Researching disabled children and young people’s views on decision-making: Working reflexively to rethink vulnerability

Abstract

Usage of any items from the University of Cumbria's institutional repository 'Insight' must conform to the following fair usage guidelines. Any item and its associated metadata held in the University of Cumbria's institutional repository Insight (unless stated otherwise on the metadata record) may be copied, displayed or performed, and stored in line with the JISC fair dealing guidelines (available here) for educational and not-for-profit activities provided that • the authors, title and full bibliographic details of the item are cited clearly when any part of the work is referred to verbally or in the written form • a hyperlink/URL to the original Insight record of that item is included in any citations of the work • the content is not changed in any way • all files required for usage of the item are kept together with the main item file. You may not • sell any part of an item • refer to any part of an item without citation • amend any item or contextualise it in a way that will impugn the creator's reputation • remove or alter the copyright statement on an item. The full policy can be found here.

Fostering global dialogue: Conceptualisations of children's rights to participation and protection

“…The interconnections of children's rights are hindered by normative attitudes such as ‘adultocentrismo’ (Lay‐Lisboa & Montañés, 2018) and views of children as ‘becoming’ rather than ‘being’ (Heimer & Palme, 2016). This prevalence of paternalism (Alfandari, 2017; Evans, 2009) and protectionism (McCafferty, 2017; Skyrme & Woods, 2018) sustain the prioritisation of child protection above participation (Vis et al., 2012). For example, paternalistic ideologies reflect the view that adults know what is in the child's best interest (Vis et al., 2012).…”

The RIX Wiki: the use of multimedia advocacy to support person‐centred planning in a special needs secondary school – implications for current policy and practice

“…It was acknowledged that concerns about vulnerability, may mean that disabled children do not often have the chance to participate in research that has the potential to impact positively on their lives (Cocks, 2006). Indeed, as Skyrme and Woods (2018) argue very strongly, it is the expectation (not the exception), that disabled children and young people, should be involved in decisions about their care, and vulnerability and competence, should not be confused in research processes. Additionally, as noted in the methodology and methods section, researching "with" rather than "on" young people with disabilities was an important guiding practice, as well as ethical consideration.…”

Parallel lines? Childhood discourses emphasized by the children’s rights movement and the emerging field of children’s rights studies

“…First, whereas the CRM has particularly focused largely on advocating for the rights of vulnerable or at-risk groups of children including children on the move from natural disaster, conflict, and discrimination, as evidenced by NGOs such as Save the Children and their work on eliminating child suffering, CRS has focused more broadly on all social groups of children and on theoretical understandings of childhood (Desmet et al, 2015; Moody and Darbellay, 2019). Although it should be noted that CRS has also explored research pertaining to groups of children that are considered particularly vulnerable (Brunnberg and Visser-Schuurman, 2015; Denov, 2004; Grover, 2002; Henderson, 2013; Paré, 2003; Skyrme and Woods, 2018; Wihstutz, 2011; among others).…”