The postnatal support needs of mothers with an intellectual disability

Abstract

Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access the University's research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. Single copies of full items can be reproduced, displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder. The full policy is available online: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/policies.html This document may differ from the final, published version of the research and has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the published version of the research, please visit the publisher's website (a subscription may be required.) NOTICE: this is the author's version of a work that was accepted for publication in Midwifery. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive versio n was subsequently published as: Design: A qualitative design was used and data were collected using a semi-structured interview format and analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Setting:The study took place in community settings in Scotland.Participants: Six mothers with intellectual disabilities were interviewed about their experiences. Measurements and findings:Two super-ordinate themes are discussed with accompanying subthemes: challenges of providing support and how support was delivered. Key conclusions:The mothers valued formal postnatal care, but this was secondary to informal support. How mothers perceived the support impacted on its effectiveness and building effective relationships with professionals presented challenges. Implications for practice:The study suggests the structure and quality of the wider support networks of mothers with an intellectual disability are central and should be taken account of by professionals. Providing information and advice in ways that validates the mother's role is also important, particularly as the mother's perception of how help is given can impact on the degree to which mothers engage with professionals.

Is it possible to use interpretative phenomenological analysis in research with people who have intellectual disabilities?

“…Sixteen papers were rated as “acceptable” (Anslow, ; Brown & Beail, ; Dysch, Chung, & Fox, ; Gould & Dodd, ; Kenyon, Beail, & Jackson, ; MacMahon et al, ; Malik, Unwin, Larkin, Kroese, & Rose, ; McRitchie, McKenzie, Quayle, Harlin, & Neumann, ; Mitchell, Clegg, & Furniss, ; Monteleone & Forrester‐Jones, ; Newberry, Martin, & Robbins, ; Robinson, Escopri, Stenfert Kroese, & Rose, ; Rushbrooke, Murray, & Townsend, ; Shewan, McKenzie, Quayle, & Crawley, ; Sullivan et al, ; Wilson et al, ). All of these papers subscribed to the theoretical principles of IPA.…”

“…Her overall assessment of the papers agreed completely with one of the previous raters and disagreed with the other rater on one paper in relation to their overall quality suggesting that reliability between raters was robust. Wilson et al, 2013). All of these papers subscribed to the theoretical principles of IPA.…”

“…The sample sizes for the papers in this review appeared in line with this recommendation, with the exception of four papers. Judge et al, (2010) In 13 of the papers, the homogeneity of the sample was either poorly rationalized, poorly achieved or both (Dysch et al, 2012;Judge et al, 2010;Kenyon et al, 2014;MacDonald et al, 2003;Malik et al, 2017;Monteleone & Forrester-Jones 2017);Robinson et al, 2016;Roscoe et al, 2016;Rushbrooke et al, 2014;Sullivan et al, 2016;Wilson et al, 2013). Sampling strategies which do not articulate the shared perspective upon the phenomenon of interest not only violate the idiographic philosophy of IPA, but also impact on the researcher's ability to formulate theories (Smith, 1999) only (e.g., Sullivan et al, 2016).…”

“…of the papers investigated the experiences of parents with intellectual disabilities(Baum & Burns, 2007;Gould & Dodd, 2014;Shewan et al, 2014;Wilson et al, 2013). Seven of the studies explored the experience of receiving psychological therapy(Anslow, 2013;Lewis et al, 2016;MacDonald et al, 2003;MacMahon et al, 2015;Merriman & Beail, 2009;Roscoe et al, 2016;.…”

Child protection services and parents with intellectual and developmental disabilities

“…A simple screening may be the first step in helping identify parents with IDD who are CPS‐involved. This type of screening fits within the context of a typical CPS assessment interview protocol and could have dramatic impact on referrals for appropriate parenting assessments and service provision to parents with IDD, and by extension, improve the safety, permanency and well‐being outcomes for their children (Azar & Read, ; Cuskelly & Bryde, ; Feldman & Aunos, ; Lightfoot et al., ; McConnell & Llewellyn, ; Schalock et al., ; Tarleton & Ward, ; Wilson, McKenzie, Quayle, & Murray, ). While identification of disability may introduce additional bias into the system, it is necessary for parents in the USA to be covered under Title II of the ADA and therefore, receive appropriate accommodations, modifications and supports.…”