Search

The last three issues of "Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (IDD)" have featured perspectives from a diverse set of contributors on how the field of intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) is being impacted by COVID-19. As four newly appointed faculty members with diverse backgrounds, the editor of "IDD" invited us to share our experiences with beginning academic careers during this unique time. In making this request, he pointed out that approximately half the members of the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD) are those who have some type of affiliation with an institution of higher education. While the perspectives outlined in this article do not represent those of all early career faculty, we hope our stories resonate with "IDD" readers who may be facing similar circumstances. This article includes a series of brief essays addressing how the pandemic has affected our academic job searches, research, teaching, and service. Although penned by different authors, each section encompasses our collective experiences, concerns, and hopes for the broader IDD community. We close with guiding questions that might support more socially responsive and integrated approaches to traditional academic roles as faculty continue to navigate the repercussions of COVID-19.

Background: There has been little qualitative analysis of the experience of stigma, social comparisons and conception of identity among adults with intellectual disabilities (ID). This study aimed to develop an understanding of how adults with intellectual disabilities experience their own disability, and any implications relating to self-esteem, stigma and social interactions. Materials and Methods: Fifteen adults with intellectual disabilities were interviewed using semi-structured, open-ended questions regarding disability, social interactions and self-esteem. Interviews were analysed independently by two researchers using interpretive phenomenological analysis. Results: Three major themes emerged during analysis, exploring pressure on participants to behave in a socially normative way, tendency to produce personal definitions of disability and consistently limited knowledge of and discomfort around common disability terminology. Conclusions: Participants' clearly experienced feelings of difference, despite a lack of articulation. Limited understanding of both terminology and conceptualization of disability status could negatively impact self-esteem, person-centred actions and political movement.

Formal Language: In this essay, I reflect on the systematic exclusion of people with intellectual disabilities from philosophy even as their personhood is subject to ongoing philosophical debates. Theorizing this disenfranchisement as a form of epistemic oppression, I consider it in the context of the invalidation of disabled perspectives more broadly and characteristics of knowledge-production that confer credibility in philosophy. I end with a call for transformation through the framework of disability justice. I include an Easy Read summary, a plain language companion, and discussion questions, which restate my argument in simplified language and invite dialogue, demonstrating how philosophy might resist epistemic gatekeeping and imagine knowledge-production otherwise. Plain Language: This essay is about philosophy and intellectual disability (ID). People with ID do not get to do philosophy very much. Some reasons they are left out are: – Disabled people are not believed when they talk about their lives. – The way we write in philosophy makes it hard for people with ID to join. I think we should change how we do philosophy. I wrote a summary that is easy to read. I wrote questions to talk about together. I want to think about how to do philosophy better. Easy Read Summary: Philosophers are thinkers. They think about how the world is and how it should be. They think about intellectual disability (ID). Some thinkers say people with intellectual disabilities (ID) are worth less than other people. Most people with intellectual disabilities (ID) do not get to say what they think. We can change how we think by including people with intellectual disabilities (ID). We can believe what people with intellectual disabilities (ID) say about their lives. We can write and speak in simple ways. We can give people help thinking and making decisions. We can include people who do not speak or write. We can think as a community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Disability Studies is the property of Canadian Disability Studies Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD), and yet their perspectives and experiences have not been incorporated into the vast majority of research, public health plans, or social service provision. This article presents the pandemic experiences of twelve adults with I/DD living in the United States in late spring 2020. Findings include informants' uncertainty about the virus and its impacts, difficulties navigating changes to housing, employment, and schedules, increased feelings of personal responsibility, and exacerbated tensions in professional and personal relationships. I conclude with recommendations for research, policy, and practice that privilege the lived experiences of people with I/DD during times of crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]