Background The social inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities presents a major challenge to services. As part of a 12-year follow up of people resettled from long-stay hospitals, the size of 213 individuals' social networks and the types of social support they received were investigated, as viewed by people with intellectual disabilities themselves. The types of support received in four different kinds of community accommodation were compared. Method Individuals were interviewed and their social support networks mapped using a Social Network Guide developed for the study. Descriptive statistics were generated and comparisons made using generalized linear modelling. Results The sample comprised 117 men (average age 51 years) and 96 women (average age 56 years). All but seven were White British, 92% were single and they had in general, mild to moderate intellectual disabilities. The average network size was 22 members (range 3-51). The mean density was 0.5. A quarter of all network members were other service users with intellectual disabilities and a further 43% were staff. Only a third of the members were unrelated to learning disability services.In general, the main providers of both emotional and practical support were staff, although these relationships were less likely to be described as reciprocal. Other people with intellectual disabilities were the second most frequent providers of all types of support. People in small group homes, hostels and supported accommodation were significantly more likely to report close and companiable relationships than those in residential and nursing homes, but they also reported a greater proportion of critical behaviour. Conclusions The social networks revealed in this study are considerably larger than those of previous studies which have relied on staff reports, but findings about the generally limited social integration of people with intellectual disabilities are similar. A clearer policy and practice focus on the desirability of a range of different social contexts from which to derive potentially supportive network members is required so that people do not remain segregated in one area of life. Some participants were able to provide membership category but not the type of support provided or interactional behaviours, hence the different totals.

Background The social inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities presents a major challenge to services. As part of a 12-year follow up of people resettled from long-stay hospitals, the size of 213 individuals' social networks and the types of social support they received were investigated, as viewed by people with intellectual disabilities themselves. The types of support received in four different kinds of community accommodation were compared. Method Individuals were interviewed and their social support networks mapped using a Social Network Guide developed for the study. Descriptive statistics were generated and comparisons made using generalized linear modelling. Results The sample comprised 117 men (average age 51 years) and 96 women (average age 56 years). All but seven were White British, 92% were single and they had in general, mild to moderate intellectual disabilities. The average network size was 22 members (range 3-51). The mean density was 0.5. A quarter of all network members were other service users with intellectual disabilities and a further 43% were staff. Only a third of the members were unrelated to learning disability services.In general, the main providers of both emotional and practical support were staff, although these relationships were less likely to be described as reciprocal. Other people with intellectual disabilities were the second most frequent providers of all types of support. People in small group homes, hostels and supported accommodation were significantly more likely to report close and companiable relationships than those in residential and nursing homes, but they also reported a greater proportion of critical behaviour. Conclusions The social networks revealed in this study are considerably larger than those of previous studies which have relied on staff reports, but findings about the generally limited social integration of people with intellectual disabilities are similar. A clearer policy and practice focus on the desirability of a range of different social contexts from which to derive potentially supportive network members is required so that people do not remain segregated in one area of life. Some participants were able to provide membership category but not the type of support provided or interactional behaviours, hence the different totals.

No abstract

Background  There has been increasing recognition of the importance and extent of abuse of vulnerable adults, including people with intellectual disabilities, leading to the development of monitoring systems. This paper reports findings from one of the largest databases in the UK collected between 1998 and 2005. Method  Analysis of the 1926 referrals relating to people with intellectual disabilities included description of the nature of abuse and the responses to the referrals, comparisons to those relating to other client groups and comparisons between those placed locally and those placed out‐of‐area. Results  About one‐third of all adult protection referrals related to people with intellectual disability, remaining consistent over time. However, the number of referrals increased significantly. The majority of people lived in residential care or supported living and this was reflected in the nature of the referrals – people were more likely to have been abused in the care home and by staff or service users than those without an intellectual disability. The most common type of abuse was physical abuse. Sexual abuse was more prevalent in the intellectual disability sample than in other client groups. People with intellectual disability were more likely to have experienced follow‐up action, usually through more monitoring. There was a different pattern of abuse seen in those placed out‐of‐area. Conclusions  The overall pattern of abuse is similar to that reported in earlier studies. There is some indication that residential situation and in particular being placed in a residential placement out‐of‐area, may be an important factor in predicting adult protection referrals.

No abstract