The efficacy of interventions designed to prevent and protect people with intellectual disabilities from sexual abuse: a review of the literature

Abstract

This paper reviews the clinical interventions used to address the vulnerability of people with intellectual disabilities to sexual abuse. Prevalence of sexual abuse for this group is discussed. Factors that are considered to put people with intellectual disabilities at an increased risk of sexual abuse are also discussed.As the teaching of protection and prevention skills to adults and children with intellectual disabilities has been put forward as an effective intervention to help avoid sexual abuse, a review of nine studies that attempted to evaluate such intervention programmes is carried out. It is concluded that adults with intellectual disabilities can successfully be taught skills to prevent and protect themselves from sexual abuse. However, issues around the generalisation and the maintenance of acquired skills have to be considered. Recommendations for future research are made. Finally, the clinical implications of the results of this review are discussed.

Let’s talk about sex: How people with intellectual disability in Australia engage with online social media and intimate relationships

“…Firstly, this finding challenges previous research by Bruder andKroese, (2005) andSweeney, (2007) in which people with intellectual disability when going online would be vulnerable and exploited as they pursue relationships. The findings of this study suggest that the opposite maybe the current situation; people with intellectual disability are capable of exercising judgement in the type of material they engage and in a respectful manner, by themselves or in their respective consenting relationship.…”

“…While well-intentioned, gatekeepers may view people with intellectual disability as gullible or vulnerable to exploitation (Parley, 2010) and require control and protection over internet based content, banning pornography or viewing violent sites (Löfgren-Mårtenson, 2008). However, the contrary remains true with restrictions to appropriate social and sexual interactions leaving people with intellectual disability more vulnerable to exploitation and inappropriate sexual relationships (Bruder & Kroese, 2005;Sweeney, 2007).…”

Bağımsız Yaşama Güvenli Bir Adım: Gelişimsel Yetersizliği Olan Bireyler İçin Güvenlik Becerileri / A Safe Step to an Independent Life: Safety Skills For Individuals with Developmental Disabilities

“…Research conducted with individuals with developmental disabilities (DD) which includes individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID) and Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) revealed that the percentage of being exposed to safety risks of individuals with ASD is twice or three times more than individuals with typical development (Dixon, Bergstorm, Smith and Tarbox, 2010;Jang, Mehta and Dixon, 2016;Tekin-İftar, Olçay-Gül, Şirin, Bilmez and Değirmenci, 2018). Main reasons of this percentage was listed in the literature as follows: individuals with DD (a) have cognitive, sensual and behavioral failures (Agran and Krump, 2010), (b) limitations in communication skills (Bruder and Kroese, 2005), (c) cannot understand dangerous conditions because of their lack of awareness (Bryen, Carey and Frantz, 2003), (d) do not have any training regarding safety skills (Bryen, Carey and Frantz, 2003;Levy and Packman, 2004), (e) have the behavior of following the directions provided by adults as a result of being provided directions by adults during all their education lives (Kıyak, Tuna and Tekin-İftar, 2019;Tekin-İftar et al, 2018) and people who have danger threats see individuals with DD as easy targets (Fisher, Burke and Griffen, 2013).…”

“…Zihin yetersizliği ve/veya otizm spektrum bozukluğunu (OSB) da içine alan şemsiye bir kavram olan gelişimsel yetersizliği olan bireylerle yapılan çalışmalar ise bu bireylerin güvenlik risklerine maruz kalma oranının tipik gelişen akranlarından iki ya da üç kat daha fazla olduğunu göstermektedir (Dixon, Bergstorm, Smith ve Tarbox, 2010;Jang, Mehta ve Dixon, 2016;Kim, 2010;Ramirez, Fillmore, Chen ve Peek-Asa, 2010;Strickland, McAllister, Coles ve Osborne, 2007;Tekin-İftar, Olçay-Gül, Şirin, Bilmez ve Değirmenci, 2018;Yıldırım-Sarı ve Girli, 2012). Bunun temel nedenleri alanyazında gelişimsel yetersizliği olan bireylerin; (a) bilişsel, duyuşsal ve davranışsal yetersizliklere sahip olmaları (Agran ve Krump, 2010), (b) iletişim becerilerinde yetersizliklerinin olması (Bruder ve Kroese, 2005), (c) farkındalık düzeyleri düşük olduğu için güvenlik tehdidine maruz kaldıklarını anlayamamaları (Bryen, Carey ve Frantz, 2003), (d) güvenlik becerilerine ilişkin herhangi bir eğitim almamaları (Bryen, Carey ve Frantz, 2003;Levy ve Packman, 2004), (e) eğitim yaşantıları boyunca yönergelere uyma, söyleneni yapma gibi uyum eğitimi almalarının bir sonucu olarak özellikle yetişkinlerden gelen yönergelere uyup söyleneni yerine getirme davranışına sahip olmaları (Kıyak, Tuna ve Tekin-İftar, 2019; Tekin-İftar ve ark., 2018) ve (f) güvenlik tehdidinde bulunan kişilerin bu bireyleri kolay hedefler olarak görmeleri (Fisher, Burke ve Griffen, 2013) olarak sıralanmaktadır. Sıralanan bu noktalar göz önünde bulundurulduğunda güvenlik becerilerinin anne-babalar, öğretmenler, bireyin yakın çevresindeki kişiler tarafından ne olduğunun bilinmesi ve gelişimsel yetersizliği olan bireylere sistematik öğretimler yoluyla kazandırılması büyük önem taşımaktadır.…”

A randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of a sexual abuse prevention programme for girls with intellectual disabilities: study protocol

“…Eight studies on adults with ID and five studies on children and adolescents with ID investigated such an approach (listed in Chodan, Häßler, & Reis, 2014, except for Kim, 2016. Several reviews (Barger et al, 2009;Bruder & Kroese, 2005;Chodan et al, 2014;Doughty & Kane, 2010;Lumley & Miltenberger, 1997;McEachern, 2012;Muccigrosso, 1991;Tsui, 2008) acknowledged the benefits of such an approach while also identifying several shortcomings of these specific programmes and their evaluation studies. Points of criticism are listed below.…”