We discuss strategies to promote the inclusion of people with developmental disabilities (DDs) in qualitative community-based research studies. Strategies were applied in three projects conducted between 2012 and 2017 that addressed issues of socioeconomic challenges, discrimination, and exclusion of children and young adults with developmental disabilities (YADD). Strategies included partnership with community organizations; inclusion of YADD, family caregivers (FCs), and service providers in advisory committees (ACs); and strategies to accommodate YADD. As part of our contribution, we discuss issues of invisibility and exclusion of individuals with DDs who have “low” functioning capacities. There is a need to review studies sampling inclusion criteria as they may constitute a barrier for participation. Preference for sampling “high” functioning individuals may reinforce exclusion in research, and replicate broader patterns of socioeconomic exclusion of individuals with disabilities. Our discussion of inclusive research is informed by critical disability studies and the underlying principle “nothing about us without us.”
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
2.
AshbyC. E. (2011). Whose “voice” is it anyway? Giving voice and qualitative research involving individuals that type to communicate. Disability Studies Quarterly, 31(4), 1–21. doi:10.18061/dsq.v31i4.1723
3.
AtkinsonD. (2004). Research and empowerment: Involving people with learning difficulties in oral and life history research. Disability & Society, 19, 691–702. doi:10.1080/0968759042000284187
4.
BarnesC. (1997). A legacy of oppression: A history of disability in western culture. In BartonL.OliverM. (Eds.), Disability studies: Past, present and future (pp. 3–25). Leeds, UK: The Disability Press.
5.
BarnesC. (2012). Disability, work and welfare. Sociology Compass, 6, 472–484. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9020.2012.00464.x
6.
BartonL. (2005). Emancipatory research and disabled people: Some observations and questions. Educational Review, 57, 317–327. doi:10.1080/00131910500149325
7.
BayntonD. C. (2017). Disability and the justification of inequality in American history. In DavisL. (Ed.), Disability studies reader (5th ed., pp. 18–22). New York, NY: Routledge.
8.
Ben-ShlomoY.KuhD. (2002). A life course approach to chronic disease epidemiology: Conceptual models, empirical challenges and interdisciplinary perspectives. International Journal of Epidemiology, 31, 285–293. doi:10.1093/ije/31.2.285
9.
BigbyC.FrawleyP.RamcharanP. (2014a). Conceptualizing inclusive research with people with intellectual disability. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 27, 3–12. doi:10.1111/jar.12083
10.
BigbyC.FrawleyP.RamcharanP. (2014b). A collaborative group method of inclusive research. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 27, 54–64. doi:10.1111/jar.12082
11.
BrowneM.MillarM. (2016). A rights-based conceptual framework for the social inclusion of children and young persons with an intellectual disability. Disability & Society, 31, 1064–1080. doi:10.1080/09687599.2016.1232190
12.
BuettgenA.RichardsonJ.BeckhamK.RichardsonK.WardM.RiemerM. (2012). We did it together: A participatory action research study on poverty and disability. Disability & Society, 27, 603–616. doi:10.1080/09687599.2012.669106
13.
CameronL.MurphyJ. (2007). Obtaining consent to participate in research: The issues involved in including people with a range of learning and communication disabilities. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 113–120. doi:10.1111/j.1468-3156.2006.00404.x
14.
Canadian Institutes of Health Research. (2014). Tri-Council policy statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans. Ottawa: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
15.
CastrodaleM. A. (2018). Mobilizing dis/ability research: A critical discussion of qualitative go-along interviews in practice. Qualitative Inquiry, 24, 45–55. doi:10.1177/1077800417727765
16.
DalrympleJ.BurkeB. (2006). Anti-oppressive practice: Social care and the law. London: McGraw-Hill Education Press.
17.
DaltonA. J.McVillyK. R. (2004). Ethics guidelines for international, multicenter research involving people with intellectual disabilities 1, 2, 3, 4. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 1(2), 57–70. doi:10.1111/j.1741-1130.2004.04010.x
18.
DavisL. J. (2013). Introduction: Disability, normality, and power. In DavisL. J.LennardJ. (Eds.), The disability studies reader (pp. 1–17). Florence, Italy: Routledge.
19.
deFurS. H.PattonJ. R. (1999). Transition and school-based services: Interdisciplinary perspectives for enhancing the transition process. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
DuckettP.FryerD. (1998). Developing empowering research practices with people who have learning disabilities. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 8, 57–65. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1298(199801/02)8:1<57::AID-CASP438>3.0.CO
22.
FitzgeraldH.JoblingA.KirkD. (2003). Valuing the voices of young disabled people: Exploring the experience of physical education and sport. European Journal of Physical Education, 8, 175–200. doi:10.1080/1740898030080206
23.
FladJ.BergerR. J.FeuchtJ. (2011). Can you hear me now? Augmentative communication, methodological empowerment, and the life story of Jon Feucht. Disability Studies Quarterly, 31(4). Retrieved from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1726/1774
24.
FogdenB.ThomasS.DaffernM.OgloffJ. (2016). Crime and victimisation in people with intellectual disability: A case linkage study. BMC Psychiatry, 16, 170–179. doi:10.1186/s12888-016-0869-7
GustafsonD. L.BrungerF. (2014). Ethics, “vulnerability,” and feminist participatory action research with a disability community. Qualitative Health Research, 24, 997–1005. doi:10.1177/1049732314538122
27.
HallN.DurandM. A.MengoniS. E. (2017). “ . . . their opinions mean something”: Care staff’s attitudes to health research involving people with intellectual disabilities. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 198–207. doi:10.1111/bld.12195
28.
HillM.DavisJ.ProutA.TisdallK. (2004). Moving the participation agenda forward. Children & Society, 18, 77–96. doi:10.1002/chi.819
29.
HughesB.PatersonK. (1997). The social model of disability and the disappearing body: Towards a sociology of impairment. Disability & Society, 12, 325–340. doi:10.1080/09687599727209
30.
JenningsS.KhanlouN.SuC. (2014). Public health policy and social support for immigrant mothers raising disabled children in Canada. Disability & Society, 29, 1645–1657. doi:10.1080/09687599.2014.966804
31.
JohnsonC. (2009). The benefits of physical activity for youth with developmental disabilities: A systematic review. American Journal of Health Promotion, 23, 157–167. doi:10.4278/ajhp.070930103
32.
KhanlouN. (2018). Information Sheet 8: Direct funding: Challenges for caregivers of young adults with developmental disabilities. Toronto: York University.
33.
KhanlouN.HaqueN.DavidsonD.DastjerdiM. (2016). Voices of immigrant mothers of children with disabilities: Availability and use of social support. Toronto: Office of Women’s Health Research in Mental Health, York University.
34.
KhanlouN.HaqueN.MustafaN.VazquezL. M.MantiniA.WeissJ. (2017). Access barriers to services for immigrant mothers of children with autism in Canada. International Journal of Mental Health & Addiction, 2, 239–259. doi:10.1007/s11469-017-9732-4
35.
KhanlouN.HaqueN.SheehanS.JonesG. (2015). “It is an issue of not knowing where to go”: Service providers’ perspectives on challenges in accessing social support and services by immigrant mothers of children with disabilities. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 17, 1840–1847. doi:10.1007/s10903-014-0122-8
36.
KhanlouN.MustafaN.VazquezL. M.DavidsonD.YoshidaK. (2017). Mothering children with developmental disabilities: A critical perspective on health promotion. Health Care for Women International, 38, 613–634. doi:10.1080/07399332.2017.1296841
37.
KidneyC. A.McDonaldK. E. (2014). A toolkit for accessible and respectful engagement in research. Disability & Society, 29, 1013–1030. doi:10.1080/09687599.2014.902357
38.
KitchinR. (1998). “Out of place,” “Knowing one’s place”: Space, power and the exclusion of disabled people. Disability & Society, 13, 343–356. doi:10.1080/09687599826678
39.
KitchinR. (2000). The researched opinions on research: Disabled people and disability research. Disability & Society, 15, 25–47. doi:10.1080/09687590025757
40.
LesterJ. N.NusbaumE. A. (2018). “Reclaiming” disability in critical qualitative research: Introduction to the special issue. Qualitative Inquiry, 24, 3–7. doi:10.1177/1077800417727761
41.
LloydV.GathererA.KalsyS. (2006). Conducting qualitative interview research with people with expressive language difficulties. Qualitative Health Research, 16, 1386–1404. doi:10.1177/1049732306293846
42.
LunskyY.BaloghR.SullivanW. F.JaakkimainenR. L. (2014). Periodic health examinations for adults with developmental disabilities: Are we doing enough?Canadian Family Physician, 60, 109–110. Retrieved from http://www.cfp.ca/content/60/2/109.short
43.
LutzD.FisherK. R.RobinsonS. (2016). Sharing the focus: Engaging with support workers to include people with communication needs in research. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 138–145. doi:10.1111/bld.12126
44.
MorrisJ. (2001). Social exclusion and young disabled people with high levels of support needs. Critical Social Policy, 21, 161–183. doi:10.1177/026101830102100202
45.
MorriseyB. (2012). Ethics and research among persons with disabilities in long-term care. Qualitative Health Research, 22, 1284–1297. doi:10.1177/1049732312449389
46.
MulcahyN. (2012). Narrating developmental disability: Researchers, advocates, and the creation of an interview space in the context of university-community partnerships. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 11, 165–179. doi:10.1177/160940691201100204
47.
O’BrienM.DaggettJ. A. (2006). Beyond the autism diagnosis: A professional’s guide to helping families. Baltimore: Brookes.
48.
OliverM. (1997). Emancipatory research: Realistic goal or impossible dream? In BarnesC.MercerG. (Eds.), Doing disability research (pp. 15–31). Leeds, UK: The Disability Press.
49.
RiosD.MagasiS.NovakC.HarnissM. (2016). Conducting accessible research: Including people with disabilities in public health, epidemiological, and outcomes studies. American Journal of Public Health, 106, 2137–2144. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2016.303448
50.
SakamotoI.PitnerR. O. (2005). Use of critical consciousness in anti-oppressive social work practice: Disentangling power dynamics at personal and structural levels. British Journal of Social Work, 35, 435–452. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch190
51.
SchallC.Cortijo-DovalE.TargettP. S.WehmanP. (2016). Applications for youth with autism spectrum disorders. In WehmanP. (Ed.), Life beyond the classroom: Transition strategies for young people with disabilities (pp. 535–575). Baltimore: Brookes.
52.
SchallC.WehmanP. (2008). Understanding the transition from school to adulthood for students with autism. In WehmanP.SmithM. D.SchallC. (Eds.), Autism and the transition to adulthood: Success beyond the classroom (pp. 1–14). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
53.
ScotchR. K. (2009, July). “Nothing about us without us”: Disability rights in America. OAH Magazine of History, 23(3), 17–22. doi:10.1093/maghis/23.3.17
54.
ShierM.GrahamJ. R.JonesM. E. (2009). Barriers to employment as experienced by disabled people: A qualitative analysis in Calgary and Regina, Canada. Disability & Society, 24, 63–75. doi:10.1080/09687590802535485
55.
SitlingtonP. L.ClarkG. M. (2016). Transition education and services for students with disabilities. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
56.
Smith-ChandlerN.SwartE. (2014). In their own voices: Methodological considerations in narrative disability research. Qualitative Health Research, 24, 420–430. doi:10.1177/1049732314523841
57.
Statistics Canada. (2006). Disability in Canada: A 2006 profile. Ottawa: Ministry of Industry.
StewartD.FreemanM.LawM.HealyH.Burke-GaffneyJ.ForhanM.GuentherS. (2010). The transition to adulthood for youth with disabilities: Evidence from the literature. In StoneJ. H.BlouinM. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of rehabilitation (pp. 1-25). New York: Center for International Rehabilitation Research Information & Exchange.
60.
StromA.SolveigM. F. (2012). Systematic data integration—A method for combined analyses of field notes and interview texts. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 11, 534–546. doi:10.1177/160940691201100502
61.
TeachmanG.GibsonB. E. (2013). Children and youth with disabilities: Innovative methods for single qualitative interviews. Qualitative Health Research, 23, 264–274. doi:10.1177/1049732312468063
62.
TeachmanG.McDonoughP.MacarthurC.GibsonB. E. (2018). A critical dialogical methodology for conducting research with disabled youth who use augmentative and alternative communication. Qualitative Inquiry, 24, 35–44. doi:10.1177/1077800417727763
63.
TitchkoskyT. (2003). Governing embodiment: Technologies of constituting citizens with disabilities. The Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 28, 517–542. doi:10.2307/3341840
64.
TitchkoskyT. (2015). Normal. In AdamsR.ReissB.SerlinD. (Eds.), Keywords for disability studies (pp. 130–132). New York: New York University Press.
