Knowing,being or doing? A comparative study on human service professionals’ perceptions of quality in day-to-day encounters with clients and students with intellectual disabilities
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online September, 2018
Knowing,being or doing? A comparative study on human service professionals’ perceptions of quality in day-to-day encounters with clients and students with intellectual disabilities
What does it mean to decide, act and behave in a professional manner towards people with intellectual disabilities? This article analyses how professionals from three welfare organizations describe quality in daily encounters with people with intellectual disabilities. Four hundred and twenty-one respondents participated in the study. Our empirical data consisted of written excerpts exclusively. Findings revealed that quality in encounters with people with intellectual disabilities was associated with personal attributes, pertinent knowledge, professional actions and ideological awareness. Findings also show differences in responses, both quantitatively (frequency) and qualitatively (content), which seem to be associated with organization. This reflects that human service organizations, as normative environments, underpin ideas about relevance and appropriateness in day-to-day situations, forming actions and perceptions among its members. Our conclusion is that organizational context needs to be considered to enhance our knowledge on how different categories of professionals view quality and moral worth when working with people with intellectual disabilities.
AlbrechtGJetteAPetrieH. (2001) An Evaluation of Swedish Disability Research. Stockholm: Forskningsrådet för arbetsliv och socialvetenskap.
2.
AxelssonRBihari AxelssonS (2006) Integration and collaboration in public health – a conceptual framework. International Journal of Health Planning and Management21(1): 75–88.
3.
BigbyCFrawleyP (2010) Social Work and Intellectual Disability: Working for Change. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
4.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3: 77–101.
5.
BuntinxWSchalockR (2010) Models of disability, quality of life, and individualized supports: implications for professional practice in intellectual disability. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities7(4): 283–294.
6.
CheathamLAbellNHyejinK (2015) Development and validation of the social worker’s attitudes toward disability scale. Journal of Social Work Education51(2): 379–397.
7.
ChungMCHardingC (2009) Investigating burnout and psychological well-being of staff working with people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour: the role of personality. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities22: 549–560.
8.
CODEX (2011) Etiska regler och riktlinjer för forskning. [Ethical Rules and Guidelines for Research]. Vetenskapsrådet, Uppsala University. Available at: http://www.codex.vr.se/ (accessed 2 November 2016).
9.
DevereuxJHastingsRNooneS (2009) Staff stress and burnout in intellectual disability services: Work stress theory and its application. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities22: 561–573.
10.
DuránAExtremeraNReyL (2004) Self-reported emotional intelligence, burnout and engagement among staff in services for people with intellectual disabilities. Psychological Reports95: 386–390.
11.
DunérAWolmesjöM (2015) Interprofessional collaboration in Swedish health and social care from a care managers’ perspective. European Journal of Social Work18(3): 354–369.
12.
EastonC (2013) An examination of the Internet’s development as a disabling environment in the context of the social model of disability and anti-discrimination legislation in the UK and USA. Universal Access in the Information Society12(1): 105–114.
13.
Esping-AndersenG (1991) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
14.
GreveB (2007) What characterise the Nordic welfare state model. Journal of Social Sciences3(2): 43–51.
15.
GustavssonA (2004) The role of theory in disability research - springboard or strait-jacket?Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research6: 55–70.
16.
GustavssonATøssebroJTraustadòttirR (2005) Introduction: approaches and perspectives in Nordic disability research. In: GustavssonASandvinJTraustadòttirRTøssebroJ (eds) Resistance, Reflection and Change: Nordic Disability Research. Lund: Studentlitteratur, pp. 23–44.
17.
HasenfeldY (1983) Human Service Organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
18.
HasenfeldY (2010) Human Services as Complex Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ltd.
19.
InelandJ (2015) Logics and ambivalence: professional dilemmas during implementation of an inclusive education practice. Education Inquiry6(1): 53–71.
20.
InelandJ (2016) Hybrid structures and cultural diversity in welfare services for people with intellectual disabilities. The case of inclusive education and disability arts in Sweden. ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.alter.2016.06.002 (accessed 3 November 2016).
21.
InelandJSjöströmS (2007) Normalisering, autenticitet och reflexivitet – om iscensättande av det vanliga livet i handikappomsorg [Normalization, authencity and reflexivity – about staging the everyday life in disability services]. Socialvetenskaplig tidkrift4: 266–279.
22.
KvistJGreveB (2011) Has the Nordic welfare model been transformed?Social Policy & Administration45(2): 146–160.
23.
LipskyM (1980) Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
24.
LizanoEL (2015) Examining the impact of job burnout on the health and well-being of human service workers: a systematic review and synthesis. Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Governance39(3): 167–181.
25.
MarchJGOlsenJP (1995) Democratic Governance. New York: Free Press.
26.
MayringP (2000) Qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Social Research1(2). Available at: http://www.qualitativeresearch.net (accessed 11 October 2016).
27.
McConachieAJMcKenzieKMorrisPG. (2014) Acceptance and mindfulness based stress management for support staff caring for individuals with intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities35(6): 1216–1227.
28.
NooneSJ (2013) Supporting care staff using mindfulness and acceptance approaches. In:TaylorJLLindsayWRHastingsRPHattonC (eds) Psychological Therapies for Adults with Intellectual Disabilities. Chichester: Wiley and Sons Ltd., pp. 207–221.
29.
NooneSJHastingsRP (2009) Building psychological resilience in support staff caring for people with intellectual disabilities: pilot evaluation of an acceptance-based intervention. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities13(1): 43–53.
30.
PacheA-CSantosF (2010) When worlds collide: the internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands. Academy of Management Review35(3): 455–476.
31.
PearceLD (2016) Mixed methods inquiry in sociology. American Behavioral Scientist56: 829–848.
32.
PonnertLSvenssonK (2016) Standardisation – the end of professional discreation?European Journal of Social Work19(3–4): 586–599.
33.
PurtiloRDHaddadAMDohertyRF (2014) Health Professional and Patient Interaction, 8th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier.
34.
RoseNKentSRoseJ (2012) Health professionals’ attitudes and emotions towards working with adults with intellectual disability and mental ill health. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research56: 854–864.
35.
SFS (1982:763) Health and Medical Services Act. Sweden: Socialdepartementet [Ministry of Health and Social Affairs].
36.
SFS (1993:387) Act Concerning Support and Services for Persons with Certain Functional Impairments. Sweden: Socialdepartementet [Ministry of Health and Social Affairs].
37.
SFS (2001:453) Social Services Act. Sweden: Socialdepartementet [Ministry of Health and Social Affairs].
38.
SFS (2003:460). Sweden: Act concerning Ethical Review of Research Involving Humans [Ministry of Education].
39.
SandelowskiM (2000) Focus on research methods: whatever happened to qualitative description?Research in Nursing and Health23: 334–340.
40.
SchillingJ (2009) From ineffectiveness to destruction: a qualitative study on the meaning of negative leadership. Leadership5: 102–128.
41.
ShakespeareT (2006) Disability Rights and Wrongs. Oxford: Routledge.
42.
SkirrowPHattonC (2007) Burnout amongst direct care workers in services for adults with intellectual disabilities: a systematic review of research findings and initial normative data. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities20(2): 131–144.
43.
SöderM (2013) Swedish social disability research: a short version of a long story. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research15(1): 90–107.
44.
StinchcombeAL (2001) When Formality Works: Authority and Abstraction in Law and Organizations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
45.
The Swedish Agency for Participation (2014) What’s up in 2015? The Fourth Follow-up of the Developments in the Disability Policy in Sweden. Stockholm: The Swedish Agency for Participation.
46.
VassosMNankervisKSkerryT. (2013) Work engagement and job burnout within the disability support worker population. Research in Developmental Disabilities34(11): 3884–3895.
47.
VinterekM (2006) Individualisering i ett skolsammanhang. Stockholm: Liber.
48.
WhitePEdwardsNTownsend-WhiteC (2006) Stress and burnout amongst professional carers of people with intellectual disability: another health inequity. Current Opinion in Psychiatry19(5): 502–507.
49.
WieczorekCMarentBOsreckiF. (2015) Hospitals as professional organizations: challenges for reorientation towards health promotion. Health Sociology Review24(2): 123–136.
50.
YazbeckMMcVillyKParmenterTR (2004) Attitudes toward people with intellectual disabilities. An Australian perspective. Journal of Disability Policy Studies15(2): 77–111.
