The COVID-19 pandemic has had a disparate impact across demographic groups, resulting in BIPOC and disabled people experiencing transmission, hospitalization, and death at higher rates than White and non-disabled populations. However, responses within the pandemic created new avenues for access to people with disabilities, including telehealth, work from home opportunities, and virtual participation, which were the very solutions and accommodations they have been requesting, but denied, for years. The call for a "return to normal" is steeped in ableist thinking. Society was made aware of the inequities for disabled people throughout the pandemic, and flexible solutions must be retained and refined to continue the access provided during this time. As a start to a discourse on reflection and action, the authors suggest four areas to target for change toward health equity: (a) messaging and communication, (b) accessibility, (c) addressing attitudinal barriers, and (d) seeking and using the input of disabled people. The following presents an overview of each factor and action steps, with resources to guide them.Author note: Although APA style conventions and professional discourse support the use of person-first language in academic writing about disability, both person-first and identity-first language was used throughout this paper. One of the authors identifies as disabled, and we chose to use both out of respect for the disabled community about whom we speak.
An ethics project is described that challenged students to collaborate with disability rights authorities to co-write a code of ethics for a Center of Independent Living. Experiential and reflective assignments analyzed how the construction of knowledge and language is never value-neutral, and people with disabilities need to have a voice in decisions that affect their lives. Insights from the project suggest considerations for teaching students to construct ethical knowledge that is empathetic and respectful to the culture for which a code of ethics will be applied, in this case, the experience of disability from a social model perspective.
Calls for cross-disciplinary dialogue and greater coherence in disability policies have produced limited understanding of disability policy making. Most scholars focus on what should be done but give scant consideration to how the dynamics of the policy making process constrain substantive options. The authors argue that failing to consider the environment of the policy making processes on program design and advocacy hinders understanding about policy and development of practical initiatives. This article describes the dynamics of policy making through a case study of the Job Accommodation Network, which provides an example of path dependence and the infilling of policy spaces and exemplifies how later arriving, modest initiatives and influential advocates can target narrower niches, seek to improve collaboration, and create better linkages between stakeholders in their efforts to expand employment opportunities for persons with disabilities. The analysis has implications for advocates and practitioners by demonstrating how policy programs evolve, shape, and adapt to new policy initiatives.
Date Presented 04/02/2022
This exploratory study examined OT students’ knowledge and perceptions of functional electrical stimulation (FES) cycle technology. This study demonstrates a lack of OT student knowledge of and exposure to FES cycle technology despite its proven effectiveness in the United States, possibly limiting client access to the technology. More research is needed to determine how OT students’ perceptions and educational experiences affect their use of FES technology upon graduation.
Primary Author and Speaker: Nicole Kuhl
Additional Authors and Speakers: Jenna Willer
Contributing Authors: Audri Higginbotham, Emma Engelby, Austin McMurray, Sara P. Johnston
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.