Models of Intellectual Disability: Towards a Perspective of (Poss)ability

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read Online Read More Add to Saved list
  • Author(s): Mckenzie, J. A.
  • Language:
    English
  • Source:
    Journal of Intellectual Disability Research. Apr 2013 57(4):370-379.
  • Publication Date:
    2013
  • Document Type:
    Journal Articles
    Reports - Research
  • Additional Information
    • Availability:
      Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/
    • Peer Reviewed:
      Y
    • Source:
      10
    • Subject Terms:
      Q Methodology; Mental Retardation; Discourse Analysis; Foreign Countries; Adults; Parents; Task Analysis; Attitudes toward Disabilities; Factor Analysis; Context Effect; Models; Statistical Analysis; Professional Personnel; Parents with Disabilities; Social Attitudes
    • Subject Terms:
      South Africa
    • Accession Number:
      10.1111/j.1365-2788.2012.01547.x
    • ISSN:
      0964-2633
    • Abstract:
      Background: The social and medical models of disability configure the relationship between disability and impairment differently. Neither of these models has provided a comprehensive theoretical or practical basis for talking about intellectual disability (ID). Models that emphasise the interactive nature of disability appear to be more promising. This study explores the ways in which models of disability are reflected in disability discourse in an empirical discourse analysis conducted in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. Methods: Q methodology was used in this study as a discourse analysis tool. Adults with ID, parents of children with ID and professionals who work with people with ID completed a sorting task where they stated the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with statements that are made about people with ID. This exercise resulted in a pattern of responses for each participant, termed a Q sort and these were used as data in a factor analysis using dedicated Q method software. A second order factor analysis was then performed on the resulting factors. Results: Four discourses were identified: the "Social Model/Human Rights Discourse," the "Medical Model/Professional Religious Discourse," the "Community Model/Community Religious Discourse" and the "Interactive Discourse." Except for the last one, each of these discourses adopts a model of disability with a static view of impairment as fixed. The "Interactive Discourse" appears to be related to dynamic, environmental conceptions of disability where competence is built through social interaction. Conclusions: A theory of (poss)ability is proposed and some of its concerns are suggested. This perspective views impairment as an interaction between individuals and their environment and postulates that competence is a function of context, rather than a property of the individual. (Contains 3 tables and 1 figure.)
    • Abstract:
      As Provided
    • Number of References:
      29
    • Publication Date:
      2014
    • Accession Number:
      EJ1013215