|
Scarica
l'articolo in PDF
Forgotten People – Examining issues of justice and
social inclusion
with respect to people with intellectual disabilities
Sheila Hollins
Introduction
Adults with intellectual disabilities
are arguably the most vulnerable, impoverished and socially excluded
group in society. This is true in all cultures and throughout the
world. After more than one hundred and fifty years of institutional
care in the western world, community care is being developed in many
countries with the intention to provide more humane support to people
in their daily lives. Sadly human rights abuses and inequalities
remain hidden in our societies.
The author draws on her professional and personal experience in the
field of intellectual disability, reflects on the opportunities and
experiences of intelletually disabled people as members of church
communities, and considers how far Catholic Social Teaching has
impacted on people’s lives.
Drawing on sociological and anthropological insights and research into
the quality of life of institutionalized people, the paper will also
consider the responses of other members of society to people perceived
as different or ‘other’.
Despite the clear reminders in Catholic Social Teaching that every
human being has the same value in God’s eyes and belongs to society,
the way in which this is interpreted in practice in both secular and
church society, falls far short of these aspirations. Solidarity with
our neighbour should include promoting equality of rights and
opportunities, and at the very least the chance to enjoy an ‘ordinary
life’. But in the Western World, some householders will campaign to
prevent a home for people with intellectual disabilities from being
built in their street. It seems as if being a successful contributor
to economic growth is often valued more than being a member of a
family and a neighbourhood.
The author will explore ways in which people with intellectual
disabilities are both included and excluded by local communities,
including church communities, giving examples mainly from the UK. She
will suggest that some of the well-intentioned approaches to meet the
perceived needs of disabled church members may serve to disadvantage
them further, and will conclude with some ideas about how the church
could modernise its thinking and influence for this diverse group of
disabled people.
Principles
Gaudium et Spes
(1965) emphasised some principles about human dignity which have also
become or are becoming, enshrined in International Human Rights
legislation and within some government policies.
…There is a growing awareness of the
exalted dignity proper to the human person, since he stands above all
things, and his rights and duties are universal and inviolable.
Therefore, there must be made available to all men everything
necessary for leading a life truly human, such as food, clothing, and
shelter; the right to choose a state of life freely and to found a
family, the right to education, to employment, to a good reputation,
to respect, to appropriate information, to activity in accord with the
upright norm of one's own conscience, to protection of privacy and
rightful freedom. even in matters religious (GS 26).
These are Catholic, Christian and
universal principles. They are applied in society, by governments as
well as at the level of communities and families, to varying extent.
What communities tend to have in common, however, is that such
principles are not extended to all equally. Some minority groups tend
to be considered sufficiently different from other community members,
such that they are not treated equally. However, the 2nd Vatican
Council laid stress on a reverence for humanity:
… everyone must consider his every
neighbour without exception as another self, taking into account first
of all his life and the means necessary to living it with dignity, so
as not to imitate the rich man who had no concerns for the poor man,
Lazarus. (GS 27)
So does this really apply to everyone?
Are there any exceptions? How far do we live out the aspirations of
Gaudium et Spes in reality? What about people with serious
intellectual disabilities? How far is intellectual ability seen as an
essential component of personhood?
The intellectual nature of the human
person is perfected by wisdom and needs to be, for wisdom gently
attracts the mind of man to a quest and a love for what is true and
good. Steeped in wisdom, man passes through visible realities to those
that are unseen.
Our era needs such wisdom more than bygone ages if the discoveries
made by man are to be further humanized. For the future of the world
stands in peril unless wiser men are forthcoming. It should also be
pointed out that many nations, poorer in economic goods, are quite
rich in wisdom and can offer noteworthy advantages to others. (GS 15)
Is the full humanity of people with
intellectual disabilities recognised, supported and fulfilled? How far
is wisdom equated with intellect and to what extent is emotional
intelligence recognised? If not fully recognised, are we aware of the
shortcomings in the responses of our own communities, and what are we
doing about them? Should our responses be restricted to Catholic
circles or should we share our insights with the world at large and
how effective will we be?
The size of the ‘problem’
What is Intellectual Disability? The
definition[1]
includes the presence of:
● A significantly reduced ability to understand new or complex
information, and to learn new skills (impaired intelligence)
● A reduced ability to cope independently (impaired social
functioning)
● That started before adulthood with a lasting effect on
development.
This definition encompasses people with a broad range of
disabilities. The presence of a low intelligence quotient, for example
an IQ below 70, is not, of itself, a sufficient reason for deciding
whether an individual should be provided with additional health and
social care support. An assessment of social functioning and
communication skills should also be taken into account when
determining need. Many people with intellectual disabilities also have
physical and/or sensory impairments. The definition covers adults with
autism who also have intellectual disabilities.
The current prevalence of intellectual disability is between 2.5 and
4% of the population, the majority of whom have mild intellectual
disabilities. Evidence suggests that the number of people with severe
intellectual disabilities will increase by around 1% of this total per
annum as a result of:
● increased life expectancy, especially among people with Down’s
syndrome
● growing numbers of children and young people with complex and
multiple disabilities who now survive into adulthood
● a rise in the reported numbers of school age children with autistic
spectrum disorders, some of whom will have intellectual disabilities
Policy development
Respect for individuals with
disabilities or with mental health problems is the main value
underpinning some of the most progressive government policy
initiatives. In Britain, ‘Valuing People’ - (a new cross government
White paper on intellectual disability in England), as one such policy
initiative, has aspirations to support the inclusion, rights, choices
and independence of people with intellectual disabilities.
Implementation of this policy has also drawn attention in many circles
to the need for people’s spiritual needs and church membership to be
considered.
How did such humane policies develop in practice and what lessons can
we learn from the processes involved?
In 1999 I was invited to play a key role in an International Policy
Academy hosted by the President’s Committee on Mental Retardation to
be held in Washington, DC. Eight US state teams, two teams from Native
American Tribal Groups and two international teams were invited. Each
team was asked to ensure that the members would include legislators,
service users, family members and service providers. The England Team
comprised 16 people and among them were three women who themselves had
intellectual disabilities, and four members who were themselves family
members whilst also having professional contributions to make. My role
was to attend to the group dynamics and support the team leaders, but
I was also called on to share my experience as the mother of a young
man with severe intellectual disabilities.[2]
The five-day Academy proved invaluable
in determining the way in which new policy on intellectual disability
was later developed in England. The inclussive way in which our
discussions proceeded, and the often-painful way in which we learnt to
listen to the intellectually disabled members of the team, had a
profound impact on everyone. We also heard from other US teams about
the ways in which they had made progress in developing inclusive
approaches to supporting people with intellectual disabilities and
their families in their everyday lives. By the end of the week we were
ready to return to the UK with the building blocks of a new policy.
The then Minister of Health was ready to listen. Perhaps one key
factor was his personal experience of having had a child with a severe
disability himself. He formed a ‘Minister’s Advisory Group’ which
included most of the members of the Washington ‘sixteen’. By May 2001
he was ready to launch his new policy. I will quote from some sections
of the report to illustrate the exciting way in which I think the
influence of Gaudium et Spes can be recognised.
For example as the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, said in his
introduction to the White Paper:
People with intellectual disabilities can
lead full and rewarding lives as many already do. But others find
themselves pushed to the margins of our society. And almost all
encounter prejudice, bullying, insensitive treatment and
discrimination at some time in their lives. Such prejudice and
discrimination – no less hurtful for often being unintentional – has a
very damaging impact. It leads to your world becoming smaller,
opportunities more limited, a withdrawal from wider society so time is
spent only with family, carers or other people with intellect-ual
disabilities.
Later on the White Paper refers to the
social change needed to ensure that people with intellectual
disabilities have a chance to be treated as equal citizens:
1.14 Too many people with intellectual
disabilities and their families still lead lives apart, with limited
opportunities and poor life chances. To maintain the momentum of
change we now need to open up mainstream services, not create further
separate specialist services. People with intellectual disabilities
should have the same opportunities as other people to lead full and
active lives and should receive the support needed to make this
possible.
It also addresses their health needs:
Many people with intellectual
disabilities have greater health needs than the rest of the
population. They are more likely to experience mental illness and are
more prone to chronic health problems, epilepsy, and physical and
sensory disabilities. The Government’s objective is to enable people
with intellectual disabilities to have access to a health service
designed around their individual needs, with fast and convenient care
delivered to a consistently high standard and with additional support
where necessary. We will ensure that people with intellectual
disabilities, including those from minority ethnic communities, have
the same right of access to mainstream health services as the rest of
the population.
Many of the changes identified start
with addressing the attitudes towards, and the opportunities available
to children:
3.3 Three main messages have come out of
consultation with disabled children:
● treat us more like our brothers and sisters
● we want to do the things other children do, not always ‘something
special’
● give us a chance to be independent, get a job and have a home.
An Easy Read version of Valuing People was also produced – probably
the first widely accessible government policy.[3]
Learning from experience
A visit to Africa
Some years ago, the supervisor of a
religious order came to see me to discuss issues of justice as they
apply to people with intellectual disabilities. Her order had come to
a similar conclusion: people with intellectual disabilities are
probably one of the last groups in society to have their essential
humanity recognised. The Sacred Heart Sisters in Chigwell in England
have established working communities in Zambia and the Philippines
amongst other places, where their social action includes providing
teaching and social care for disabled children and adults.
Following a visit to one of their Zambian projects, I co-authored an
editorial[4]
about their successful work in developing inclusive education for
severely disabled children living in a shantytown. A major barrier to
achieving the international goal of universal primary education (UPE;
UNESCO 2001) is the fact that those children who do not attend primary
school are overwhelmingly from poor households in poor countries. In
1998 UNESCO’s Education for All (EFA) 2000 Assessment[5]
estimated that one child in five was not enrolled in school. The vast
majority (nearly 87%) of these children lived in just three regions:
Sub-Saharan Africa, South and West Asia and the Arab States and North
Africa.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that one in 10 children
in developing countries have special needs in education. Children
with intellectual disability are not the first priority when
educational policy is being made in any part of the world, and yet
there are pragmatic reasons why it is fruitful to remember them,
perhaps especially so in Africa. Many disabled children in Africa are
orphans because of the impact of the AIDS epidemic in their parent’s
generation. Many more are separated from their extended families
because of famine, war or the migration of their parents to the cities
in search of work. A child who is slow to develop and who has extra
care needs is harder to support in these circumstances. Consider the
challenge of a floppy baby with no head control who cannot be carried
safely on her sister’s, mother’s or grandmother’s back. Her carer will
be unable to work unless she can find another caregiver. But disabled
children are still objects of fear in many parts of Zambia, and some
families hide their disabled children, perhaps feeling shame for their
child’s difference.
The sisters are making a significant local contribution towards the
UNESCO aim of Education for All by 2015. The school is an integral
part of a mainstream ‘Open Community School’ (a no-fee school catering
for orphans and vulnerable children), in a shantytown in the capital.
The special classes started in 1997 following a survey in the Compound
(population 40,000) to try and find the ‘hidden’ children. The survey
was conducted with the help of the children already in school, in
identifying their disabled brothers, sisters and neighbours. 110
children and young people with special educational needs were found,
from 18 months to 24 years, many of whom were orphans and who put an
additional strain on an already stretched extended family. Before the
survey there were no disabled children attending the school. By 2003,
70 children were regularly attending the special school which provided
classes from pre-school up to age 15, as well as a 16+ training
programme. Inclusive approaches such as these help to break down
attitudinal barriers in the wider community, and enable disabled
children in sub Saharan Africa to enjoy their right to education.
Living and working in London
In my work as a psychiatrist and
psychotherapist I have direct clinical contact with people of all
ages and all degrees of intellectual disability, their families, and
carers. As a university teacher and researcher I have an opportunity
to teach the next generation of health care professionals and to
identify and address research questions which might make a difference
to people’s lives. I want to describe some key lessons that I have
learnt from my clinical and university experience. I also have some
important personal, family and community experience to reflect on and
share. In some instances, it is the combination of my personal and
professional insights that has been called on to inform policy and
practice, both at government level and to a limited extent within
church organisations.
A Diocesan initiative
Thus, for example, one diocese in London
had obtained a grant to review the needs of disabled members and to
consider how best to meet their pastoral and spiritual needs. I was
invited to join and sometimes chair a steering group for the project.
The researcher visited and reviewed different models of provision and
drafted a detailed report, concluding with an option appraisal. The
options ranged from the more traditional approach of offering an
occasional, segregated ‘special’ Mass for people with intellectual
disabilities, to a community development approach that aimed to
include people as visible and equal members of the church community.
The latter option was chosen and seemed very much in line with the
emphasis on inclusion and choice which government policy in the UK was
also beginning to embrace.
The diocese then employed two workers to develop this vision, rather
optimistically, since there are dozens of parishes in the diocese. The
purpose of the project[6]
was described as to bring about change at parish level to promote the
full and active participation of disabled people in the church and in
the community. The work aims to …“create an awareness of the needs and
gifts of disabled people, and to develop the sensitivity, confidence
and expertise of clergy and laity, thus enabling parishes to welcome
and accept disabled people as fellow-members of the Church.”
Consider the following experiences:
● A boy with cerebral palsy was denied membership of a church scout
group because it wouldn’t be ‘fair’ on the other boys
● A middle aged woman with Down’s Syndrome was refused a blessing by a
Eucharistic minister
● The mother of an autistic teenager was advised not to bring her son
to church because of his disturbed behaviour.
And more positively (also see Hollins & Grimer, 1988)[7]:
● A mother of a non-verbal girl was encouraged to bring her to the
altar for her first Communion when she judged she was ready – this
welcoming approach recognising the lack of an inclusive first
Communion programme in the parish, and affirming her mother as her
child’s first teacher.
● L’Arche communities are acclaimed for offering ‘a sign of hope’ by
enabling people with and without learning disabilities to live
together in Christian community.
Painful secrets
Jean Vanier’s writing, personal example
and leadership, particularly through the work of L’Arche
internationally, has been an inspiration to many. The last time I came
to Rome was to speak at an International Federation of L’Arche
Communities about the needs of families with a disabled child. In
preparing for that occasion I defined some developmental factors that
I consider are particularly important in the lives of young people
with intellectual disabilities as they are growing up. I called these
factors ‘the three secrets’. Since then, they have been further
developed with my colleague Dr Valerie Sinason, into the five
mutative factors[8].
These are the secrets of disability, sexuality, mortality, dependency
and the fear of being killed.
So how do these issues relate to our theme for this conference? I am
going to suggest that people with intellectual disabilities are often
aware from infancy that their very existence may provoke feelings of
rejection and hostility, and even their families may wish they were
dead. We do not know how often death is hastened for children and
adults with severe disabilities.
Our insights also suggest, for example, that an individual’s
disability will be kept from him or her, and that she/he will be
treated as an eternal child and not helped to understand inevitable
aspects of the human lifecycle. A reluctance to offer sex education to
children is even greater when the child or teenager is disabled. These
are vulnerable children and research shows that they are much more
likely to be abused - usually by someone known to thembefore they
reach adulthood. Instead of preparing them carefully so that they
might be able to protect themselves better, they are often left in
ignorance. In my clinical practice I hear stories of incest or of
abuse by trusted community members. In one recent example, a priest in
an African town is alleged to have abused two disabled girls. Those
involved believe that the priest was acting on the local myth that
sleeping with a virgin will cure a man of HIV infection. The teacher
who supported the girls’ parents has allegedly been threatened with
the sack.
… while human progress is a great
advantage to man, it brings with it a strong temptation. For when the
order of values is jumbled and bad is mixed with the good, individuals
and groups pay heed solely to their own interests, and not to those of
others. Thus it happens that the world ceases to be a place of true
brotherhood (GS 37).
Last year a woman came to see me who
discovered when her father was dying that he had abused her two
sisters as well as herself. She had thought she was the one with the
‘special’ relationship with Dad. These deathbed revelations have
shattered this devout catholic family. Earlier this year another woman
came for therapy who had ‘got’ incest. She didn’t know what incest
was, but said her children had been taken into care so that they
wouldn’t catch it. She didn’t know whom the fathers of her children
were - but said her father, uncle and brothers had all been asked to
have tests. She said she had been told that it wasn’t OK to have sex
with family members in England, but her family had said that that
didn’t apply to her father and his brothers because they were Indian
and it was normal in their country.
With colleagues at St. George’s I have been carrying out research to
try to understand more about how to recognise signs of abuse and how
to help people recover from the psychological trauma of being abused[9].
Bereavement
The concepts of life and death are
difficult for all of us to understand, but so much harder if one is
unable to read and has to rely on visual and sensory clues to help
make sense of the world. My research has explored how people with
intellectual disabilities react when they are bereaved, and how well
social and religious institutions respond to these needs. One small
study compared how far the funeral rituals of six different religious
groups in South London were able to include people with intellectual
disabilities[10].
None of the religious leaders interviewed had even considered the
matter, and most of these church leaders concluded that people with
intellectual disabilities should be left out of the funeral
arrangements. But our most significant study found that failing to
support people with intellectual disabilities following a parental
bereavement leads to serious mental health consequences[11].
Our next study was conducted jointly with L’Arche UK[12].
It was a very successful study in which we compared two different
interventions designed to improve the mental health and behaviour of
bereaved people with intellectual disabilities, one delivered by
L’Arche assistants who knew the individual well, and the other by
volunteer trained bereavement counsellors from external counselling
agencies. To our surprise the intervention delivered by L’Arche
assistants was unsucccessful in that no demonstrable change in
behaviour or mental health was found. This was despite the fact that
many people living in a L’Arche community home are also accompanied by
long term friends of the community, including former assistants, or by
local church members. The ongoing training and formation of
‘accompaniers’ includes aspects of loss and bereavement as well as
issues related to supporting the spiritual needs of the person being
accompanied. The behavioural and mental health measures used in our
study showed significant change for those receiving targeted
counselling, but those not offered counselling by an outside agency
did not show any improvement. This does not mean that the attention to
these issues within L’Arche is unnecessary, but rather that, sometimes
professional external interventions are also needed to achieve the
best outcome for an individual. L’Arche remains unusual in recognising
and attending to the spiritual and emotional needs of both residents
and staff and offers an example of good practice in this area.
Relationships and community
An insight that has been extensively
addressed by Jean Vanier[13]
relates to the essential interdependence of each one of us, but also
draws attention to the difficulty experienced by most people with
intellectual disabilities in being able to develop exclusive intimate
relationships. Gaudium et Spes says:
But God did not create man as a solitary,
for from the beginning "male and female he created them" (Gen. 1:27).
Their companionship produces the primary form of interpersonal
communion. For by his innermost nature man is a social being, and
unless he relates himself to others he can neither live nor develop
his potential.
Assistants living in community with
people with intellectual disabilities learn about mutual dependence
and about the challenge of celibacy. One assistant in explaining her
role to others in a training session simply said …”there are nine us
in our house, six of us have disabilities and three of us do not”.
The latest on human rights
The United Nations Committee negotiating
the treaty on persons with disabilities is currently discussing
individual rights and freedoms. Meeting for its fifth session in
earlier this year, the General Assembly Ad Hoc Committee concluded its
session in February by discussing draft articles addressing equal
recognition before the law, liberty and security of the person and
other individual rights.
During the 5th Ad Hoc Committee, state parties with input from civil
society organizations, reviewed and amended Articles 8 through 15 of
the draft text. The draft text along with the background documents for
the 5th session are available on the United Nations Department of
Economic and Social Affairs website
www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/ rights/ahc5.htm.
These include: Article 8 – Right to Life; Article 9 – Equal
Recognition as a Person Before the Law and; Article 15 – Living and
Being Included in the Community;
Article 11: On freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment:
State parties are to take measures to
prevent persons with disabilities being subjected to such treatment or
punishment. In particular, they are to prohibit medical and scientific
experiments without the consent of the person concerned and to protect
disabled persons from forced interventions or institutionalization.
Article 12: On freedom from violence and
abuse:
States are to take measures to protect
persons with disabilities from all forms of violence, injury, abuse,
neglect, mistreatment or exploitation.
However, it was reported that
… participants were split on whether to
have a provision on the need to educate families and/or caregivers to
prevent and address situations of abuse.
At the Conclusion of the 5th Ad Hoc
Committee, Diane Richler, President of Inclusion International
commented on the challenges ahead.
…There continues to be a lack of
understanding by State Parties and other Disability groups of the
issues affecting people with intellectual disability and second, there
is even less understanding or acceptance of the role that families
play in promoting the inclusion and human rights of people with
intellectual disabilities. Our job is to articulate to all those
involved in the Convention process the nature of the exclusion faced.
The Convention is an opportunity to go beyond institutionalizing
existing practices but rather to advance a vision for the future that
takes seriously the inclusion of all people with disabilities in
society.
The 6th Ad Hoc Committee Meeting will
take place in August 2005 and the Articles that remain to be
negotiated are Articles 15-25. Key issues include Articles on
Education, Children and International Development.
These ‘new’ demands were anticipated by the Council fathers and
although diversity of talent was recognised, interestingly they did
not mention disability:
True, all men are not alike from the
point of view of varying physical power and the diversity of
intellectual and moral resources. Nevertheless, with respect to the
fundamental rights of the person, every type of discrimination,
whether social or cultural, whether based on sex, race, colour, social
condition, language or religion, is to be overcome and eradicated as
contrary to God's intent. For in truth it must still be regretted that
fundamental personal rights are still not being universally honoured.
(GS 29)
Research experience
Let me give some more examples from our
research. The UK is not unusual in having provided institutional care
for people whose families were unable to continue to care. The history
of our institutions goes back to the Poor Law in 1601, when ‘paupers
and the insane’ were accommodated in workhouses within each parish,
and perhaps even further back into the Middle Ages when monasteries
often provided care for people excluded from the mainstream of
society. Deinstitution- alisation has gained momentum in the West in
recent years, and in England we expect all of the long stay hospitals
for people with intellectual disabilities to have been closed by 2006.
From 70,000 people in such hospitals 40 years ago, now less than 1000
people remain.
About seven years ago I recruited Jane Hubert, a social
anthropologist, to find out more about the lives and behaviour of 16
men with severe intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviour,
who were living in a locked ward in one of these long stay hospitals[14].
The men were to move into the ‘community’ and the hospital wanted to
know more about them, and their likes and dislikes, and then to follow
them into their new homes. She spent 300 hours ‘living’ in the ward
with the men and movingly describes how she came to know and
understand them. Few of them had any speech. All had been admitted as
children, and most had lost contact with their families. What is
disturbing about her research however is the way in which these small
boys became dehumanised in the eyes of their carers and of society.
Each day she documented petty and thoughtless abuses. For some of them
more serious abuses were documented in their notes. One of the
tragedies of care for some of these individuals was the way in which
an innocent child was abused or traumatised such that his own
behaviour became socially unacceptable. Outsiders could be forgiven
for seeing these children, now grown into adult men, as challenging
and ‘bad’. And yet the damage they do to other residents and staff
derives from their own trauma. The struggle they face in overcoming
such unsocial behaviours requires skilled and intensive supports,
which unfortunately are rarely available. Groups of people such as
these are truly scapegoated and excluded.
The Problem of Empathy
René Girard’s insights may be helpful
here and made more accessible in Kirwan’s new book, Discovering
Girard
[15].
He explained that firstly we are mimetic creatures, and secondly, that
all cultures use similar mechanisms for resolving tensions in
communities. For example, communities exclude a scapegoat, who often
later is found to be innocent. He suggests that we can either respond
against a person who is different, or with the person. The compassion
needed to be with such a person is surely what Christ called us to. He
goes on to explore the uncommon nature of empathy as written about by
Girard. This has been explored previously, for example in Edith
Stein’s classic discussion about the problem of empathy, and more
recently by Martha Nussbaum.
Conclusion
My professional experience will be
unfamiliar and even shocking to many readers. Typical responses to
hearing of these issues are to want to distance oneself from them. In
our churches we hear such people and their problems described as ‘the
handicapped’ or ‘the poor’ – not as people first. I suggest that our
church leaders, lay and religious, need to learn about people with
intellectual disabilities in their early training and formation, and
one model for such training is described in A New Kind of Trainer[16].
Pastoral workers need to confront their fears about people who may at
first sight seem very different or ‘other’ to themselves. By
understanding more about them as people first, they will be able to
share more positive attitudes and develop adequate communication
skills in order to be truly inclusive. However I consider that to have
any chance of achieving change, the principles espoused in Gaudium
et Spes also need to be taken up within secular government and
community policies. Our role must include strong advocacy in public
life and a commitment to social action and justice.
Notes
[1]
Valuing People: A New Strategy for Learning
Disability for the 21st Century.
(London: HMSO, 2001)
[2]
TOWELL, D. (2000) “Achieving Positive Change In
People’s Lives Through The National Learning Disability Strategy:
Lessons from an American experience” Tizard Learning Disability
Review 5, (3), 30-36.
[3]
Department of Health, Nothing About Us
Without Us (London: Department of Health, 2001)
[4]
Dawson, E., Hollins, S., Mukongolwa, M.,
Witchalls, A. Editorial: “Including disabled children in Africa.”
Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 47(3),
153-154.
[5]
UNESCO, Education for All 2000 Assessment,
Statistical Document. World Educational Forum (Paris: UNESCO,
2000).
[6]
Archdiocese of Southwark, A community
development project for the inclusion of people with disabilities
into the life of the church,
(Tooting, London: Christian
Education Centre, 1998).
[7]
Hollins, S. & Grimer, M. Going Somewhere:
People with mental handicaps and their pastoral care. (London:
SPCK, 1988).
[8]
Hollins, S. & Sinason, V. “New Perspectives:
Psychotherapy, Learning Disabilities and Trauma.” British
Journal of Psychiatry, 2000, 176, 32-26.
[9]
Sequeira, H., Howlin, P., Hollins, S.
“Psychological disturbance associated with sexual abuse in people
with intellectual disabilities: a case control study.” British
Journal of Psychiatry, 2003, 183,
451-456.
[10]
Raji, O., Hollins, S., Drinnan, A. “How far are
people with learning disabilities involved in funeral rites?”
British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 2003, 31, 42-45.
[11]
Hollins, S. & Esterhuyzen, A. “Bereavement and
grief in adults with learning disabilities.” British Journal of
Psychiatry, 1997, 170, 497-501.
[12]
Dodd P., Dowling S., Hollins S. “Review of
bereavement: emotional, psychiatric and behavioural responses to
bereavement in people with learning disabilities.” Journal of
Intellectual Disability Research (In press).
[13]
Vanier, J. Man and Woman He Made Them.
(London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1985).
[14]
Hubert, J. Madness, Disability and Social Exclusion: the
archaeology and anthropology of ‘difference’, (London:
Routledge, 2000).
[15]
Kirwan, M., Discovering Girard, (DLT,
2005)
Scarica
l'articolo in PDF
|