Critiquing representations of intellectual disability in occupation-based literature

References

• Phelan SK. Constructions of disability: a call for critical reflexivity in occupational therapy. Can J Occup Ther. 2011;78(3):1–18. doi: 10.2182/cjot.2011.78.3.4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fadyl JK, Nicholls DA, McPherson KM. Interrogating discourse: the application of foucault’s methodological discussion to specific inquiry. Health (London). 2013;17(5):478–494. doi: 10.1177/1363459312464073.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foucault M, Foucault M. The archaeology of knowledge. New York: Vintage Books; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Teachman G, Gibson BE. Children and youth with disabilities: innovative methods for single qualitative interviews. Qual Health Res. 2013;23(2):264–274. doi: 10.1177/1049732312468063.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runswick-Cole K. ‘Us’ and ‘them’: the limits and possibilities of a ‘politics of neurodiversity’ in neoliberal times. Disabil Soc. 2014;29(7):1117–1129. doi: 10.1080/09687599.2014.910107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinchloe JL, McLaren P, Steinberg SH, et al. Critical pedagogy and qualitative research: advancing the bricolage. In: The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publishing; p. 235–260.
   Google Scholar
• Oliver M. Social work with disabled people. London: Macmillan; 1983.
   Google Scholar
• Davis LJ. Enforcing normalcy: disability, deafness, and the body. London; New York: verso; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Linton S. Claiming disability: knowledge and identity. New York University Press; 2020 https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.18574/nyu/9780814765043.001.0001/html.
   Google Scholar
• McRuer R. Compulsory able-Bodiedness and queer/disabled existence. In: The disability studies reader. 5th ed. New York: Routledge; 2016. p. 301–308.
   Google Scholar
• American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. American Psychiatric Association; 2013. https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/book/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596.
   Google Scholar
• Farias L, Rudman DL. Practice analysis: critical reflexivity on discourses constraining socially transformative occupational therapy practices. Br J Occup Ther. 2019;82(11):693–697. doi: 10.1177/0308022619862111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerlach AJ. Sharpening our critical edge: occupational therapy in the context of marginalized populations: aiguiser notre sens critique : l’ergothérapie dans le contexte des populations marginalisées. Can J Occup Ther. 2015;82(4):245–253. doi: 10.1177/0008417415571730.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Njelesani J, Teachman G, Durocher E, et al. Thinking critically about client-centred practice and occupational possibilities across the life-span. Scand J Occup Ther. 2015;22(4):252–259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudman DL. Occupational terminology: occupational possibilities. J Occup Sci. 2010;17(1):55–59. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2010.9686673.
   Google Scholar
• Katzman E, Mohler E, Durocher E, et al. Occupational justice in direct-funded attendant services: possibilities and constraints. J Occup Sci. 2022;29(4):586–601. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2021.1942173.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farias L. The (mis)shaping of health. In: The routledge handbook of transformative global studies. 1st ed. London: Routledge; 2020. p. 582. doi: 10.4324/9780429470325.
   Google Scholar
• Fadyl JK, Teachman G, Hamdani Y. Problematizing ‘productive citizenship’ within rehabilitation services: insights from three studies. Disabil Rehabil. 2020;42(20):2959–2966. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2019.1573935.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams R, Reiss B, Serlin D, editors. Keywords for disability studies. New York University Press; 2020 https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.18574/nyu/9781479812141.001.0001/html
   Google Scholar
• Finlay L. “Outing” the researcher: the provenance, process, and practice of reflexivity. Qual Health Res. 2002;12(4):531–545. doi: 10.1177/104973202129120052.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodley D. Dis/entangling critical disability studies. Disabil Soc. 2013;28(5):631–644. doi: 10.1080/09687599.2012.717884.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixon-Woods M, Cavers D, Agarwal S, et al. Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6(1):35. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-35.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goodley D. Disability studies: an interdisciplinary introduction. Los Angeles (CA): SAGE; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• O’Neill KV, Gutman SA. Facilitating the postsecondary transitions of youth with moderate intellectual disability: a set of guidelines for occupational therapy practice. Occup Ther Ment Health. 2020;36(2):119–144. doi: 10.1080/0164212X.2020.1725714.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ineson R. Exploring paid employment options with a person with severe learning disabilities and high support needs: an exploratory case study. Br J Occup Ther. 2015;78(1):58–65. doi: 10.1177/0308022614561234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golisz K, Waldman-Levi A, Swierat RP, et al. Adults with intellectual disabilities: Case studies using everyday technology to support daily living skills. Br J Occup Ther. 2018;81(9):514–524. doi: 10.1177/0308022618764781.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahoney WJ, Roberts E, Bryze K, et al. Occupational engagement and adults with intellectual disabilities. Am J Occup Ther. 2016;70(1):7001350030p1–7001350030p6. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2016.016576.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Justice H, Haines D, Wright J. Occupational therapy for adults with intellectual disabilities and sensory processing challenges: a delphi study exploring practice within acute assessment and treatment units. IJOT. 2021;49(1):28–35. doi: 10.1108/IJOT-11-2020-0018.
   Google Scholar
• Barlott T, MacKenzie P, Le Goullon D, et al. A transactional perspective on the everyday use of technology by people with learning disabilities. J Occup Sci. 2021;30(2):218-234. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85114437275&doi=10.1080/14427591.2021.1970616&partnerID=40&md5=99d208f2d1fb3683805d4205c1ff4779
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Channon A. Intellectual disability and activity engagement: exploring the literature from an occupational perspective. J Occup Sci. 2014;21(4):443–458. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2013.829398.
   Google Scholar
• Blaskowitz MG, Johnson KR, Bergfelt T, et al. Evidence to inform occupational therapy intervention with adults with intellectual disability: a scoping review. Am J Occup Ther off Publ Am Occup Ther Assoc. 2021;75(3):7503180010.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• King E, Brangan J, McCarron M, et al. Predictors of productivity and leisure for people aging with intellectual disability. Can J Occup Ther. 2022;89(2):135–146. doi: 10.1177/00084174211073257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gappmayer G. Disentangling disablism and ableism: the social norm of being able and its influence on social interactions with people with intellectual disabilities. J Occup Sci. 2021;28(1):102–113. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2020.1814394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahlin I, Kjellberg A, Hagberg J-E. Choice and control for people ageing with intellectual disability in group homes. Scand J Occup Ther. 2016;23(2):127–137. doi: 10.3109/11038128.2015.1095235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crowe TK, Salazar Sedillo J, Kertcher EF, et al. Time and space use of adults with intellectual disabilities. Open J Occup Ther. 2015; https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/ojot/vol3/iss2/2
   Google Scholar
• Milbourn B, Mahoney N, Trimboli C, et al. “Just one of the guys” an application of the occupational wellbeing framework to graduates of a men’s shed program for young unemployed adult males with intellectual disability. Aust Occup Ther J. 2020;67(2):121–130. doi: 10.1111/1440-1630.12630.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson KR, Bagatell N. Beyond custodial care: mediating choice and participation for adults with intellectual disabilities. J Occup Sci. 2017;24(4):546–560. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2017.1363078.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson KR, Blaskowitz M, Mahoney WJ. Occupational therapy practice with adults with intellectual disability: what more can We do? Open J Occup Ther. 2019; https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/ojot/vol7/iss2/12
   Google Scholar
• Eakin JM, Gladstone B. “Value-adding” analysis: doing more with qualitative data. Int J Qual Methods. 2020;19:160940692094933. doi: 10.1177/1609406920949333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudman DL. Critical discourse analysis: adding a political dimension to inquiry. In: Cutchin MP, Dickie VA, editors. Transactional perspectives on occupation. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2013 p. 169–181. https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-94-007-4429-5_14.
   Google Scholar
• Vila-Henninger L, Dupuy C, Van Ingelgom V, et al. Abductive coding: theory building and qualitative (re)analysis. Sociol Methods Res. 2022; doi: 10.1177/00491241211067508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedner MI. Sensory futures: deafness and cochlear implant infrastructures in India. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press; 2022. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/west/detail.action?docID=6976893
   Google Scholar
• Habilitate | Etymology, origin and meaning of habilitate by etymonline. https://www.etymonline.com/word/habilitate
   Google Scholar
• Gibson BE. Rehabilitation: a post-critical approach. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press, An imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Laliberte Rudman D, Aldrich R. “Activated, but stuck”: applying a critical occupational lens to examine the negotiation of long-term unemployment in contemporary socio-political contexts. Societies. 2016;6(3):28. doi: 10.3390/soc6030028.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trent JW. Idiots in America. Oxford University Press; 2017. https://academic.oup.com/book/24573/chapter/187821804
   Google Scholar
• Quine MS. The slipperiness and indeterminacy of eugenics. Ethn Racial Stud. 2022;45(13):2491–2495. doi: 10.1080/01419870.2022.2096412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kittay EF. The ethics of care, dependence, and disability*. Ratio Juris. 2011;24(1):49–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9337.2010.00473.x.
   Google Scholar
• Fawcett B. Children and disability: Constructions, implications and change. Int Soc Work. 2016;59(2):224–234. doi: 10.1177/0020872813515011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fine M, Glendinning C. Dependence, independence or inter-dependence? Revisiting the concepts of ‘care’ and ‘dependency. Ageing Soc. 2005;25(4):601–621. doi: 10.1017/S0144686X05003600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramugondo EL, Kronenberg F. Explaining collective occupations from a human relations perspective: bridging the individual-collective dichotomy. J Occup Sci. 2015;22(1):3–16. doi: 10.1080/14427591.2013.781920.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kantartzis S, Molineux M. Collective occupation in public spaces and the construction of the social fabric: l’occupation collective dans les espaces publics et la construction du tissu social. Can J Occup Ther. 2017;84(3):168–177. doi: 10.1177/0008417417701936.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carnevale FA. Recognizing children as agents: taylor’s hermeneutical ontology and the philosophy of childhood. Int J Philos Stud. 2021;29(5):791–808. doi: 10.1080/09672559.2021.1998188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tijsma G, Hilverda F, Scheffelaar A, et al. Becoming productive 21 st century citizens: a systematic review uncovering design principles for integrating community service learning into higher education courses. Educ Res. 2020;62(4):390–413. doi: 10.1080/00131881.2020.1836987.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey AC. Ebook of on the margins of citizenship: intellectual disability and civil rights in Twentieth-Century America. Temple University Press; 2009. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/heb34614.0001.001
   Google Scholar
• Pass L. The productive citizen: marx, cultural time, and disability. Stance. 2019;7(1):51–58. doi: 10.33043/S.7.1.51-58.
   Google Scholar
• Cruel optimism. https://books-scholarsportal-info.proxy1.lib.uwo.ca/en/read?id=/ebooks/ebooks0/duke/2012-01-06/1/9780822394716#page=10
   Google Scholar
• Titchkosky T. Governing embodiment: technologies of constituting citizens with disabilities. Can J Sociol Cah Can Sociol. 2003;28(4):517. doi: 10.2307/3341840.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tassé MJ. What’s in a name? Intellect Dev Disabil. 2013;51(2):113–116. doi: 10.1352/1934-9556-51.2.113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes B. Disabled people as counterfeit citizens: the politics of resentment past and present. Disabil Soc. 2015;30(7):991–1004. doi: 10.1080/09687599.2015.1066664.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey AC. Intellectual disability and the dimensions of belonging. In: Lewis Brown R, Maroto M, Pettinicchio D, editors. Oxf handb sociol disabil. 1st ed. Oxford University Press; 2022. p. 230–248. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/37079/chapter/337840847
   Google Scholar
• Fudge Schormans A. Epilogues and prefaces: research and social work and people with intellectual disabilities. Aust Soc Work. 2010;63(1):51–66. doi: 10.1080/03124070903464301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blankvoort N, Van Hartingsveldt M, Laliberte Rudman D, et al. Decolonising civic integration: a critical analysis of texts used in Dutch civic integration programmes. J Ethn Migr Stud. 2021;47(15):3511–3530. doi: 10.1080/1369183X.2021.1893668.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mosleh D. Critical disability studies with rehabilitation: re-thinking the human in rehabilitation research and practice. The Journal of Humanities in Rehabilitation. 2019. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:209750370
   Google Scholar