Are persons with physical disabilities who participate in society healthier and happier? Structural equation modelling of objective participation and subjective well-being

Abstract

In many countries, governments pursue a policy of offering persons with disabilities greater opportunities for participation in society, based on the assumption that this will also improve their subjective well-being. Currently, however, it is not known whether this assumption is valid. In this study we relate the objective participation and the subjective well-being aspects of both disabled and non-disabled persons to an array of social and health-related determinants. Linear structural equation modelling of data of a sample selection of the Dutch population is analysed. The sample size is 5,826, including 642 respondents with physical disabilities. In terms of objective participation, the persons with disabilities are at a greater disadvantage as regards labour participation than is the case for social and cultural participation. When it comes to subjective well-being, we find that the persons with disabilities are more likely to lag behind in perceived physical health than in mental health and happiness. In a multivariate model relating objective participation to subjective health and happiness, correlations are much weaker than expected. It is striking to find that participation, perceived health and happiness are much less closely related than is often assumed. Their determinants differ widely in nature and strength. The empirical model leads to rejection of the hypothesis that higher participation by the persons with disabilities is associated with higher subjective well-being.

Children and Adolescents with Mobility Limitations

“…Furthermore, participation in society is often viewed as a desirable outcome-if not the ultimate goal. It should be noted however that data do not necessarily support a direct relationship between objective measures of participation and subjective well-being (van Campen and Iedema 2007). Although most would agree that quality of life is important, fewer agree on what quality of life actually is.…”

“I’m perfectly imperfect”: Exploring the relationship between PERMA model of wellbeing with self-esteem among persons with disabilities

“…Engagement helps reduce mood disturbances, increase competence (Lundberg, Bennett, & Smith, 2011), increase quality of life (Yazicoglu et al, 2012;Lundberg Bennett, & Smith, 2011;Colver, 2007) and life satisfaction. Moreover, being engaged in different activities are said to be better than physical therapy and rehabilitations among patients (Yazicoglu et al, 2012) and this will lead in promoting subjective wellbeing (Campen & Iedema, 2007).…”

“…The literatures said that through participation in social activities, psychological wellbeing among PWDs were promoted (Yazicoglu et al, 2012;Lundberg, Bennett, & Smith, 2011;Palisano et al, 2011;Kandasamy, Prakash, & Thirusangu, 2009;Campen & Iedema, 2007;Colver, 2005). In summary, one objective of the study is to explore PERMA pillars among PWDs.…”

“…Literature said that the most victimized by bullying were the youngest (Sentenac et al, 2011) and this factor may have big impact why PWDs did not get that high level of wellbeing and since their level of Engagement is not that high and actually, it has the lowest level among the scores in the PERMA pillars, the Engagement level of the PWDs must be improved. Literatures suggest that there are ways to promote psychological wellbeing among PWDs like participation to the activities with the one they loved like their families (Palisano et al, 2011) and even with their co-PWDs (Kandasamy, Prakash, & Thirusangu, 2009) and these promotes wellbeing especially if they think that their participation is valuable (Campen & Iedema, 2007). One implication is that when their engagement level improve there will be a high tendency that their wellbeing will also be improve because of the interrelationship of Engagement to other pillars of PERMA.…”

“…The participation which the PWDs are involved together with their family and the environment will help them to become goal-oriented, family-centered, cooperative, strength-based, ecological, and self-determined (Palisano, Chiarello, King, Novak, Stoner, & Fiss, 2011). It also promotes subjective wellbeing especially if they perceive that their participation to the different social activities are valuable (Campen & Iedema, 2007). Their interactions to their co-PWDs also made them happy and cooperative (Kandasamy, Prakash, & Thirusangu, 2009).…”