Creating academic-community partnerships to jointly enhance advocacy and research on violence and disability: Two case examples.

Abstract

Objective: This article describes the use of community-based participatory research (CBPR) to foster bidirectional and equitable academic-community partnerships in two studies related to interpersonal violence and disability. Method: We analyzed our methods and experiences in conducting these studies to focus on the ways in which CBPR methodology was used to jointly promote and enhance research and advocacy surrounding violence and disability in the research processes themselves and the resulting assessment and intervention products. Results: Our use of CBPR methodology allowed us to identify and address critical issues related to violence in the disability community, such as disability-related forms and experiences of violence, concerns and barriers linked to mandated reporting laws, and inaccessible measures and interventions, and to address them in research products. Additionally, our bidirectional academic-community partnerships led us to address overall accessibility of the research process itself as a means by which to amplify advocate voices in science. Conclusions: Full, meaningful, and equitable participation of people with disabilities at every stage of the research process allows for the creation of partnerships that jointly advance research and advocacy around violence and disability. Clinical Impact StatementDespite being at higher risk for violence, people with disabilities are often left out of academic conversations around violence, and their experiences and concerns go unheard. To address this, academic researchers partnered with community members with disabilities to create accessible assessments and interventions that addressed the lived experiences of violence in disability Emily M.

Valuing the insider-professional perspective of disability: A call for rehabilitation psychologists to support disabled psychologists and trainees across the profession.

“…Disabled trainees and psychologists overcome numerous, significant barriers in order to join and engage in the field (Lund et al, 2014(Lund et al, , 2016Lund, Andrews, et al, 2020. For example, disabled trainees often struggle to find mentorship (Lund et al, 2014;Lund, Andrews, et al, 2021), access reasonable accommodations (Lund et al, 2016;Lund, Andrews, et al, 2021;Wilbur et al, 2019Wilbur et al, , 2022, and find disability competent supervision in academics and research (Lund, Hughes, et al, 2021), teaching (Lund, 2021a;Lund & Hanebutt, in press), and clinical work (Wilbur et al, 2019). These types of repeated experiences often leave disabled trainees feeling isolated, unheard, and unsure of their decision to enter psychology at all (Joshi, 2006;Lund et al, 2016;Lund, Andrews, et al, 2020.…”

“…Individuals with dual professional and personal (i.e., insider) knowledge of disability bring an important, even critical, voice to professional and academic conversations about disability (Lund, 2021a; Lund, Hughes, et al, 2021; Lund et al, 2022; Lund & Ayers, 2020) because they are able to understand both the professional, scientific, and clinical context of disability as well as the personal and community context (Stergiopoulos et al, 2018). However, disabled psychologists and other disabled health care professionals and trainees (Beck, 2020; Stergiopoulos et al, 2018) can sometimes feel uncomfortable or othered if they try to express both disabled and professional identities in the same space.…”

Issues of Confidentiality and Potential Disability Discrimination in Behavior Intervention Team Responses to College Student Suicidality

“…Thus, not only should this process involve professionals who are knowledgeable about and committed to disability civil right laws, but it should also involve individuals with disabilities, especially those with psychiatric disabilities. Such involvement can create a partnership by which legal professionals, service providers, and the affected community works together to create institutional policies that are legally sound, based on evidence and best practice, and less likely to have unintended iatrogenic consequences for the communities that they serve (Lund, Hughes, et al, 2021). This can result in a reformation of institutional policy that protects the interests and well-being of all involves and aligns with current laws and federal guidance.…”

“…This can result in a reformation of institutional policy that protects the interests and well-being of all involves and aligns with current laws and federal guidance. Such community-based practices for addressing these issues also allow all parties to work within the current legal framework to create a quickly implemented consensus on best allowable practices (Lund, Hughes, et al, 2021), rather than attempting to alter legislation itself, which can be a long, costly, and uncertain process.…”

“…In addition, BITs and other student suicide policies and guidelines must be informed by disability rights laws and frameworks from the ground up. Community-based participatory researchers have found that policies and procedures developed without the involvement of people with disabilities can lead to iatrogenic outcomes that are the opposite of the policies’ initial intent (Lund, Hughes, et al, 2021). Thus, not only should this process involve professionals who are knowledgeable about and committed to disability civil right laws, but it should also involve individuals with disabilities, especially those with psychiatric disabilities.…”