. Most of the reported research was Anglo-American, and fell within the academic fields of nursing studies, medicine and public health. The studies were categorized into three groups according to the epistemic perspective that was taken on the subject of family support, the studies focusing on (i) views and perceptions on family support of both clients and professionals (63 studies), (ii) the effectiveness of interventions (27 studies) and (iii) activities in the practices and processes of MCH (8 studies). First, the groups were described with regard to the study participants and the data and methods used. A bias towards the perspectives of risk groups and mothers was detected. Second, we examined the potential of different epistemic perspectives to describe care practices. The article contributes to the discussion about how to examine the practices and processes of health promotion and preventive care in such a way that the 'good practices' identified could be implemented in other contexts than the one studied.

No abstract

Fathers could easily be engaged in conversations through gaze. Also the questionnaire seems promising in engaging fathers in conversations in clinics.

The data was collected in the course of a research project that has had two grants from the Juho Vainio Foundation. We would like to thank Riikka Homanen,Pirjo Lindfors and Aku Kallio for their collaboration in the research project, and Elina Weiste for her valuable comments on the analyses. We also thank participants in the seminars and datasessions in University of Tampere and Helsinki during 2011−2013.

In this paper, we demonstrate how performing and belonging paradoxes act as triggers, mitigators and amplifiers for each other in moment-by-moment interaction. We show how expressing a performing paradox as part of group practice triggers belonging tensions, particularly when there is a strong expectation towards a uniform value-base. We further demonstrate how another performing paradox at the organization level is constructed to mitigate the belonging paradox through latency. This leads to an amplification dynamic where a paradox that is more socially appropriate is reinforced in order to cope with a more interactionally problematic one. Our results speak to research on the intertwined nature of paradoxical tensions and the relationship between latency and salience in working through paradox. Our study advocates for developing a more systematic approach for studying the interactional foundations of organizational paradox and offers ethnomethodological conversation analysis (EMCA) as one means to achieve improved understanding in this domain.