Search

A personal choice taken within a specific sociopolitical context, now needs reevaluation, as the political framework shifts under the shadow of Brexit. I recall a life-changing decision made young, to move from Dublin to London for university and consequently to stay in the United Kingdom. I look back on my early experiences in London, on a sense of immersion within collectively shared European history, particularly the long shadow cast by the trauma of war. I examine my national and European identities, and how I grew to inhabit a hybrid, non-binary notion of national identity. I question my position and the effect a challenge to polarise identity has upon me and consider the value of maintaining presence as a complex, embodied self who holds a pluralistic notion of national identity as a strategy of resistance against discourses that seek to deny the existence of such subjectivities.

A panel convened around the idea of intersubjectivation, loosely conceived as a process of actively, consciously, and reciprocally adjusting the structures and power dynamics of our social relations, thereby mutually (and consensually) reconfiguring our subjectivities and, over time, our wider cultures. Through a series of explorations of how one may elicit, reach, or realize a shared sense of intersubjectivity, the panel reflected on and challenged conceptions of the human subject as unitary, discretely embodied, economically accountable, and objectively measurable by a proscribed set of validating criteria. Speakers invited, allowed, or insisted upon the (re)presentation of hidden, unrecognized, or misconstrued aspects of subjectivities: their own or other people’s. While considering varied examples, variously presented, of the process we came to call intersubjectivation, something happened in the room: feeling intensified… shifted… becoming more… an enhanced sense of intimacy perhaps… affectively charged empathic stillness … sensations of interconnection. And we became. Using recollections and reflections from those present, this paper attempts a representation of what happened in the room, intangible yet perceptible—precious and alive—in hope of building understanding of how intersubjectivation may be conceptualized and achieved, whether actively intended or obliquely manifested through some peripheral, perhaps-parallel perhaps-integral, process.

Aim Currently there are few population-based data on the outcomes of stroke in childhood, and no data on what parents want from such research. We conducted a Delphi Consensus Process among parents of children (n = 26) who had suffered an arterial ischaemic stroke to investigate which research outcomes they think are most important to follow up, and what methods of assessment they would find most acceptable. Methods A postal Delphi Consensus Process was conducted. Results The Delphi panel reached consensus that motor, cognitive and communication outcomes are the most important outcome domains to assess. They strongly preferred home visits over hospital visits or telephone interview. The majority were happy with assessment visits lasting up to 1.5 h. Ongoing concerns for panel members related to the cause of the original stroke, the risk of recurrence and the long term outcome for their child. Interpretation Future outcome studies should preferably assess outcomes at home and focus on children's motor, cognitive and communication abilities. There is an ongoing need to clarify issues with regards to the likely cause of children's strokes and their risk of recurrence.