Resources search

The first living condition-survey among people with intellectual disability in Sami areas in Norway was conducted in 2017. The purpose of this article is to present and discuss results from the living-condition study, with a focus on the results related to mental health and bullying as a risk factor for poor mental health among people with intellectual disability and a Sami background. We have conducted a questionnaire survey among people with intellectual disability in Sami areas, with and without a Sami background (N = 93). People with intellectual disability have poorer mental health compared to the population in general and those with Sami background have the poorest mental health. Bullying is one of several factors that increase the risk of poor mental health among people with intellectual disability and Sami background. Having a Sami background makes people with intellectual disability more disposed to poor mental health.

Purpose: Examining everyday challenges in the interactions between people with intellectual disabilities and their staff, as seen from the user’s perspective, is an important perspective in health care research. Involving people with intellectual disabilities as so-called co-researchers is a relatively unexplored research strategy. In this paper, co-researchers participated in all the steps of the research process, from planning to reporting, in addition to the written reporting of the findings. The aim of this study was to explore how people with intellectual disabilities experienced a filmed vignette of an everyday situation.

Method: Based on audio-recorded and transcribed individual and focus-group interviews with people with intellectual disabil- ities, performed by co-researchers with intellectual disabilities together with researchers, qualitative content analysis was used.

Results: The analysis reveals three themes: “being emotionally touched”, “being aware of the other”, and “being unclear”.

Conclusions: The results are discussed in light of normalization and participation in society with independence and one’s own decision-making. Regarding the care of people with intellectual disabilities, the main finding is the need to focus not only on greater involvement of this population in their own daily lives, but also to teach self-determination skills. Another finding is the importance of involving people with intellectual impairment as co-researchers.

One of the most powerful claims of disability theology is that the rejection of persons with disabilities somehow correlates with a rejection of God. This ‘correlative rejection’ is, however, frequently just stated rather than explored in detail, something this article therefore seeks to remedy by examining one example of the correlative rejection that draws together the ethical concerns of theologians writing on intellectual disability with Meister Eckhart’s teaching on the human relationship with God. Here, the correla- tive rejection is exposed as an inevitable result of the narrow emphasis on autonomy and rationality in human self-perception which shape the habituated, even ritualised ways that we try to know persons with intellectual disabilities and God. By contrast, truly knowing and relating to persons with intellectual disabilities, God, and finally also ourselves, relies on a reconciliation with the dependence, vulnerability, and non-rational forms of exchange that a narrow attachment to autonomy and rationality seems directly to occlude. The correlative rejection thus signals both a practical and epistemological problem which results from how we view ourselves and how we subsequently relate to and try to know others, the harmful effects of which are both ethical and spiritual.

Location is often at the fore of decision-making regarding fieldwork and choice of methods. However, little research has directly discussed the importance of the choice of site in the production of research data, particularly concerning the way that different relationships will manifest between researcher and participant in different spaces. Site may be particularly important in research with (learning disabled) children, as research location is intertwined with the level of caregiving required from the researcher, and the sorts of surveillance the research engagement may be subject to. This paper draws on research with learning disabled 6–16-year olds that took place in homes, schools and the outdoors, in a variety of microgeographical locations from bedrooms to nature reserves. This paper reflects on the challenges, including the very ‘worst’ research moments, occurring in the different research environments. Whilst the research was carried out with learning disabled children and young people, the discussion has implications for research with non-disabled children and ‘vulnerable’ participants more broadly.