Life Story Narratives of Adults with Intellectual Disability and Mental Health Problems: Personal Identity, Quality of Life and Future Orientation

The narrative is a functional skill and a means for sharing stories which consist of a single event or events causally related to the individual’s past, present, and future. In this study we aimed to explore the narratives of a voiceless population in society and in research: adults with a dual diagnosis of intellectual disability (ID) and a mental health problem (MHP). Our operative goals were to explore the meaning of their lives as people with a dual diagnosis, their quality of life, and their aspirations for the future. The core questions of the study were: which type of disability is assimilated in their identity: ID, MHP, or both? What is their perception regarding their quality of life in the present and their horizon for the future? Our study was based on the three functions (the directive personal identity, a social function, and a directive/problem-solving function) of the Autobiographical Memory Model. We analyzed semi-structured interviews of twelve adults (aged 31-60) with mild-moderate ID and an MHP using mixed qualitative and quantitative methods. The findings yielded four themes: personal identity, directive problem-solving function, current quality of life, and future orientation. Wilcoxon analysis indicated that the MHP is more prominent in the participants’ personal identities. Thus, people with a dual diagnosis cannot bear the burden of two disabilities. The medical staff still exhibits a medical approach. Social theories such as the Multidimensional Insight Model, Stigma Theory, the Social Inclusion Model, and the Future Time Perspective Theory can serve as explanations

Crystallized and fluid intelligence of university students with intellectual disability who are fully integrated versus those who studied in adapted enrichment courses.

Inclusion of people with intellectual disability (ID) in higher postsecondary academic education is on the rise. However, there are no scientific criteria for determining the eligibility for full inclusion of students with ID in university courses. This study focuses on two models of academic inclusion for students with ID: (a) separate adapted enrichment model: students with ID study in separate enrichment courses adapted to their level; (b) full inclusion model: students with ID are included in undergraduate courses, receive academic credits and are expected to accumulate the amount of credits for a B.A.(a) To examine whether crystallized and fluid intelligence and cognitive tests can serve as screening tests for determining the appropriate placement of students with ID for the adapted enrichment model versus the full inclusion model. (b) To examine the attitudes towards the program of students with ID in the inclusion model.The sample included 31 adults with ID: students with ID who were fully included (N = 10) and students with ID who participated in the adapted enrichment model (N = 21). Crystallized and fluid intelligence were examined (WAIS-III, Wechsler, 1997) and Hebrew abstract verbal tests (Glanz, 1989). Semi-structured interviews were conducted in order to examine the attitudes of students in the inclusion model towards the program.The ANOVAs indicate that the most prominent difference between the groups was in vocabulary, knowledge and working memory. ROC analysis, a fundamental tool for diagnostic test evaluation, was used to determine the students' eligibility for appropriate placement in the two models. Seven tests distinguished between the groups in terms of sensitivity and specificity. The interviews were analyzed according to three phases.The results indicate that students with ID are able to participate in undergraduate courses and achieve academic goals. The general IQ and idioms test seem to be best determiners for appropriate placement of students with ID to one of the two models. The included students with ID are motivated and self-determined in continuing in the program

Mean, SD, and <i>F</i> values of the crystallized and fluid tests in the full inclusion (<i>N</i> = 10) and adapted enrichment (<i>N</i> = 21) groups.

<p>Mean, SD, and <i>F</i> values of the crystallized and fluid tests in the full inclusion (<i>N</i> = 10) and adapted enrichment (<i>N</i> = 21) groups.</p

Sample answers on the semi-structured interview.

<p>Sample answers on the semi-structured interview.</p

Percentage above and below the ROC cutoff point in the full integration (<i>N</i> = 10) versus the adapted enrichment (<i>N</i> = 21) groups.

<p>Percentage above and below the ROC cutoff point in the full integration (<i>N</i> = 10) versus the adapted enrichment (<i>N</i> = 21) groups.</p

The AUC, sensitivity and specificity values for each variable.

<p>The AUC, sensitivity and specificity values for each variable.</p

Mean, SD, and <i>F</i> values of the WAIS IQ tests in the full inclusion (<i>N</i> = 10) and adapted enrichment (<i>N</i> = 21) groups.

<p>Mean, SD, and <i>F</i> values of the WAIS IQ tests in the full inclusion (<i>N</i> = 10) and adapted enrichment (<i>N</i> = 21) groups.</p

Hierarchy of the verbal and perceptual IQ subscales in the full integration and adapted enrichment groups.

<p>Hierarchy of the verbal and perceptual IQ subscales in the full integration and adapted enrichment groups.</p