BackgroundSouth African speech-language therapists have identified the need for culturally valid and sensitive assessment tools that can accommodate multiple languages and cover a reasonable age range. The Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL) extend from birth to 68 months, contain five separate subscales including receptive language, expressive language, gross motor, fine motor and visual reception scale, are straightforward to administer and have been successfully used in other African countries, such as Uganda. It also identifies a child’s strengths and weaknesses and provides a solid foundation for intervention planning.ObjectivesThis research aimed to demonstrate the appropriateness and usefulness of the translated and culturally and linguistically adapted MSEL across four South African languages (Afrikaans, isiZulu, Setswana and South African English) through two sub-aims: (1) to describe differences, if any, in MSEL performance across language groups and (2) to describe differences, if any, in MSEL performance between age groups.MethodA total of 198 typically developing children between the ages of 21 and 68 months spread across the four language groups were individually assessed with the culturally and linguistically adapted and translated MSEL.ResultsA one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed no statistically significant differences between the four language groups for total MSEL scores. A Welch’s one-way ANOVA showed that the total MSEL scores were significantly different between age groups.ConclusionThe translation and adaptation of the MSEL was successful and did not advantage or disadvantage children based on their home language, implying that linguistic equivalence was achieved. The MSEL results differed between age groups, suggesting that the measure was also successful in differentiating the performance of children at different developmental levels.

The translated MSEL and the supplemental measures successfully characterize the language profiles and related skills in children with NDD in multilingual South Africa. Together, these assessment tools can serve a valuable function in guiding the choice of intervention and also may serve as a way to monitor progress.

For persons with severe communication disabilities to be given access to justice, transformative equality and court accommodations should be made a global human rights priority as articulated in Article 13 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. However, these individuals face significant barriers when attempting to access the court system. Currently, there are numerous concerns about what accommodations should be afforded these individuals to ensure transformative equality in court. The aim of the current legal scoping review was to identify the range of documented court accommodations internationally that will enable persons with severe communication disabilities to participate equally and without discrimination in court. As the research aim is placed at the nexus of social sciences and law, a rigorous new 5-step framework was developed. Search terms were entered into 8 databases following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines in order to ensure a worldwide sample of data. From the included 54 publications, a total of 302 accommodations were identified. Using an inductive coding approach, these accommodations were categorized according to the 4 components of the procedural justice framework: 62% of the accommodations referred to the Respect component; 27,40% referred to Voice; 19,47% to Understanding; and 15,51% to Neutrality. Accommodations with the highest frequency count were the use of intermediaries, permitting augmentative and alternative communication, ensuring appropriate and proper questioning strategies, allowing frequent breaks, including closed-circuit television (CCTV) in court, and using expert witnesses.

Globally, persons with disabilities, specifically individuals with severe communication disabilities, require a range of court accommodations to enable them access to the court system, thereby realizing their right to access to justice. This study aimed to investigate the perspectives of nine international experts on possible universal court accommodations for these individuals. An asynchronous, online focus group discussion with four questions was conducted over five days. Through deductive thematic analysis, four themes related to Article 13 of the CRPD were identified: Accommodations related to procedural fairness (e.g., testifying via CCTV camera); accommodations related to ensuring equality (e.g., specific international and local legislation); accommodations related to non-discrimination (e.g., developing appropriate questioning techniques); and accommodations related to legal practitioners (e.g., disability sensitivity training). The range of identified court accommodations could act as the impetus needed to ensure access to justice, a basic human right, for persons with disabilities internationally.

Introduction and backgroundPersons with disabilities are at greater risk of experiencing violence than their peers without a disability.Globally, children with disabilities are three to four times more likely to experience violence than their peers without disability (World Health Organization 2015). Recently, a South African study also estimated that children with disabilities were 1.5 and 2.1 times more at risk of sexual abuse than their peers without a disability (Artz et al. 2016). In an American study that compared 9086 women with and without a disability, results showed that 39% of the women who had been raped in the 12 months preceding the survey had a disability at the time of the rape (Basile, Breiding & Smith 2016). Another American study that reported on 21 615 respondents and their victimisation found that 26.6% of women with disabilities reported sexual violence compared with 12.4% of women without disabilities (Mitra, Mouradian & Diamond 2011). This trend was also observed in American men, as 13.9% of men with disabilities reported sexual violence compared with 3.7% of men without disabilities (Mitra et al. 2011).Within the sphere of disability, individuals with severe communication disabilities are particularly vulnerable and have an increased risk of becoming victims of abuse (Bornman, Bryen, Kershaw & Ledwabe 2011). This may be because of the fact that they are unable to shout or call for help, or because perpetrators often seek out vulnerable individuals who they perceive as being unable to Background: Persons with disabilities are generally at greater risk of experiencing violence than their peers without a disability. Within the sphere of disability, individuals with severe communication disabilities are particularly vulnerable and have an increased risk of being a victim of abuse or violence and typically turn to their country's criminal justice system to seek justice. Unfortunately, victims with disabilities are often denied fair and equal treatment before the court. Transformative equality should be pursued when identifying accommodations in court for persons with communication disabilities, as the aim should be to enable such individuals to participate equally in court, without barriers and discrimination.Objectives: This research aimed to identify court accommodations recommended by legal experts, which could assist individuals with severe communication disabilities in the South African court. Method:A qualitative design was used to conduct a discussion with a panel of legal experts.Results: Using Article 13 (Access to Justice) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) as a human rights framework, four themes were identified: equality, accommodations, participation and training of professionals. Conclusion:Foreign and national law clearly prohibits discrimination against persons with communication disabilities because of their disability and state that they should be given fair and equal access to the court system. For transformative equality to be achieved, cert...