Search

Populations researched often have little if any input in the means of data collection, analysis, or authorship of the findings published. They are excluded from participating in the scientific methods even though they are the subject of the content that is being produced. This is true for Indigenous populations and the disability community around the globe. Researchers usually use colonial methodology that does not encompass the values of these communities or have their well-being in mind. This paper examines the history of colonization and how it has infiltrated science and inhibits self-determination of Indigenous peoples. Indigenous communities need to have the means and power for self-determination. For individuals with disabilities, this includes rights to services and programs that give the respect and person-centered care they deserve to make informed decisions about their lives. Moreover, there is a recognized need for culturally appropriate services that empower American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) people with disabilities to lead independent lives in their own communities—urban or rural. AI/AN cultures may view disabilities differently than those in the mainstream U.S. Barriers and challenges for AI/AN individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) and AI/AN families of individuals with IDD in access to services include inadequate funding, personnel shortages, housing shortages, lack of coordination among agencies, lack of consultation with tribes, and problems identifying persons eligible for services. AI/AN-specific programs that have begun to bridge the gap in access to and development of culturally competent services such as Oyáte Circle and development of collegiate courses focused on AI/AN disabilities issues. There remains a need for partnership with AI/AN tribes for disability services and incorporation of AI/AN people with disabilities as equitable partners in program development and implementation. To reach a full decolonization of IDD health care and fully embrace diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) principles, individuals in these communities need to be viewed as experts in their journey of resilience.

Impaired profiles of neurocognitive function have been consistently demonstrated among pediatric patients with bipolar disorder (BD), and may aid in the identification of endophenotypes across subtypes of the disorder. This study aims to determine phenotypic cognitive profiles of patients with BD Type I and II. Subjects (N = 79) consisted of BD I (n = 27) and BD II (n = 19) patients and demographic and intellectually matched healthy controls (HC; n = 33) that completed a battery of neurocognitive tasks. Bipolar disorder Type I patients performed significantly more poorly compared to HC on all domains of cognitive function including attention, executive function, working memory, visual memory, and verbal learning and memory. BD I patients also performed more poorly compared to BD II patients on all domains of cognitive functioning with the exception of working memory, whereas BD II patients did poorly relative to HC only on verbal learning and memory. Findings from the current study indicate that BD I patients are characterized by more severe cognitive impairment relative to BD II patients who show an intermediate pattern of performance between BD I patients and HC. Verbal learning and memory may effectively differentiate pediatric BD patients and controls, regardless of the subtype of BD, and may serve as a cognitive endophenotype for the disorder. Additionally, these findings move us closer to developing effective cognitive interventions tailored to specific subtypes of pediatric BD patients.