This article explores the experiences of six people with intellectual disabilities in the context of a self-advocacy group, identifying the benefits and difficulties of being part of the group.
Materials and Methods:
Six adults with intellectual disabilities were interviewed about their experiences. Each individual took part in two individual and two group interviews. The transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.
Results:
Analysis revealed four themes, namely, being part of the group, self-esteem, self-determination and empowerment.
Conclusion:
Being part of the group is central to the experience of self-esteem, self-development and empowerment. Responses allow the exploration of the interrelationship between individual, group and community. Consideration is given to models of disability and the evidence base in relation to personal and political outcomes of self-advocacy. Links are made with developing a sense of self, self-determination, interpersonal learning and building resilience. Implications for practice are discussed.
ArnsteinSR (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of American Planning Association35
(4): 216–224.
2.
BeartS (2005) ‘I won’t think of myself as a learning disability. But I have’: social identity and self-advocacy. British Journal of Learning Disabilities33: 128–131.
3.
BeartSHardyGBuchanL (2004) Changing selves: a grounded theory account of belonging to a self-advocacy group for people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities33, 97–100.
4.
BeresfordPCampbellJ (1994) Disabled people, service user, user involvement and representation. Disability and Society9
(3): 315–325.
5.
BionWR (1961) Experiences in Groups and Other Papers. London: Tavistock Publications.
6.
BoothTBoothW (1994) The use of depth interviewing with vulnerable subjects: lessons form a research study of parents with intellectual disabilities. Social Science and Medicine39: 415–425.
7.
BrandonT (2005) Empowerment, policy levels and service forums. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities9: 321–331.
8.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3: 77–101.
9.
BronfenbrennerU (1979) The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
10.
BuchananIWalmsleyJ (2006) Self-advocacy in historical perspective. British Journal of Learning Disability34: 133–138.
11.
BurkeP (2005) Listening to young people with special needs: the influence of group activities. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities9: 359–376.
12.
CaldwellJ (2011) Disability identity of leaders in the self-advocacy movement. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities49
(5): 315–326.
13.
CaldwellJArnoldKRizzoloM (2012) Envisioning the Future: Allies in self-advocacy report. Chicago: Institute on Disability and Human Development, The University of Illinois at Chicago.
14.
CardoneL (1999) Exploring the use of question methods: pictures do not always help people with learning disabilities. The British Journal of Developmental Disabilities45
(2): 93–98.
15.
ChappellALGoodleyDLawthornR (2001) Making connections: the relevance of the social model of disability for people with intellectual disabilities. British Journal of Learning Disabilities29: 45–50.
16.
CoopersmithS (1967) The Antecedents of Self-esteem. San Francisco and London: W. H. Freeman and Company.
17.
CrockerJMajorB (1989) Social stigma and self-esteem: the self-protective properties of stigma. Psychological Review96
(4): 608–630.
18.
DaganDSandhuS (1999) Social comparison, self-esteem and depression in people with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research43
(5): 372–379.
19.
DanielBWassellSGilliganR (1988) Child Development for Child Care and Protection Workers. London: Jessica Kingsley.
20.
DavisFA (2010) Can we sustain the magic?The Psychologist23(1): 32–33.
21.
Dearden-PhillipsCFountainR (2005) Real power? An examination of the involvement of people with learning disabilities in strategic service development in Cambridgeshire. British Journal of Learning Disabilities33: 200–204.
22.
DowsonS (1997) Empowerment within services: a comfortable delusion. In: RamcharanPRobertsGGrantGBorlandJ (eds) Empowerment in Everyday Life: Learning disability. London and Bristol: Jessica Kingsley.
23.
DuckettPSFryerD (1998) Developing empowering research practices with people who have learning disabilities. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology8: 57–65.
24.
FredricksonBL (1998) What good are positive emotions?Review of General Psychology2(3): 300–319.
25.
FredricksonBL (2001) The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist56
(3): 218–226.
GoodleyD (2000) Self-advocacy in the Lives of People with Intellectual Disabilities: The Politics of Resilience. Buckingham: Open University Press.
28.
GoodleyD (2005) Empowerment, self-advocacy and resilience. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities9
(4): 333–343.
29.
GoodleyDArmstrongD (2001) Self-advocacy Civil Rights and the Social Model of Disability: Final Research Project. Leeds, UK: Economic and Social Research Council, Centre for Disability Studies.
30.
HahnH (1993) The politics of physical differences: disability and discrimination. Journal of Social Issues44
(1): 39–48.
31.
Helitzer-AllenDMakhamberaMWangelA (1994) Obtaining sensitive information: the need for more than focus groups. Reproductive Health Matters3: 35–41.
32.
Hycner (1985) Some guidelines for the phenomenological analysis of interview data. Human Studies8
(3): 279–303.
33.
JahodaAMarkovaI (2004) Coping with social stigma: people with intellectual disabilities moving from institutions and family homes. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research48
(8): 719–729.
34.
KorenPEDeChilloNFriesenBJ (1992) Measuring empowerment in families whose children have emotional disabilities: a brief questionnaire. Rehabilitation Psychology37
(4): 305–321.
35.
MacdonaldJSinasonVHollinsS (2003) An interview study of people with a learning disabilities’ experience of and satisfaction with group analytic therapy. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice76: 433–453.
36.
MaierSFSeligmanM (1976) Learned helplessness: theory and evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology105
(1): 3–46.
37.
MaslowAH (1967) The need to know and the fear of knowing. The Journal of General Psychology68: 111–125.
38.
MayNPopeC (2000) Qualitative research in health care: assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ320: 50. Available at: www.bmj.com (accessed 6 October 2008).
39.
MitchellP (1997) The impact of self-advocacy on families. Disability and Society12
(1): 43–56.
40.
MosleyJ (1994) You Choose: A Handbook for Staff Working with People Who have Learning Disabilities to Promote Self-esteem and Self-advocacy. Cambridgeshire: LDA.
41.
OrfordJ (2008) Community Psychology: Challenges, Controversies and Emerging Consensus. Chichester: Wiley.
42.
PayneRJahodaA (2004) The Glasgow social self-efficacy scale – a new scale for measuring social self-efficacy in people with intellectual disability. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy11: 265–274.
43.
PrattMAshforthB (2003) Fostering meaningfulness in working and at work. In: CameronKSDuttonJEQuinnRE (eds) Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, pp. 309–327.
44.
PuttmanM (2005) Conceptualising disability: developing a framework for political disability identity. Journal of Disability Policy Studies16
(3): 188–198.
45.
RadnorHA (1994) Collecting and analysing interview data. Educational Research Monograph Series no 3. School of Education, University of Exeter, Exeter.
46.
RamcharanP (2005) Editorial: special issue on empowerment and advocacy. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities9: 283–287.
47.
RappaportJ (1995) Empowerment meets narrative: listening to stories and creating settings. American Journal of Community Psychology23
(5): 795–807.
48.
RappaportJManthorpeJMoriartyJ. (2005) Advocacy and people with learning disabilities in the UK: how can local funders find value for money?Journal of Intellectual Disabilities9: 299–319.
49.
RitchieJSpencerIO’ConnorW (2003) Carrying out qualitative analysis. In: RitchieJLewisJ (eds) Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. London: Sage, p219–262.
50.
RoetsGGoodleyD (2008) Disability, citizenship and uncivilized society: the smooth and nomadic qualities of self-advocacy. Disability Studies Quarterly28(4). Available at: www.dsq-sds.org (accessed 6 November 2014).
51.
RogersESChamberlinJEllisonML. (1997) A consumer-constructed scale to measure empowerment among users of mental health services. Psychiatric Studies48
(8): 1042–1047.
52.
RutterM (1987) Psychological resilience and protective mechanisms. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry57
(3): 316–331.
53.
RyleA (1991) Object relations theory and activity theory: a proposed link by way of procedural sequence model. British Journal of Medical Psychology64: 307–316.
54.
ShakespeareTWatsonN (2002) The social model of disability: an outdated ideology?Research in Social Science and Disability2: 9–28.
55.
SmithJA (1995) Semi-structured interviewing and qualitative analysis. In: SmithJAHarreRVan LangenhaveL (eds) Rethinking Psychology. London: Sage, pp. 9–26.
56.
SmithJ AOsbornM (2003) Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In: SmithJA (ed) Qualitative Psychology: a guide to research method. London: Sage, pp. 51–80.
57.
SmithJAOsbornM (2008) Interpretive phenomenological analysis. In: SmithJA (ed) Qualitative Research: A practical guide to research methods. 2nd ed. London: Sage.
58.
StaintonT (2005) Empowerment and the architecture of rights based social policy. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities9: 289–298.
59.
TaylorRR (2005) Can the social model explain all of disability experience? Perspectives of persons with chronic fatigue syndrome. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy59
(5): 497–506.
60.
TelfordRFaulknerA (2004) Learning about service user involvement in mental health research. Journal of Mental Health13
(6): 549–559.
61.
VygotskyLS (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher psychological process. In: ColMJohn-SteinerVScribnerSSoubermanE. (eds) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Process. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 79–91.
62.
WalmsleyJ (2001) Normalisation, emancipatory research and inclusive research in learning disability. Disability and Society16
(2): 187–205.
63.
WardMJ (2005) An historical perspective of self-determination: accomplishments and challenges. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities30
(3): 108–112.
64.
WehmeyerML (1995). The Arc’s Self-Determination Scale: Procedural Guidelines. Texas: The ARC of the United States.
65.
WehmeyerMLGragoudasS (2004) Centres for independent living and transition age youth: empowerment and self-determination. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation20: 53–58.
66.
World Health Organization (WHO) (2002) Toward a Common Language for Functioning, Disability and Health: International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: WHO.
67.
YalomID (with LeszczM) (2005) The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy. 5th ed. New York: Basic Books.
