IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v20y1985i6p561-565.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceptions of disability of persons with cerebral palsy, their close relatives and able bodied persons

Author

Listed:
  • Gething, Lindsay

Abstract

The insider-outsider view of disability is applied to the perception of problems associated with cerebral palsy. Twenty-five persons with cerebral palsy, 22 close relatives and 70 able bodied members of the public were asked to rate the severity of 48 problems likely to confront a cerebral palsied adult between the ages of 18 and 35 years. Results, analysed using the Kruskall-Wallis analysis of variance, provided support for predictions that persons with cerebral palsy would perceive problems as being less severe than would their relatives or able bodied persons. Two explanations are proferred for emerging differences: the greater optimism of the disabled sample can be interpreted as support for the 'insider' concept but could also reflect expectations and standards at variance with those of other groups sampled in the study. Qualified support was received for the third prediction that relatives would perceive problems as less severe than would able bodied persons. Relatives tended to emphasize problems associated with everyday management of the disability, restrictions in functioning and concern about the future, whilst 'outsiders' emphasized psychological problems and areas of personal interaction. The latter also seemed aware of their attitudes as a source of handicap for the disabled. It was concluded that greater interaction between disabled and able bodied people could bring into closer harmony their views of life with a distability. However evidence suggests that levels of contact between the two are still relatively low.

Suggested Citation

  • Gething, Lindsay, 1985. "Perceptions of disability of persons with cerebral palsy, their close relatives and able bodied persons," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 561-565, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:20:y:1985:i:6:p:561-565
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(85)90394-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:20:y:1985:i:6:p:561-565. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.