Urban encounters limited: The importance of built-in boundaries in contacts between people with intellectual or psychiatric disabilities and their neighbours

Abstract

People with intellectual disabilities or psychiatric disorders who live in ordinary neighbourhoods often have little contact with fellow residents without disabilities. Recent research suggests that we should not strive for warm contacts based on familiarity and shared values between utterly different groups in urban areas. Daily life between people with and without disabilities is described as a process in which boundaries are negotiated. This study builds on that observation. It was based in a middle sized town in the Netherlands and consists of a survey among people with intellectual or psychiatric disabilities and neighbourhood residents (not being support staff or relatives of people with disabilities); semi structured interviews and participant observation. We found that fruitful encounters between different groups depend on built-in boundaries in contacts. Positive encounters occur when roles are clear and boundaries do not have to be negotiated because they are given. Both parties benefit from boundaries and fixed roles: people with disabilities do not need social reflexivity or intricate social skills to find their way in the situation; people without disabilities can end the contact without being rude. In line with previous research we also found that positive neighbourhood contacts are usually light and superficial and result in conviviality rather than long term relationships.

Neighbourhood social inclusion from the perspective of people with intellectual disabilities: Relevant themes identified with the use of photovoice

“…First, being born and raised in the neighbourhood, and consequently having a lot family and acquaintances (personal relationships) nearby, contributes to the OVERMARS-MARX Et Al. public familiarity that appears to be important for a feeling at home in the neighbourhood (see also Blokland & Nast, 2014;Bredewold et al, 2016;Wiesel & Bigby, 2014). This finding is in line with the studies of Wiesel, Bigby, and Carling-Jenkins (2013) and Bredewold et al (2016), who found local shops to be of great importance to the people with intellectual disabilities, because they provide recognition and thus contribute to public familiarity (Blokland & Nast, 2014). Our participants narrated stories about the valuable contacts they have with shop assistants in local shops.…”

“…These findings suggest that public familiarity could be identified as a significant aspect of neighbourhood social inclusion from the perspective of people with intellectual disabilities (e.g., Blokland & Nast, 2014;Bredewold, Tonkens, & Trappenburg, 2016;Van Alphen et al, 2009). In cases where public familiarity was absent, participants felt less connected to their neighbourhood.…”

Territorial Stigmatization and Territorial Destigmatization: A Cultural Sociology of Symbolic Strategy in the Gentrification of Parkdale (Toronto)

“…Maximal warm encounters between local residents and psychiatric survivors are not necessary, and as Bredewold et al . () show, may not even be desirable. A modest modicum of recognition may suffice to address discursive erasure.…”

Identifying conceptualizations and theories of change embedded in interventions to facilitate community participation for people with intellectual disability: A scoping review

“…More recently, researchers have begun to disrupt the binary between community presence and participation using ideas about encounter and the diverse and fluid social networks that characterize modern cities (Bigby & Wiesel, 2011Bredewold, Tonkens, & Trappenburg, 2016;Laurier & Philo, 2006;Wiesel, Bigby, & Carling Jenkins, 2013). Convivial encounters are a particular type of encounter-social interactions that are neither free mingling in public places (presence) nor based on long-term relationships (participation as understood by O'Brien & Lyle, 1987) but where there is a shared identity or activity and a sense of pleasantness or warmth (Fincher & Iveson, 2008).…”

“…Gestures such as a nod or a wave "contribute to a sense of recognition and of 'feeling at home' in a neighbourhood" (Bredewold et al, 2016;p. 3381).…”