“Remember Our Voices are Our Tools:” Sexual Self-advocacy as Defined by People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

Sexuality issues and the voices of adults with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review of the literature

“…A score of 17 and above, demonstrating the overall quality of the study, was achieved by 7 of the studies (Dukes & McGuire, 2009;Yau et al, 2009;Bedard et al, 2010;Eastgate et al, 2011;Stoffelen et al, 2013;Sullivan et al, 2013;Rushbrooke et al, 2014). A total of 14 studies scored between 14 and 16, indicating shortcomings in relation to clarity of aims, data collection methods, research relationships considered, and ethics considerations (Siebelink et al, 2006;Leutar & Mihoković, 2007;O'Callaghan & Murphy, 2007;Wheeler, 2007;Yacoub & Hall, 2008;Arias et al, 2009;Bernert, 2011;Fitzgerald & Withers, 2013;Bane et al, 2013;Bernert & Ogletree, 2013;Kijak, 2013;Box & Shaw, 2014Friedman et al, 2014Turner & Crane, 2016). The remaining 2 studies received scores of below 14, due to limited information that impacted on the quality and were related to the aims, ethics, and clarity and detail of findings (Klepping, 2008;Azzopardi-Lane & Callus, 2015).…”

Sexuality and intellectual disability

“…One method that can be used to study the opinions of people with an ID is the Nominal Group Technique (NGT). Previous research (Friedman et al, 2014;Roeden, Maaskant & Curfs, 2011) has shown that NGT is an effective and acceptable method for determining and collecting the ideas and standpoints of people with an ID. NGT is a structured and specific form of focus group research; it was first used at the end of the 1960s and was developed further by Van de Ven and Delbecq in 1972.…”

“…People with an ID have indicated the barriers they experience with their sexuality: being unable to talk openly with their parents or caregivers about their sexual relationships, a lack of privacy, overly strict institutional regulations, not having any examples to follow and experiencing inadequate support, no sex education that matches their level, questions and needs Borawska-Charko, Rohleder, & Finlay, 2016;Friedman, Arnold, Owen, & Sandman, 2014;.…”

The Nominal Group Technique (NGT) as a Tool for Facilitating Pan-Disability Focus Groups and as a New Method for Quantifying Changes in Qualitative Data

“…More recently, one of the areas where the NGTs' flexibility has proven to be of great value is as an accessible group research method involving people with cognitive disabilities. This included those with mild IDs (Bekkema, de Veer, Hertogh, & Francke, 2016;Roeden, Maaskant, & Curfs, 2011), those with ID and developmental disability (Friedman, Arnold, Owen, & Sandmanet, 2014;Owen et al, 2016), and those with aphasia (Garcia, Barrette, & Laroche, 2000;Hinckley, Boyle, Lombard, & Bartels-Tobin, 2014;Wallace et al, 2017). Although, "to date, NGTs have only been employed for people with ID and aphasia, a fraction of the spectrum of disabilities," and "more research is required to develop a greater understanding of additional NGT method considerations for other disabilities" (Lakhani, Watling, Zeeman, Wright, & Bishara, 2018, p. 2113 The project cited in this article sought to fill this void.…”