Knowledge of learning disabilities: the relationship with choice, duty of care and non-aversive approaches

Abstract

The present study examines the relationship between the knowledge of the diagnostic criteria for a learning disability (based on DSM IV criteria), care practices and experience in health care and social care staff. Responses to a questionnaire were analysed in terms of participants emphasis on: recognizing duty of care; enabling choice; non-aversive and aversive strategies. Results indicated that the knowledge of the criteria for a learning disability was limited, with only I6% of the sample correctly identifying all three criteria. There were no significant differences between the two groups in relation to experience or level of knowledge. No clear cut differences were found between the groups in relation to tendency to emphasize a particular management approach, with the strategies adopted appearing to be influenced by vignettes used in this study. Participants tended to give responses that identified both a recognition of their duty of care to clients and the need to enable choice. Limitations of this study are discussed. ' People are born that way' Low IQ ' Can't understand things the way we do' ' Not as clever as normal people' Impaired adaptive skills 'Need help with lots of daily tasks' ' Can't cope with everyday things' Aversive strategies ' Just let her scream for the biscuits' ' Tell him he has to wash it ' Non-aversive strategies ' Buy him five of his favourite shirts' ' Introduce her slowly to a range of foods' Duty of care ' Make sure she eats other things' ' Wash his shirt quickly each night' Enabling choice ' Buy him five shirts all the same as his favourite' ' Let her have the biscuits if she is healthy'

Health and social care workers' knowledge and application of the concept of duty of care

“…Health staff were found to have a significantly broader understanding than social care staff of the factors involved in intervening effectively in the situations depicted in both scenarios. While previous studies which have examined differences in staff knowledge have found it to be related to years of experience (McKenzie et al, 1999) no relationship between experience and staff knowledge was found in the present study. The differences found may therefore be more likely to be attributable to differences in the training received by or the professional remit of each group as outlined above.…”

“…In addition, staff responses may have been affected by the scenarios themselves. McKenzie et al (1999) found that respondents appeared less certain about their course of action when the scenario depicted an individual with a more severe learning disability. A similar effect may have occurred in the present study.…”

Care staff intentions to support adults with an intellectual disability to engage in physical activity: An application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour

“…The barriers to carers supporting people with ID undertaking physical activity may include issues such as health difficulties, older age, incontinence, lack of daytime activity (Scottish Executive, 2003) access to transport and finance (Hawkins & Look, 2006) and beliefs about the choices of the person with an ID (Messent et al, 1999). Some of these perceived barriers may be genuine barriers that are out with the control of carers, however, other perceived barriers, such as issues relating to choice and duty of care (McKenzie, Murray, Higgon, & Matheson 1999;Messent & Cooke, 1999) might be addressed via staff training. Given the apparent importance of perceived behavioural control in predicting clients' physical activity, future studies might usefully focus upon identifying common perceived barriers to supporting physical activity with a view to subsequently developing interventions aimed at reducing these barriers.…”