Citation

Lewin B. J. Policy Pract. Intellect. Disabil. 2007; 4(3): 170-176.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2007, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1741-1130.2007.00115.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The author identified and discusses barriers and facilitators for public action after the occurrence of abuse against an adult with an intellectual disability (ID). Data were collected via a postal survey sent to guardians in one Swedish region with questions about suspected abuse against their wards (n = 978), of whom 392 had an ID (the remaining were affected by dementia or had another physical or mental disability). The rate of abuse was 4.8% (n = 19) among those wards with an ID. A range of abuses were reported, but there were no significant statistical differences attributed by sex of the wards. Facilitating examples for redress in the statutory framework were identified, but it was observed that implementation of redress was often flawed. Three alternative public actions were discussed: (1) victims' refusal to contact the public sector; (2) internal handling by the social services; and (3) reporting to police (but case closed). Findings showed that there were difficulties in understanding that passive respect for integrity and autonomy is not in line with the public ethos that demands actively caring for dependent wards, that offences in residential settings were sometimes handled internally and not reported in accord with the statutory framework, and that the ability of the criminal justice system to compensate for communicative disabilities seemed deficient.