Participation of adults with cognitive, physical, or psychiatric impairments in family of origin and intimate relationships: A grounded theory study

1Citations
Citations of this article
61Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: How adults with disabilities perceive participation has received little attention. Our purpose was to formulate a grounded theory on participation, based on the subjective experience of adults with cognitive, physical, or psychiatric impairment(s), and to identify barriers, facilitators, and support needs concerning participation in different areas of life. We aimed to explore whether the United Nations' Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), ratified by Switzerland in 2014, and its principles are being met. Here we report on the main category and focus on the participation areas 'family of origin' and 'intimate relationships.' Methods: In a qualitative, grounded theory study, we conducted problem-centered interviews with 23 adults with cognitive, physical, or psychiatric impairments (30-53 years; 11 men, 12 women), with different housing (on their own, assisted living, with parents) and work situations (primary vs. secondary labor market) in nine German-speaking Swiss cantons. Results: Participation can be understood as a continuum that extends on a horizontal level (from participation is restricted to participation takes place) and a vertical level (separative setting vs. inclusive setting). In separative as well as in inclusive settings, diverse levels of participation are possible. Many participants were stuck in an 'in-between' area between separative and inclusion-oriented settings. In the family of origin, there was a thin line between fulfilling relations that enhance participation and conflictual relations and overprotective parenting that limit participation. In intimate relationships, opportunities for participation were limited overall. Many interviewees were single. Social environment and family of origin (e.g., parents) can enable and facilitate intimate relationships and sexual contacts but can also be an important barrier. Conclusions: Participation can be understood as a continuum. Participation restrictions exist in separative as well as in inclusive-oriented settings, also in the areas of family of origin and intimate relationships. Participation barriers must be torn down in separative as well as in inclusion-oriented settings. Trajectories to inclusive settings should be facilitated. Families with children with impairment(s) should be supported from early on to create the best possible participation possibilities for the (adult) person with impairment(s) and to support the family of origin itself.

References Powered by Scopus

Social networks of people with mild intellectual disabilities: Characteristics, satisfaction, wishes and quality of life

70Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Barriers to the long-term recovery of individuals with disabilities following a disaster

69Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Structural and functional characteristics of the social networks of people with mild intellectual disabilities

64Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

The Right to Sexuality, Reproductive Health, and Found a Family for People with Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review

20Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pfister, A., Georgi-Tscherry, P., Berger, F., & Studer, M. (2020). Participation of adults with cognitive, physical, or psychiatric impairments in family of origin and intimate relationships: A grounded theory study. BMC Public Health, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08770-x

Readers over time

‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2506121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 17

74%

Lecturer / Post doc 3

13%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

9%

Researcher 1

4%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Psychology 9

43%

Nursing and Health Professions 6

29%

Social Sciences 4

19%

Medicine and Dentistry 2

10%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0