Understanding Decision Making and Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

Khemka, Ishita

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-74675-9_11

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 93 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Guaranteeing access to the right to vote is therefore not the only challenge in promoting full and complete civic participation by people with intellectual disability; it is also essential to offer them systematic civic education (Bueso, 2022), since both traditional and digital civic learning opportunities are known to lead to greater civic engagement and development of young people without (Bowyer & Kahne, 2020) and with disabilities (Fontana‐Lana et al, 2017). It is crucial to ensure they have accessible information about the issues being put to the vote (Confédération suisse, 2021), to help them prepare themselves and support them in building their decision‐making capacities (Khemka & Hickson, 2021; van Hees et al, 2019). If not considered, these important points can lead to disinterest or abandonment of voting rights by the persons themselves.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voting status of people with an intellectual disability in four French–speaking cantons of Switzerland: A survey

Fontana‐Lana,

Petragallo,

Bach

et al. 2023

Policy Practice Intel Disabi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Switzerland is a direct democracy, so its citizens are very often called to vote on various issues. Gaining voter status is, however, a very difficult process for many Swiss citizens with intellectual disability. This research describes the voting status of people with intellectual disability in four French–speaking cantons of Switzerland. It tries to understand systemic or structural factors, such as the guardianship legislation and the legal frameworks, that might have an impact on the voting status of these people. Three hundred individuals with intellectual disability (18–72 years) took part in the study. They were recruited in 11 facilities through a full selection or a letter‐cluster sampling procedure depending on the age group. A questionnaire for each participant was anonymously completed by a support person in the facilities. The questionnaire was constructed with the assistance of self–advocates with intellectual disability, as well as that of people with various roles in decisions regarding voting rights, or providing support to people with intellectual disability, in the participating cantons. Descriptive analyses have been used. The results show that on average slightly more than one person with intellectual disability out of two received voting material, and about one out of two used it. Non‐receipt of voting material is significantly linked to general curatorship, higher financial allowance, living in less independent conditions and/or working in the most protective sectors. People who use their rights more are those who live in more protective environments. Having an intellectual disability implies a higher risk of being deprived of one's political rights, even when the law does not systematically prescribe such a restriction. Even a tailor‐made gradual guardianship system can result in rigid applications of the law, characterized by illegitimate deprivation of rights, such as the right to vote.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Voting status of people with an intellectual disability in four French–speaking cantons of Switzerland: A survey

Fontana‐Lana,

Petragallo,

Bach

et al. 2023

Policy Practice Intel Disabi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…nhanced self-determination is critical to positive employment, community living and participation, and quality-of-life outcomes (Mazzotti et al, 2021;Wehmeyer, 2020). Yet people with complex support needs often have fewer opportunities and supports to make decisions (a key ability for self-determination) to advance these outcomes (Khemka & Hickson, 2021). For example, youth aged 18 to 22 with complex support needs receiving state disability supports and services (e.g., Medicaid-funded long-term supports and services) are most likely (more so than even adults older than 75) to be under guardianship arrangements (Bradley et al, 2019).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Deciding My Future: Making Decisions and Planning for Supports

Dean,

Hagiwara,

Linnenkamp

et al. 2024

Inclusive Practices

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Supported Decision Making (SDM) is a way for people with complex support needs to get the support they need to make important life decisions. Using SDM, a person selects the type of support (e.g., a trusted person and technology) that bridges the gap between their decision-making experience and abilities and the demands of the decisions they need to make. In this article, we describe an intervention that was developed in partnership with people with complex support needs, Deciding My Future. The intervention supports people with complex support needs to make decisions and plan for support. A case study is provided to illustrate how Deciding My Future can be used to support decision-making.

show abstract

Understanding Decision Making and Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities

Cited by 2 publications

References 93 publications

Voting status of people with an intellectual disability in four French–speaking cantons of Switzerland: A survey

Voting status of people with an intellectual disability in four French–speaking cantons of Switzerland: A survey

Deciding My Future: Making Decisions and Planning for Supports

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About