12.07.2015 Views

Women with Disabilities: Barriers and Facilitators to Accessing ...

Women with Disabilities: Barriers and Facilitators to Accessing ...

Women with Disabilities: Barriers and Facilitators to Accessing ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

WOMEN WITH DISABILITIES: BARRIERS AND FACILITATORS TO ACCESSING SERVICES DURING PREGNANCY,CHILDBIRTH AND EARLY MOTHERHOODSchool of Nursing <strong>and</strong> Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin‘developmental disability’ <strong>and</strong> ‘intellectual disability’ (Schalock et al, 2007;Wehmeyer et al, 2008). The American Association on Mental Retardationchanged its name on 1 st January 2007 <strong>to</strong> the American Association onIntellectual <strong>and</strong> Developmental <strong>Disabilities</strong> (AAIDD) (AAIDD, 2008).In the past century <strong>and</strong> a half, additional social policy labels have applied <strong>to</strong> thisgroup of people. These included terms such as 'developmentally disabled','feeble-minded’, ‘idiot’, ‘imbecile’, ‘mental defective’, ‘mentally retarded’ <strong>and</strong>‘vagabond’. (United Kingdom Parliament, 1913; Stain<strong>to</strong>n, 1992; Trent, 1994;Cocks et al, 1996; Walmsley, 1997; 2000; Walsh <strong>and</strong> Gash, 2004; Grant et al,2005). Gates et al (2007) adds ‘moral defective’ <strong>and</strong> ‘uneducable’ <strong>to</strong> this list.The label utilised <strong>and</strong> what it means has varied over time <strong>and</strong> legislativeboundaries. From the literature, it would appear that, as social policy shiftedover the last century from care based on the bio-medical model, emphasisingsegregation <strong>and</strong> institutionalisation, <strong>to</strong> a social <strong>and</strong> rights based approach, theterms existing at the time became outdated <strong>and</strong> changed. Furthermore,negative over<strong>to</strong>nes have developed around many of the labels that werepreviously used <strong>and</strong> so these have become unacceptable (ERHA, 2002; Gates,et al, 2007). Thus, for example, the previous medical <strong>and</strong> legal classifications‘idiot’ <strong>and</strong> ‘imbecile’ (United Kingdom Parliament, 1913) are now generallyconsidered <strong>to</strong> be insulting <strong>and</strong> undignified terms.2.7.2.2. Defining characteristics <strong>and</strong> diagnostic criteriaWhile the label <strong>and</strong> meaning(s) attached <strong>to</strong> this heterogeneous group of peoplemay vary over time <strong>and</strong> between societies, the general consensus in thepublished literature is that a number of commonalities exist (Gates et al, 2007;MacKenzie, 2007) <strong>and</strong> the following recurring themes have emerged (WHO,1992 <strong>and</strong> 1993; Jenkinson, 1996; American Psychiatric Association, 2000;Scottish Executive, 2000; Department of Health, 2001; Welsh Office, 2001;ERHA, 2002; New Zeal<strong>and</strong> Ministry of Health, 2003; Department of Health <strong>and</strong>41

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!