Perceptions of District- and School-Level Special Education Leaders on Guardianship and Adult Decision-Making Support

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 REHABILITATION
A. Plotner, Charles B. Walters
{"title":"Perceptions of District- and School-Level Special Education Leaders on Guardianship and Adult Decision-Making Support","authors":"A. Plotner, Charles B. Walters","doi":"10.1177/10442073211006395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are many known barriers facing youth with disabilities as they make the transition from high school to their adult lives. One potential barrier receiving increased attention over the last 5 years is guardianship, the court petition-driven process by which adults with disabilities are declared incapacitated (i.e., unable to make or communicate decisions regarding their affairs). The result of this process is the appointment of a surrogate decision-maker known as a guardian. Depending on the nature of the court order, some rights like entering into contracts might transfer to the guardian, other rights may be retained by the “ward,” and other rights like marrying might be removed altogether. Guardianship has been framed as antithetical to the aims of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and contrary to research demonstrating the importance of self-determination for young adults with disabilities. Few studies, however, have examined the perspectives of professionals in special education leadership roles on issues related to special education, guardianship, self-determination, and alternatives to guardianship. This study surveyed professionals in district- and school-level special education leadership roles (N = 117) to examine their perspectives on what “should” be done and what is actually being done relative to issues surrounding guardianship in their district. Subsequent descriptive and inferential analyses show a stark incongruence between that which professionals value regarding this domain and the current reality of practice in their local areas. Salient findings with important implications for special education policy and future research are presented and discussed.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"290 - 300"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10442073211006395","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073211006395","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

There are many known barriers facing youth with disabilities as they make the transition from high school to their adult lives. One potential barrier receiving increased attention over the last 5 years is guardianship, the court petition-driven process by which adults with disabilities are declared incapacitated (i.e., unable to make or communicate decisions regarding their affairs). The result of this process is the appointment of a surrogate decision-maker known as a guardian. Depending on the nature of the court order, some rights like entering into contracts might transfer to the guardian, other rights may be retained by the “ward,” and other rights like marrying might be removed altogether. Guardianship has been framed as antithetical to the aims of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and contrary to research demonstrating the importance of self-determination for young adults with disabilities. Few studies, however, have examined the perspectives of professionals in special education leadership roles on issues related to special education, guardianship, self-determination, and alternatives to guardianship. This study surveyed professionals in district- and school-level special education leadership roles (N = 117) to examine their perspectives on what “should” be done and what is actually being done relative to issues surrounding guardianship in their district. Subsequent descriptive and inferential analyses show a stark incongruence between that which professionals value regarding this domain and the current reality of practice in their local areas. Salient findings with important implications for special education policy and future research are presented and discussed.
区级和校级特殊教育领导对监护和成人决策支持的看法
在残疾青年从高中生活过渡到成年生活的过程中,他们面临着许多已知的障碍。在过去5年中,一个受到越来越多关注的潜在障碍是监护,这是一种由法院请愿驱动的程序,残疾成年人被宣布为无行为能力(即无法就其事务做出决定或沟通)。这个过程的结果是任命一个代理决策者,即所谓的监护人。根据法院命令的性质,一些权利,如签订合同,可能会转移给监护人,其他权利可能会由“被监护人”保留,而其他权利,如结婚,可能会被完全取消。监护被认为是与《残疾人教育法》的目标相对立的,也与证明年轻残疾成年人自决重要性的研究背道而驰。然而,很少有研究考察了特殊教育领导角色的专业人士对特殊教育、监护、自决和监护替代方案等问题的看法。本研究调查了地区和学校级特殊教育领导角色的专业人士(N = 117),以检查他们对他们所在地区的监护问题“应该”做什么和实际正在做什么的看法。随后的描述性和推断性分析表明,专业人士对这一领域的重视与他们当地实践的当前现实之间存在明显的不一致。提出并讨论了对特殊教育政策和未来研究具有重要意义的重要发现。
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
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: The Journal of Disability Policy Studies addresses compelling, variable issues in ethics, policy, and law related to individuals with disabilities. A major focus is quantitative and qualitative policy research. Articles have implications in fields such as education, law, sociology, public health, family studies, medicine, social work, and public administration. Occasional special series discuss current problems or areas needing more in-depth research, for example, disability and aging, policy concerning families of children with disabilities, oppression and disability, school violence policies and interventions, and systems change in supporting individuals with disabilities.
×
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