Securing sexual justice for people with intellectual disability: A systematic review and critical appraisal of research recommendations

被引:7
作者
Ginn, Hannah G. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Buffalo, Sch Social Work, Buffalo, NY 14260 USA
关键词
intellectual disability; intimate relationships; qualitative research; recommendations for practice; sexual rights; systematic review; LEARNING-DISABILITIES; YOUNG-PEOPLE; INTIMATE-RELATIONSHIPS; WOMEN; ADULTS; LIVES; EDUCATION; CONSENT; WELL; DIFFICULTIES;
D O I
10.1111/jar.12867
中图分类号
G44 [教育心理学];
学科分类号
0402 ; 040202 ;
摘要
Background People with intellectual disability contend with significant restrictions to their sexual expression and partnered relationships. This review examines the types of recommendations scholars offer in their qualitative research involving participants with intellectual disability discussing sexuality and intimate relationships. Method A systematic review of peer-reviewed studies published between 1972 and July 2018 yielded a sample of 26 studies. Thematic analysis was used to taxonomize scholars' recommendations. Results Six distinct forms of recommendations were identified. The most frequently offered and most strongly emphasized recommendation across studies aimed to change individuals with intellectual disability. In contrast, a minority of studies prioritized engaging individuals as informants, eliciting individuals' wishes, enabling relationships and fostering ideological change. No studies placed the greatest weight on promoting systems change. Conclusions Recommendations in the literature have predominantly emphasized individual as opposed to environmental changes. I consider the ramifications of this and argue for a reorientation towards systems change.
引用
收藏
页码:921 / 934
页数:14
相关论文
共 81 条
  • [51] Contraception and Women with Intellectual Disabilities
    McCarthy, Michelle
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH IN INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES, 2009, 22 (04) : 363 - 369
  • [52] Seeking Safer Sexual Spaces: Queer and Trans Young People Labeled with Intellectual Disabilities and the Paradoxical Risks of Restriction
    McClelland, Alex
    Flicker, Sarah
    Nepveux, Denise
    Nixon, Stephanie
    Vo, Tess
    Wilson, Ciann
    Marshall, Zack
    Travers, Robb
    Proudfoot, Devon
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HOMOSEXUALITY, 2012, 59 (06) : 808 - 819
  • [53] Merrick J, 2007, INT J DISABIL HUM DE, V6, P225
  • [54] Moher D, 2009, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V339, DOI [10.1186/2046-4053-4-1, 10.1136/bmj.b2535, 10.1136/bmj.i4086, 10.1136/bmj.b2700, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.07.299, 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007, 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097]
  • [55] Nussbaum M.C, 2000, J. Hum. Dev., V1, P219, DOI [DOI 10.1080/713678045, 10.1080/1464988002000874, DOI 10.1080/1464988002000874]
  • [56] Nussbaum M. C., 2011, Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach
  • [57] Capacity to Consent: Policies and Practices that Limit Sexual Consent for People with Intellectual/Developmental Disabilities
    Onstot, Andrea
    [J]. SEXUALITY AND DISABILITY, 2019, 37 (04) : 633 - 644
  • [58] PERSKE R, 1972, MENT RETARD, V10, P24
  • [59] Richards D., 2009, CHALLENGES HUMAN RIG, P184
  • [60] Rojas S, 2016, BRIT J LEARN DISABIL, V44, P56, DOI 10.1111/bld.12110