Critiquing representations of intellectual disability in occupation-based literature.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 REHABILITATION
Rachel Reparon, Pamela Block, Ann Fudge Schormans, Debbie Laliberte Rudman, Gail Teachman
{"title":"Critiquing representations of intellectual disability in occupation-based literature.","authors":"Rachel Reparon, Pamela Block, Ann Fudge Schormans, Debbie Laliberte Rudman, Gail Teachman","doi":"10.1080/11038128.2023.2289897","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Within and beyond occupation-based scholarship, concerns abound regarding the pervasiveness of discourses that promote a negative, deficit-based view of intellectual disability and associated consequences for disabled people's lives. Such representations risk reducing the complexities of human doing and being and can limit the occupational possibilities of this group. Yet, there is a lack of critically reflexive research exploring how disability is discursively constructed in occupation-based literature.</p><p><strong>Aims/objectives: </strong>This paper critically analyses representations of intellectual disability within occupation-based literature. It considers the influence of such representations on the occupational possibilities of people labelled intellectually disabled.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review employed a critical interpretive synthesis of 21 peer-reviewed articles from occupational therapy and occupational science that focused on intellectual disability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three analytic threads were identified as contributing to how intellectual disability was represented across the reviewed literature: <i>habilitating expected doings</i>, <i>becoming productive citizens</i>, and <i>activated, but insufficient</i>.</p><p><strong>Conclusion & significance: </strong>Occupation-based discourses have powerful influence within society, particularly within occupational therapy, regarding understandings of intellectual disability and how these shape occupational possibilities for persons labelled intellectually disabled. Drawing attention to taken-for-granted representations of intellectual disability is essential to promote transformative occupational therapy practice and enhance occupational possibilities for this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":49570,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11038128.2023.2289897","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Within and beyond occupation-based scholarship, concerns abound regarding the pervasiveness of discourses that promote a negative, deficit-based view of intellectual disability and associated consequences for disabled people's lives. Such representations risk reducing the complexities of human doing and being and can limit the occupational possibilities of this group. Yet, there is a lack of critically reflexive research exploring how disability is discursively constructed in occupation-based literature.

Aims/objectives: This paper critically analyses representations of intellectual disability within occupation-based literature. It considers the influence of such representations on the occupational possibilities of people labelled intellectually disabled.

Methods: This review employed a critical interpretive synthesis of 21 peer-reviewed articles from occupational therapy and occupational science that focused on intellectual disability.

Results: Three analytic threads were identified as contributing to how intellectual disability was represented across the reviewed literature: habilitating expected doings, becoming productive citizens, and activated, but insufficient.

Conclusion & significance: Occupation-based discourses have powerful influence within society, particularly within occupational therapy, regarding understandings of intellectual disability and how these shape occupational possibilities for persons labelled intellectually disabled. Drawing attention to taken-for-granted representations of intellectual disability is essential to promote transformative occupational therapy practice and enhance occupational possibilities for this population.

职业文学中智障表现的批判。
背景:在以职业为基础的学术研究内外,对普遍存在的关于智力残疾及其对残疾人生活的相关后果的消极的、以缺陷为基础的观点的论述感到担忧。这种表述有降低人类行为和存在复杂性的风险,并可能限制这一群体的职业可能性。然而,在以职业为基础的文献中,缺乏批判性反思性的研究来探讨残疾是如何被语篇建构的。目的/目的:本文批判性地分析了基于职业的文献中智力残疾的表现。它考虑了这种陈述对被贴上智力残疾者职业可能性的影响。方法:本综述对21篇来自职业治疗和职业科学的同行评议的关于智力残疾的文章进行了批判性的解释性综合。结果:三个分析线索被确定为有助于在审查的文献中如何表现智力残疾:适应预期的行为,成为富有成效的公民,激活但不足。结论和意义:基于职业的话语在社会中具有强大的影响力,特别是在职业治疗中,关于对智力残疾的理解以及这些如何为被标记为智力残疾的人塑造职业可能性。引起人们对智力残疾的理所当然的关注,对于促进变革的职业治疗实践和提高这一人群的职业可能性至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
15.80%
发文量
45
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy is an internationally well-recognized journal that aims to provide a forum for occupational therapy research worldwide and especially the Nordic countries. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy welcomes: theoretical frameworks, original research reports emanating from quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies, literature reviews, case studies, presentation and evaluation of instruments, evaluation of interventions, learning and teaching in OT, letters to the editor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信