Search results

Attempts to include students with severe disabilities in mainstream classes are comparatively recent in the history of special education. A major motive for inclusion is recognition of the right of all individuals to community membership. However, views differ on the extent to which the goals of inclusive education should emphasise the acquisition of the skills needed to function as contributing members of the community. Inclusion of students with severe disabilities involves changes in teacher roles and responsibilities and flexible approaches to class organisation. The move from an emphasis on functional curriculum to participation in core curriculum with non‐disabled students requires creative adaptations of both curriculum and instructional strategies, including strategies that foster class membership. Challenging behaviour is a potential barrier to successful inclusion, and new approaches that enable both class and specialist teachers to minimise its occurrence need to be developed. Although barriers still exist to inclusion of students with severe disabilities, there is evidence that inclusion can work successfully.

Special education for students with severe disabilities depends on advocacy, but for what issues we should advocate is arguable. Prioritizing issues for advocacy also may subject to debate. Some may argue for full inclusion, which is the idea that all children irrespective of impairments or needs should receive all services in general education settings. Full inclusion implies that all decisions about what, how, and where special education is provided must conform to general education contexts. Full inclusion is an absolute imposition and, accordingly, is diametrically opposed to an individualized approach articulated in US special education law. This chapter briefly addresses the incompatibility of inclusion (based on individualization) and full inclusion (based on absolute conformity) for students with severe disabilities, and suggests that special education professionals and leaders should champion meaningful curriculum delivered with effective instruction and behavioral supports. The foundations for this advocacy with and on behalf of students with severe disabilities should be scientific evidence, evidence-based practice, and the continued rights and protections associated with an individualized approach.

Ensuring that young children with severe and multiple disabilities are active participants in all aspects of their lives and that they make meaningful progress toward valued life outcomes can be a daunting endeavor for families and early educators. In this chapter, we describe evidence-based strategies that can be harnessed to ensure that each child is provided with high-quality inclusive education. Initially, we lay the foundation for the chapter by asserting shared assumptions fundamental to early childhood/early childhood special education practices with topics including strengths-based approach, self-determination, all does mean all, and play as a right for all children. Next, components of a high-quality inclusive program for young children designed to support access, participation, and meaningful progress are described. These components include the following: (1) collaborative teaming; (2) family–professional partnerships; (3) authentic assessment linked to meaningful outcomes; (4) discipline-free, functional outcomes or goals; (5) responsive, developmentally appropriate environments; and (6) levels of instructional support (e.g. universal design for learning (UDL), differentiation, and individualization). A vignette is used to further illustrate how to apply the practices discussed.

This chapter reviews the intervention research literature – particularly interventions deemed evidence-based – for students with intellectual disability across academic and life-skills instruction. Although the focus of this chapter is the spectrum of students covered under the term “intellectual disability,” the majority of research on evidence-based interventions for students with intellectual disability focus on students with more moderate and severe intellectual disability, rather than students with mild intellectual disability. The majority of the interventions determined to be evidence-based within the literature for students with intellectual disability – across both academic and life skills – tend to be those that fall within the purview of systematic instruction.

The differential impact of young adult diagnosis on families during the period of transition from school to adult life was examined. Participants were parents of 246 young adults with severe learning disability aged 18‐26. Young adults were classified into four diagnostic groups: autism (N = 30), Down's syndrome (N = 68), cerebral palsy (N = 95) and an undifferentiated learning disability group (N = 53). Research questions pertained to parent expectations about their young adults' transition to living and working environments post high school. Parental satisfaction and worries were also assessed. The results indicated more community expectations of work for young adults with Down's syndrome, and more restrictive expectations for young adults with autism, including more expectations that young adults with autism would move out of the family home into a residential environment. Parents of young adults with autism also worried significantly more about various aspects of transition than other parent groups.

The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss interventions of stabilisation of emotions and behaviour in adults with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This topic is understudied in persons with intellectual disability.

The aim of this study was to investigate interventions of stabilisation in persons with more severe intellectual disability; i.e. persons with moderate or severe intellectual disabilities. Five patients in a specialised psychiatric inpatient unit for patients with intellectual disabilities were included. Information about treatment of the patients was collected through case files, observations, and interviews. The authors of this paper followed a training programme for trauma therapists in addition to the inpatient treatment of the five patients.

Six main areas of stabilisation of emotions and behaviour were identified: validation, anxiety relief, treatment of depressed mood, increased mastering of daily activities, protection against anxiety triggers, and facilitated staff communication. Protection from anxiety triggers seems to be a core element of milieu therapy interventions. Interventions for neurotypical PTSD patients, such as exposure therapy may be contraindicated for patients with more severe intellectual disabilities.

Research on interventions of stabilisation towards adults with more severe intellectual disabilities is still in its infancy. The case reports may help milieu therapists to facilitate interventions towards patients with moderate or severe intellectual disabilities.

This article explores the nature of the classifications of learning disabilities as promulgated in the diagnostic manuals. By leaving aside all doubts and controversies that surround the concept and measurement of intellectual functioning, weaknesses are exposed from within those manuals' own frames of reference. The difficulties arising from using the international sub‐classifications of learning disabilities when the national classifications should apply are discussed.

The perception among carers and health professionals is that the health care system remains limited in its effectiveness and accessibility to non‐institutionalized people with a mental illness. The purpose of this paper is to determine the effect of the care recipient's main disabling condition (either physical or mental) on the carer's perceived need for assistance in their role as carer.

Based on the data collected from the Australian Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers, the investigation involves the non‐institutionalized recipients of care with profound and severe disabilities, aged 15 years and over, residing in private dwellings and their primary informal carers.

Regression analysis reveals that carers of those with a mental disability are 2.7 times more likely to report care needs unmet compared to carers of those with a physical disability. Further analysis using interactions shows that carers who are the adult children of mentally disabled parents report a comparatively very large amount of perceived unmet need.

If equity is measured in terms of perceived need rather than finite resources a case is made that primary carers of people with a mental disability experience greater burdens in care.

The Netherlands is a country where much is regulated, and several departments have made rules, regulations, memoranda and even laws related to people with intellectual disabilities. Large organisations that offer different forms of support dominate the system of care and support. The policy on care for people with intellectual disabilities has, generally speaking, developed away from segregation and towards integration and inclusion. Changes have led to improvement for people with mild and moderate disabilities, although the process is slow. At the same time, the situation for people with profound and multiple disabilities has deteriorated. For a real change in the support system, client‐held budgets are believed to be of primary importance. However, this is still a slow development. This article describes the current organisation of care and support.