Search results

This paper aims to explore using the children’s accelerated trauma technique (CATT) in an adult intellectual disability population, with the aim of reducing symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

A service evaluation was completed to investigate differences between pre- and post-CATT trauma scores.

Scores on a measure of PTSD decreased significantly following CATT.

The findings support continued use of CATT in adults with intellectual disabilities, and they highlight the need to evaluate effectiveness in a larger sample.

This paper evaluates the novel application of a trauma treatment – developed for use with children – in an adult intellectual disability population and adds to the existing evidence base.

The United Nation’s treaty from the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) speaks to the assurance of rights and access to justice. To assure the rights addressed in the treaty, disability scholars have argued for a collaborative approach between police officers, mental health, Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, professionals, and disability rights organisations. Internationally, we have witnessed that rights are being trampled at the intersection of race/ethnicity, gender identity, disability, and sexual orientation. Interactions with the police and the various systems are sometimes experienced as sources of trauma, racism, disrespect, pain, and abuse by individuals living with disabilities. Allyship and organising with the community, particularly with BIPOC and other ‘minoritised’ communities, is essential for policy and other systemic change. Community conversations were done to learn how Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) and allies experience and address policing and disability and act at these intersections. The advocacy and activism of Surviving Race: The Intersection of Injustice, Disability, and Human Rights served as the impetus for this study. Surviving Race was created to unite psychiatric survivors, BIPOC impacted by the mental health and disability systems, White allies, and members of the LGBQTIA+ community to stand in solidarity with activists who were demanding systemic change after the deaths of far too many. This chapter explores intersectional and cross-disability allyship, allyship to BIPOC disability, and psychiatric survivor communities. It examines how people with disabilities and allies can more effectively work at the intersection of race, rights, equity, and justice.

This study aims to identify the critical factors contributing to India-based non-governmental organizations (NGOs) capacity building and value creation for beneficiaries.

A total interpretive structural modeling technique has been used to develop a hierarchical model of critical factors and understand their direct and indirect interrelationships. The driving force and dependence force of these factors were determined by using cross-impact matrix multiplication applied to classification analysis.

This study identifies 12 critical factors influencing NGO capacity building in India’s intellectual disability sector across four dimensions. Internal organizational capabilities include infrastructure, staff qualifications, fundraising, vocational activities and technical resources. Second, coordination and stakeholder engagement highlight government and agency collaboration, dedicated board members and stakeholder involvement. Third, adaptability and responsiveness emphasize adjusting to external trends and seizing opportunities. Finally, impact and value creation emphasis on improving value for persons with disabilities (PWDs).

The findings of this study have practical implications for Indian NGOs working for PWDs. The study provides NGOs with a structural model for improving organizational capacity by identifying and categorizing critical factors into the strategic model.

There is a scarcity of literature on capacity building for disability-focused NGOs in India. This study seeks to identify critical factors and develop a hierarchical model of those factors to assist policymakers in India in building the capacity of NGOs.

The study aims to explore the diverse meanings and sources of frustration among Israeli principals working in special education settings. The study poses two questions: 1. What are the perceived expressions of frustration among principals working in the context of special education? 2. What are the perceived sources of frustration among principals working in special education settings?

A total of 17 semi-structured interviews were conducted with principals working in special education schools for complex disabilities to investigate perceived expressions and sources of frustration.

The study identified four themes through data analysis: helplessness regarding the children, helplessness regarding bureaucratic aspects, frustration from conflicts and disappointment and frustration from feeling alone.

Despite the extensive acknowledgment of emotions and feelings in the context of educational leadership, the experience of work frustration among special education school principals has not been explicitly investigated. This research provides empirical insights into the nuanced experiences of frustration among special education principals, offering both empirical and practical implications for understanding and addressing this critical aspect of their work.

This chapter explores the role of an ethics committee led by disabled academics, in supporting co-produced disability research beyond academia, in the context of a five-year research programme in the UK (2015–2020). This chapter includes reflections by the Ethics Committee members, alongside documentary research which analysed the communications between the Ethics Committee and the research projects it supported. This review of the role of the Ethics Committee showed that there were dilemmas in considering the boundaries between ethical review and providing pedagogic advice on research design, and in balancing its role in supporting and regulating research. Ethics review processes are sometimes seen as overly bureaucratic and as an obstacle course for researchers, and this was also sometimes the case for projects supported by the DRILL (Disability Research on Independent Living and Learning) Ethics Committee. Lessons to be learned from the process included that communication between ethics committees and researchers is key, and that ethics review can be a two-way process, recognising the expertise of both the researchers and the reviewers, thus mirroring the principles of co-production. We suggest that an alternative model for ethics review process could build on this generally positive experience of the DRILL Ethics Committee.

The purpose of this study is to delve into societal stigma surrounding severe mental disorders and intellectual disabilities, emphasizing gender differences and students’ proximity influence.

Involving 572 Spanish master’s students, this nonexperimental study categorizes participants based on contact frequency, using Goratu and CAEE questionnaires to measure stigma.

Gender-based stigma differences are absent; however, increased contact correlates with lower stigma levels. Notably, greater closeness is associated with more positive attitudes toward intellectual disability, resulting in diminished stigma toward severe mental disorders.

This research sheds light on the pervasive stigma faced by individuals with intellectual disabilities and severe mental disorders among postgraduate university students. Notably, the recognition of widespread stigma among individuals with higher education highlights a more significant societal problem. The findings underscore the urgent need for targeted interventions, especially in higher education contexts, to enhance understanding and reduce societal bias.

By identifying factors influencing stigma and emphasizing the importance of contact in fostering empathy, the study lays the groundwork for informed socioeducational strategies. These strategies have the potential to promote inclusivity, challenge stereotypes and contribute to the well-being and social integration of those affected by intellectual disabilities and severe mental disorders.

The findings highlight the efficacy of direct contact in reducing stigma and underscore the necessity for nuanced understanding. The study suggests fostering positive attitudes through increased contact can combat prejudice and promote social inclusion. Nevertheless, further research is crucial to explore factors influencing stigma reduction and design comprehensive socioeducational interventions addressing diverse cultural proficiencies. This study contributes valuable insights for mitigating stigma, fostering inclusivity and informing future interventions.

The ambition of human rights-based research is to generate an evidence base aligned to specific rights and rights holders. This chapter addresses the question ‘How does the ethical communication of research evidence support the achievement of this ambition?’ It outlines a Communication of Evidence For Impact (CEFI) approach that is focused on the realisation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). CEFI proposes that human rights-based communication is: a public good; a legal imperative in States that have ratified CRPD, and a moral imperative in States yet to sign or ratify; a core research competency and ethical requirement; participatory; and grounded in a culture of inclusion, intersectionality, and allyship. This chapter explores how five actors – States, research ethics committees, researchers, funders, and publishers – can each contribute to ethical communication. Recommendations are made for including and futureproofing CEFI in a disability research ethics framework.

To ensure health, social and criminal justice services are suited to the complex and dynamic needs of people with learning/intellectual disabilities (LD) at risk of offending, it is important to systematically analyse the needs and characteristics of this population. This study aimed to analyse the patterns of referrals to a single community forensic LD service before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A structured audit was conducted on all referrals to the service (n = 37) across a three-year period (May 2019 – end of July 2022).

The majority of the overall sample were male (36, 97%) and Caucasian (24, 65%) with a mean age of 32.9 years and mild LD. The most prevalent current offending type was sexual offending (17, 44%), whereas the most prevalent historical offending type was violence (17, 35%). The most common service/function offered by the service was advice and consultation to other professionals and agencies (10, 19%). The service user and forensic/legal characteristics measured did not differ significantly before and during COVID-19.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the project is the first to systematically analyse and compare community forensic LD service referral patterns before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study also provides an example of how a structured audit tool can be used to benefit individual services and the wider literature on assessing the needs and characteristics of adults with LD who live in the community and are at risk of [re]offending.

Organizational research on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is at times siloed; the experience of one minoritized or underrepresented group is treated as completely separate and different from the experience of another group and thus research separately. For example, there are terms that are studied only in the context of one group, and a different term is used to study a very similar (or identical) concept among a different group. Indeed, there are many unique experiences that specific minority groups encounter at work. Because of this end, minority groups should not be fully categorized together, and their individual should not be erased. However, there are shared experiences that many or all minorities experience at work, whether they are a gender minority, racial minority, or a member of any other minoritized group. Recognizing these shared experiences can help scholars develop a deeper understanding of what it's like to be minoritized or underrepresented at work, and therefore help to better serve these communities. To this end, our chapter highlights three such shared but unique minority experiences: three experiences that are common across all minority groups but operationalize slightly differently in different populations. The first experience we discuss is discrimination, as all minorities typically experience some form of negative differential treatment at work. The second experience we discuss is identity management, as many minorities need to actively think about how they present their minority identity to others (regardless of if their identity is “concealable” or not). Finally, we discuss strength through adversity, as many minorities argue that their minority identity is a source of strength and an area that benefits them at work. We conclude the chapter with a call toward intraminority solidarity, suggesting that recognizing shared experiences and working together can help build better workplaces for all minority employees.