‘It's pretty hard with our ones, they can't talk, the more able bodied can participate’: staff attitudes about the applicability of disability policies to people with severe and profound intellectual disabilities

Abstract

The study suggests more focused attention is needed to staff understanding the values embedded in current policies and their application to people with more severe disabilities.

A conceptual model of quality service provision for people with intellectual disability and challenging behaviours: Enhancement and enrichment through service user and other stakeholder consultation

“…Although not directly discussed by service users, their desire for consistent routines and the importance of appropriate staff attitudes may support the requirement for supervision and feedback. While in interviews with a number of supervisors, support workers' resistance to engaging in the process was confirmed, critical studies in the literature indicate that supervision and feedback is a significant requirement for delivering quality ID services (Berkery et al, 2009;Bigby et al, 2009;Clement & Bigby, 2008;Mansell, 2006;Mansell et al, 2008;Skirrow & Hatton, 2007;West et al, 2006).…”

“…Elgi, Feurer, Roper and Thompson (2002) determined that positive staff attitudes towards community inclusion of people with ID was significant to staff-initiated social interactions, which in turn was significant to community activities. In the Australian context, Bigby et al (2009) concluded that staff attitudes that were reflective of values underpinning policy and service delivery goals were enabling of service user outcomes.…”

“…It is considered one of the most important drivers in ensuring positive outcomes for service users (Children's Workforce Development Council (2007) and is well documented in the management literature (Burke & Krey, 2005;Mosley, Mosley, & Pietri, 2010;Wiener, Mizen, & Duckham, 2003). Supervision and feedback has been identified as a factor significant to quality provision in disability services by numerous authors in the Australian context (Bigby, Clement, Mansell, & Beadle-Brown, 2009;Clement & Bigby, 2008) and internationally (Berkery, Tiernan, & Armstrong, 2009;Bigby et al, 2009;Mansell, 2006;Mansell, Beadle-Brown, Whelton, Beckett, & Hutchinson, 2008;Skirrow & Hatton, 2007;West, Guthrie, Dawson, Borrill, & Carter, 2006).…”

“…This was upheld by supervisors, support workers, advocates and families/carers who identified service users' developing relationships with people in the community as a necessary requirement. Non-identification of this element by CEOs, managers, clinicians and senior practitioners highlights the need for reflective supervisory practice, which is identified as a significant requirement for delivering quality services (Berkery et al, 2009;Bigby et al, 2009;Clement & Bigby, 2008;Mansell, 2006;Mansell et al, 2008;Skirrow & Hatton, 2007;West et al, 2006).…”

“…Other groups in this research focused on the qualities of empathy and commonsense in support workers, while studies cited in the literature confirmed the need to direct attention to support worker attitudes. Other studies focused on the importance of attitudes in supporting recipients' human rights, the enhancement of community inclusion, and agreed values that underpin policy and service goals (Bigby et al, 2009;Egli et al, 2002;Mansell et al, 2008).…”