In this article, the author will question the seemingly obvious boundary between civil disobedience, as conceptualised by Rawls and Arendt, and several examples of criminal, or simply annoying, activities which don't meet their criteria, such as the case of the ‘Top 50'. The ‘Top 50' are multi-problem Dutch-Caribbean men, who refuse to adapt to predominant norms in Dutch society. IThe author argues that political aspects of their behaviour should be acknowledged, even if they engage in criminal behaviour and don't present explicit political goals. Firstly, she questions the way in which Rawls based his definition on a centralistic conception of governmental power and contrast it with Foucault's conception of normalising power, in which power is diffuse and cannot be restricted to the enactment of formal laws. Secondly, she discusses what the minimum requirements are to be able to classifyacts as civil disobedience. Rawls and Arendt draw a clear line between criminal behaviour and civil disobedience, but their requirements may be too strict. We might miss signals of injustice if actions that do not meet these criteria are excluded from the political discourse. The conclusion is that comparing Arendt's and Rawls' conception of civil disobedience with the behaviour of a marginal migrant group may be useful in questioning the boundaries of this concept and in making it more inclusive. A wider conception of civil disobedience may help to explain the meaning of deviant behaviour in terms of social critique and to challenge the traditional understanding of civil disobedience.
Young widowhood, conceptualized as the loss of one’s spouse before the age of 50, is a profoundly painful and distressing loss (Den Elzen, 2017, 2018). The literature on young widowhood shows the death of a partner generally causes a fragmentation of the self, as it violates expectations of the normal life cycle, namely growing old together (Haase and Johnston, 2012; Levinson, 1997). Premature loss of one’s spouse tends to be experienced by the surviving partner as distressing or traumatizing, such as having witnessed their suffering in illness or through accident (Den Elzen, 2018) or in struggling with unfinished business (Holland et al, 2020). Whilst post-traumatic stress is well-known and has been widely researched across various disciplines, the concept of post-traumatic growth is much newer and by contrast has received less attention. PTG was introduced as a scholarly concept by Tedeschi and Calhoun in the mid-1990s and is defined as a positive psychological change as a result of the struggle with highly challenging life events (2004). Calhoun and Tedeschi’s notion of PTG has been backed by a recent systematic review. In the first meta-analysis of moderate-to-high PTG, Wu et al. found that of the 10,181 subjects, about 50% experienced PTG (2019). They also reported that women, young people and victims of trauma experienced higher levels of PTG than men, the elderly and those who experienced indirect trauma. PTG has attracted some controversy, with some researchers questioning its scientific validity (Jayawickreme and Blackie, 2014). Others caution against the minimization of people’s suffering. Hayward is a trauma counsellor who advises approaching PTG carefully, highlighting that if it is introduced with clients too early it can "often be construed as minimizing someone's pain and suffering and minimizing the impact of the loss" (cited in Collier, 2016, n.p.). In addressing the critique of PTG, Calhoun and Tedeschi (2006) emphasize that the focus on investigating positive psychological change following trauma does not deny the common and well-documented negative psychological responses and distress following severe life stresses: “Negative events tend to produce, for most persons, consequences that are negative” (p.4). They argue however, and their research supports this finding, that for many people distressful events can foster positive psychological changes. We view PTG as a possibility following (profound) loss, and emphasize that PTG may continue to co-exist with painful and/or unresolved emotions regarding the loss itself. We conceptualize PTG as a continuum and not as an either/or binary with grief. Further, we wish to highlight that PTG is a highly individual process that depends on many factors, and we are not suggesting that the absence of PTG is to be seen as a failure. This chapter intends to contribute to the study of PTG through a person-centered approach. The most used method to assess PTG is the 21-item posttraumatic growth inventory developed by Calhoun and Tedeschi in 1996 (Jayawickreme & Blackie, 2014). Self-reported posttraumatic growth has been the foundation of PTG research, which has aimed to identify to what extent PTG evokes improved psychological and physical health. In discussing our own creative narrative processes of PTG, our practice-led-research lens aims to contribute to research on how PTG might be fostered. We propose a Writing-for-wellbeing approach in this context and explore what it offered us both as writers and widows and what it might offer the field of Writing-for-wellbeing and by extension clinical and scholarly practice.
Women and girls represent only a minority in the penitentiary system and in forensic mental health care. About 6%–10% of both prison and forensic psychiatric populations in Western countries comprise women (see for the most recent offi cial statistics in the UK w ww.gov. uk/government, in Canada w ww.statcan.gc.ca, and in the US w ww.bjs.gov) . However, there seems to be widespread agreement that in the past 20 years female offending has been on the rise, especially violent offending and particularly among young women ( Miller, Malone, and Dodge, 2010; M oretti, Catchpole, and Odgers, 2005) . Overall, a disproportionate growth of females entering the criminal justice system and forensic mental health care has been observed in many countries (for reviews, see Nicholls, Cruise, Greig, and Hinz, 2015; Odgers, Moretti, and Reppucci, 2005 ; Walmsley, 2015) . In addition, it should be noted that the ‘dark number’ for women is suggested to be bigger than for men. Offi cial prevalence rates of female offending might constitute an underestimation as women usually commit less reported offences, for example, domestic violence (N icholls, Greaves, Greig, and Moretti, 2015) . Furthermore, it has been found that – if apprehended – girls and women are treated more leniently by professionals and the criminal justice system. Generally, they receive lower prison sentences and are more often admitted to civil psychiatric institutions instead of receiving a prison sentence or mandatory forensic treatment after committing violence ( Javdani, Sadeh, and Verona, 2011 ; Jeffries, Fletcher, and Newbold, 2003 ). Hence, although female offenders compared to male offenders are a minority, female violence is a substantial problem that deserves more attention. Our understanding of female offenders is hindered by the general paucity of theoretical and empirical investigations of this population. In order to improve current treatment and assessment practices, our knowledge and understanding of female offenders should be enlarged and optimised (d e Vogel and Nicholls, 2016 ).
