An ecological approach to seeking and utilising the views of young people with intellectual disabilities in transition planning. (December 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Small, Neil; Raghavan, Raghu; Pawson, Nicole
• Is Part Of: Journal of intellectual disabilities. Volume 17:Number 4(2013)
• Page Start: 283
• Page End: 300
• Publication Date: 2013-12
• Subjects: ecological approach -- ethnicity -- intellectual disability -- person-centred planning -- transition planning; Mental retardation -- Periodicals; People with mental disabilities -- Periodicals; Learning disabilities -- Periodicals; Handicap intellectuel; Trouble d'apprentissage; Handicapé mental; Périodique électronique (Descripteur de forme); Ressource Internet (Descripteur de forme); 362.1968588
• DOI: 10.1177/1744629513500779
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1744-6295

Abstract

Transition planning using a person-centred approach has, in the main, failed to shape service provision. We offer an alternative based on an ecological understanding of human development linked to public health approaches that prioritise whole system planning. A total of 43 young people with intellectual disabilities, in Bradford, England, who were approaching transition from school or college were recruited to a qualitative study. Their ethnic breakdown was as follows: 16 white British, 24 Pakistani, 2 Bangladeshi and 1 Black African. Each young person was interviewed twice, at recruitment and a year later, to observe any changes in their social networks during transition. Interviews were undertaken with a semi-structured interview schedule and with the pictorial approach of Talking Mats. Both the networks the young people live within, and their sense of what the future might hold for them, are described and linked to Bronfenbrenner's ecological model of human development. The importance of the family and school is emphasised, as is the absence of engagement in leisure activities and work. Transition planning needs to start with mapping the systems individuals live within, areas of strength should be supported and parts of the system, which are not fit for purpose for these young people, should be prioritised for interventions.