UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Understanding and perceptions of parenting skills of persons with mental handicaps Maherali, Zuleikha Ahmed 1990

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1990_A8 M33.pdf [ 4.15MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054623.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054623-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054623-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054623-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054623-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054623-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054623-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054623-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054623.ris

Full Text

T H E UNDERSTANDING AND PERCEPTIONS OF PARENTING SKILLS OF PERSONS WITH MENTAL HANDICAPS by Zuleikha B.A., University B.Ed.,University  Ahmed  Maherali  of British of British  Columbia, Columbia,  1986 1988  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL F U L F I L L M E N T OF T H E REQUIREMENT FOR T H E DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in T H E F A C U L T Y OF GRADUATE STUDIES T H E DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY AND SPECIAL EDUCATION Faculty We  of  Education  accept this thesis as conforming to the required standing  T H E UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May (c)  Zuleikha  1990 Ahmed  Maherali  In  presenting  degree freely  at  the  available  copying  of  department publication  this  of  in  partial  fulfilment  University  of  British  Columbia,  for  this or  thesis  reference  thesis by  this  for  his thesis  and  scholarly  or for  her  Department The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada /  (2/88)  I  I further  purposes  gain  the  shall  requirements  agree  that  agree  may  representatives.  financial  permission.  DE-6  study.  of  be  It not  that  the  be  Library  an  advanced  shall  permission for  granted  is  for  by  understood allowed  the  make  extensive  head  that  without  it  of  copying my  my or  written  i i  ABSTRACT The  purpose  understanding  of  and  this  study  the perceptions  persons  with  quality  and the a v a i l a b i l i t y  skills  mental  were  planning safety  handicaps  considered  skills,  was of  o f support  i n terras  discipline  of  were  considered  services.  of  of the  Parenting  nutritional  and  meal  management,  home  and s o c i a l  i n terms  the  skills  perceptions  and behaviour  of  investigate  parenting  and t h e i r  and emergency and i n t e r a c t i o n  Supports  to  stimulation.  of formal  and  family  s e r v i ces . An  open-ended  mentally  handicapped  mothers a  perceived  stimulating  parenting.  environment  support.  support,  the process  satisfied  mothers  with  that  The  presence  to  two  factors  which  In  two-parent  to  deal  interact  of  families,  t o most  support  mothers.  and providing aspect  and  support  of  a  spouse  should  from  be  of family  i n t h e home  and t h e  support their  formal  marital  the quality  with  of  their  extended  by  of were  sources  of the q u a l i t y such  25 that  s e r v i c e s , mothers  affected  spousal  effectively  indicated  Mothers' perceptions  with  affected  indicated that  available  needs.  interview  difficult  the a v a i l a b i l i t y  differentially  opportunity  also  t h e most  indicated  were  more  as  terms  support  to  of d i s c i p l i n i n g  However,in  t o meet t h e i r  used  Findings  of the support  modified  status .  was  mothers.  I n terms  generally formal  questionnaire  family  members  of family enabled  support.  t h e mothers  children.  extended  were  Findings  f a m i l i e s was n o t  i i i  T A B L E OF CONTENTS Abstract Table  ii  of Contents  i  i  i  List  of Tables  List  of Figures  v i  Acknowledgement  v i i  CHAPTER  I.  v  INTRODUCTION  1  Rationale f o rRestrictions Societal Attitudes Incapacity to Contract S t e r i l i z a t i o n as a Condition Canadian J u d i c i a l H i s t o r y The C a s e o f E v e C u r r e n t Laws Parents With Mental Handicaps Recent Court Cases I n v o l v i n g Purpose o f t h e Study D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms CHAPTER  I I .  t o Marriage  Apprehension  R E V I E W OF L I T E R A T U R E  The  2 2 3 5 6 8 10 15 15 20 21 23  Concept o f P a r e n t i n g Who i s a C o m p e t e n t P a r e n t ? F a c t o r s A f f e c t i n g P a r e n t a l Competence I n t e 11 i g e n c e S o c i a l And Emotional Adjustment The A v a i l a b i l i t y o f S u p p o r t S e r v i c e s Formal Support System The N e e d f o r P r o f e s s i o n a l H e l p Formal Support and P a r e n t i n g S k i l l s Quality of Professional Services Evaluation o f P a r e n t / T r a i n i n g Workshops Counselling Services Family Support Benefactor t o Parent Support  24 25 27 28 29 30 31 31 31 34 34 35 36 36  CHAPTER  40  III.  METHODOLOGY  Statement of Problem I d e n t i f i c a t i o n and Demographic Instrument P i l o t Study Interview Procedures Data Anays i s  40 Information of Subjects..40 42 43 44 44  CHAPTER  IV.  RESULTS  45  I n t e r v e n t i o n s from t h e M i n i s t r y Parenting S k i l l s N u t r i t i o n a l and Meal Planning Skills D i s c i p l i n e a n d B e h a v i o u r Managemnt Home S a f e t y a n d E m e r g e n c y I n t e r a c t i o n and S o c i a l S t i m u l a t i o n I d e n t i f i c a t i o n and Perception of Support Services Formal Support Family Support  45 51 51 54 57 63 65 65 70  CHAPTER V.  D I S C U S S I O N AND C O N C L U S I O N S  72  Handicaps i n C h i l d r e n I n t e r v e n t i o n s from t h e M i n i s t r y Parenting S k i l l s N u t r i t i o n a l na d Meal P l a n n i n g S k i l l s D i s c i p l i n e a n d B e h a v i o u r Management .' Home S a f e t y a n d E m e r g e n c y Interaction and Social Stimulation Support Services S i m i l a r i t i e s i n Formal and Family Support D i f f e r e n c e s Between Formal and F a m i l y Support Formal Support Family Support , Conclusions of the Study Limitations of the study Suggestions f o rFuture Research  72 73 73 73 74 74 75 76 76 76 77 78 79 80 80  REFERENCES  81  APPENDIX A  88  V  L I S T OF Table  1:  Demographic  TABLES  Information of M e n t a l l y Handicapped  Mothers  41  Table  2:  Number  of Children  Table  3:  Frequency  of Handicaps  Table  4:  Frequency  of Mothers  Table  5:  Types  o f Foods  Removed P e r F a m i l y i n Children  Giving  46  by Gender....47  C o r r e c t R e s p o n s e s ... 51  P e r c e i v e d as N u t r i t i o u s  and Not  Nutr itious Table  6:  Meals  Table  7:  Table  8:  Meals P e r c e i v e d as N u t r i t i o u s and Not Nutritious O c c a s i o n s a s P e r c e i v e d t o be I m p o r t a n t t o Discipline Children A d d i t i o n a l Types o f Support S e r v i c e s R e c e i v e d By M o t h e r s  Table Table  9:  Served  52  10: Mothers  and P e r c e i v e d as N u t r i t i o u s  Perceiving  Families  As S u p p o r t i v e  53  54 55 66 70  L I S T OF  FIGURES  Figure  1:  Frequency  of Handicaps  Figure  2:  Mean Ages  of C h i l d r e n With Handicaps  Figure  3:  S t r a t e g i e s Used t o D i s c i p l i n e  Figure  4:  D i s t r i b u t i o n Of M e n t a l l y H a n d i c a p p e d S a f e t y and Emergency S k i l l s  Mothers'  D i s t r i b u t i o n of Mentally Handicapped Attending Prenatal Classes  Mothers  D i s t r i b u t i o n of M e n t a l l y Handicapped P e r c e p t i o n s o f Needs o f S e r v i c e s  Mothers'  Figure  Figure  5:  6:  By G e n d e r  49 ....50  Children  56  60 67  69  v i i  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I  would  Csapo , whose of  like  Dr. Sally  t o express Rogow,  D r . A r t More  scholarly advice greatly  this  project.  Csapo whose  A  word  with  must  I would  especially  like  i n the study  also  with  express  my p a r e n t s  goes  the  quality  t o D r . Marg  support  go t o t h e  sustained  into  life  this  large  who h e l p e d  and arrange t o thank  f o r sharing  my  gratitude  a n d my s i s t e r s ,  and encouragement. when  t o improve  number o f  to establish  interviews.  In  the families  who  their  and  time  me.  support my  also  subjects also  experiences must  and D r . Ken C u r t i s ,  gratitude  organizations  potential  participated  I  special  t o D r . Marg  project.  i n the  additions,  personal  this  helped  thanks  wisdom a n d c o n t i n u i n g  o f thanks  personnel contact  My  counsel,  me t h r o u g h o u t  the  my s i n c e r e  And f i n a l l y  project  i n s p i r a t i o n t o complete i t .  to  for  my  their  continuous  t o Madat,  was b e i n g  done  family,  who  came  a n d gave  me  1  CHAPTER Many p e o p l e believe  that  i n contemporary  persons  abilities  and  the  (Haavik,  1986;  consequently, to  their  ability  to  mental  required  rear  possibility  of  children  the  laws  actions  types  them  restricting  children  have  very  with  mental  been  sometimes  mental  or  prohibiting  on  adequate  Courts  policies  to  bear  These  them  1989).  are  across  eliminate  the assumption  the s k i l l s  i n relation  marriage  to prevent  And  services  1986).  the  parenting  have  handicaps  1987; Schmidt,  lack  they  support  1989; H a a v i k ,  based  handicaps  Do  parenting?  and  the courts  (Rioux,  often  lack  1989).  have • implemented  with  (Schmidt,  by  Schmidt,  of  with  minimize people  taken  continue to  f o r adequate  children.  What  assist  to  still  handicaps  1986;  and the U n i t e d States  regulations  societies  q u e s t i o n s have been r a i s e d  to  available  their  skills  several  skills?  raise  with  Feldman,  parenting  Canada  I . INTRODUCTION  and the and  include and  the  from  raising  Such  actions  that  persons  n e c e s s a r y f o r adequate  parent ing. The  purpose  understanding persons  with  examine quality  and  of  handicaps.  perceptions  of formal and family  This  chapter w i l l  have  commonly been  with  mental  study  the perceptions  mental  their  this  used  handicaps.  of  In  is  to  of  parenting  addition,  the  support  briefly  investigate  i t will  availability  and  of also the  services.  outline  for restricting In a d d i t i o n ,  skills  the  the rationales marriage i t will  of  also  that  persons discuss  the  legal  framework  handicaps  t o marry  present  three  parents  with  inadequate Several  and raise  recent  rationales  exist  to  RATIONALE FOR  contract  have  handicaps  frowned  handicapped attitude  from  a  or  sterilization  major  the basis  of  prohibit  the  attitudes,  (Shaman,  1978;  with  mental  upon  well  role  marrying  the  right  and  p e o p l e were  1978). handicaps  labels  by  stated  that  were  the so-called i n t h e case  the  also  cultures  of  mentally  need  families.  Such  subhuman a n d i d i o t i c for love  t o Shaman  an that  and as  and a f f e c t i o n ,  both  (Haavik, 1986; (1978),  stigmatised  "educated"  with  a l l  of the o l d b e l i e f s  of marriage  According  persons  of  & Menninger, 1981;  across  and raise  the product  part  or p r o h i b i t  (Haavik  d i d n o t have t h e need are integral  i n t h e development  societies  t o marry be  persons  restrict  For years,  adults  may  a result,  mental  of  societal  towards  which  mentally handicapped  Shanan,  children  1989).  played  1978).  which  on  restrict  marry:  and  attitudes  and regulations  Shaman,  of  i n which  i t will  Attitudes  handicaps  have  mental  RESTRICTIONS  Society's  mntal  with  and f i n a l l y ,  apprehended  which to  1986; Schmidt,  Societal  cases  were  handicapped  incapacity Haavik,  children  court  handicaps  of persons  parenting.  mentally  laws  of the r i g h t s  members  persons  with  derogatory  of society.  o f Buck v. B e l l ( 1 9 2 3 ) :  with  He  ...even someone as e n l i g h t e n e d ( f o r h i s d a y ) J u s t i c e Holmes once d e s c r t i b e d m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d p e r s o n s as d e g e n e r a t e s , c r i m i n a l s , a n d unfit . (Shaman,19 78,p.69 ) . Furthermore,  Justice  implementing also  Holmes'  eugenic  accompanied  by  final  sterilization demeaning  court  as  the  comments  decision  state  (Haavik  goal  &  of was  Menninger,  1981 ) .  . . . J u s t i c e Holmes' concern w i t h s o c i e t y b e i n g "swamped w i t h i n c o m p e t e n t s " , h i s p r e f e r e n c e o f prevention for "degenerate o f f s p r i n g , rather than h a v i n g t o e x e c u t e them or l e t them s t a r v e , and h i s i n t o l e r a n c e o f more t h a n " t h r e e g e n e r a t i o n s o f i m b e c i l e s " l e a v e no d o u b t t h a t he a c c e p t e d b o t h the g o a l o f improvement o f t h e r a c e t h r o u g h e l i m i n a t i o n of u n d e s i r a b l e t r a i t s and t h e mthod of s t e r i l i z i n g p e o p l e who h a d t h e s e t r a i t s . . . . (Haavik Another  common  handicaps  attitude  considered  (Haavik  &  premise  that  intimate  relationships.  very  Menninger,  often,  they  their  sexual  sexual  acts  Incapacity  The handicaps  they  as  1981).  being  This  as  a  as  was  mental  children"  based  on  the  need  without  being  result,  with  "eternal  view  individuals  regarded  and  (Johnson,  persons  (Haavik &Menninger,  were  needs  Menninger,1981,p.126).  toward  them  were  &  1981).  unable  engaged  the of  However, to  in  control indecent  1979).  to Contract  second from  reason marrying  for is  restricting their  persons  perceived  with  mental  incapacity  to  contract Ryan,  (Haavik  1983)  &  and  consequences  Meninger,  their  of  they  were  matrimony al.,1975). and  As  of a  Failure  to  marital  adjustment  Such  an  that  due  must  of  entering  the  resposibi1 ities  their  protect  marriage  the  contract  such  was  inability  to  1981; I t was  marriage  failed  Dickin  the  contract  to understand in  demands w o u l d  lead  & Menninger,  1981;  consistent with  of  (Floor  et  the  the  to problems Shanan,  the  in  1978).  rationalization  enter  into  contract,  mentally  retarded  from  entering  Menninger,  duties  process.  to  &  assumed  concept  inability  (Haavik  1978;  commonly  involved  &  anticipate  Shanan,  understanding  were  (Haavik  assumption to  they  that  recognise  1978;  1975).  capable  result,  Shanan,  (Haavik,  Zisfein,  not  nor  perceived  marriage  Floor,Baxter,Rosen,& that  1981;  1981;  society into  Floor  et  a  al . ,  1975 ) . The  lack  satisfactory makes  the  marital  c o n s i s t e n c y r e g a r d i n g what  marital study  handicapped Mattinson,  of  even  adjustment  of  indicated addition,  that  received a  their  spouses  Sturm  (1971)  those  of  maintained  1986).  of the  Mattinson's  in  1971;  their that  a healthy, marital  adjusted  and  majority  relationship.  1971;  study  well  of  and  support  1981).  were  mentally  individuals  emotional  Haavik,  results the  (1971)  a  people  Sturm,  handicapped  had  l o t of moral  the  &  Mattinson's  majority  that  among  (Andron  mentally  (Mattinson, found  success  difficult  1971;Haavik,  adjustment  among n o n - h a n d i c a p p e d  marital  more  constitutes  in from  Andron  &  consistent with of  the  couples  However, a  study  5  in  Northern  and  50%  Ireland  of  (Scally,  t h e women  marital  have  (Haavik  1973).  Furthermore degree  within  identify 1981;  marital  correlation  of the  common  contract  would  any  was  marital in a  significant  study and  1971; Floor  found  predict  Mattinson,  adjustment  between  from  the  the  1971; showed IQ,  or  e t a l , 1 9 7 5 ). adjustment  study  by  Craft  and and  allowed  that  plaguing the issue of  responsibilities  of the rights rights  and  ( H a a v i k , 1986; H e r t z ,  asserted  (Shaman,  controversies and  i s the separation  parenthood  be  which  M a t t i n s o n ' s (1971)  (Mattinson,  of handicap  marriage  have  to  Menninger,  between  no  marriage  of  adjustment  (1978). One  the  i n marital  the factors  failed  &  institutionalization  Craft  a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4 0 % o f t h e men  problems  F o r example,  correlation  the  had  t o determine  success  variables  no  that  1973).  Studies  Scally,  found  and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s responsibilities  1979).  As a r e s u l t ,  mentally handicapped  t o marry  i f they  1978; I n s t i t u t e  have  entailed  adults  undergone  o f Law R e s e a r c h  of  courts  should  only  sterilization  & Reform:  Alberta,  t o p r o c r e a t e made b y  competent  1 9 8 8 ) ).  Sterilization The  decision  consenting Court  as  protected  As a C o n d i t i o n of whether  individuals being rights.  within  t o Marriage  i s recognised the  I n t h e case  domain  by of  the  U.S  Supreme  constitutionally  o f E i s a n d t h v. B a i r d  (1972),  the  U.S.  Supreme  children  was  Court  stated  that  constitutionally  the  right  protected  to  bear  (Dickin  &  Ryan,1983). Imposing an  age  involuntary  requirement  childbearing  concern Haavik  (Haavik,  years  procreating  of  mentally  which  marrying  unless they  extensive states  prohibited  review  still  restrict  of  have  marriage  sterilization  taken  New  Oklahoma, Vermont,  Idaho,  Missouri,  Carolina,  place.  York,,  Nebraska, North  1989;  i n statutes handicaps  (Shaman,  of from  1978).  indicated  that  which  prohibit  These  of  another  (Schmidt,  mental  Iowa,  was  mental  laws  with  the  prevention  evident  sterilized  and  of persons  has  was  statutes  policies  Delaware,Georgia , Minnesota,  legal  the  children  persons with  had been  t o marriage or  1979) beyond  prohibition  1986).This  Nebraska  that  retarded  marriage  Menninger,  prior  1981; H e r t z ,  indicates  justifying &  sterilization  handicaps  An  many or  unless  included  California,  Kentucky,  Michigan,  Nevada,  Carolina,  New  Jersey,  South  North  Dakota,  Ohio,  Oregon,  Pennyslvania,  South  Dakota,  Virginia,  Wisconsin,  Wyoming  and  Tennesse, New  Mexico  (Haavik,1986 ) .  CANADIAN J U D I C I A L In  1933,  legislation on and  eugenic Reform:  HISTORY  both  which  Alberta  and  authorised  grounds Alberta,  British  non-therapeutic  ( R i o u x , 1987; I n s t i t u t e 1988).  Columbia  The e n a c t m e n t  enacted  sterilisation  o f Law,  Research  of l e g i s l a t i o n  was  undoubtedly of  Buck  influenced  v.  Bell  involuntary States  which  judgement  gave  power  following  to  courts  sterilization  Institute  of  the  in  Law  Research  and  the  case  authorize  the and  United Reform:  1988).  Originally, Sexual  the  non-therapeutic  (Rioux,1987;  Alberta,  by  b o t h the A l b e r t a n  Sterilization  "Eugenics  Boards"  to  Acts  called  determine  when  for  British the  Columbian  formation  sterilization  of  should  be  imposed. ...that the person might s a f e l y be d i s c h a r g e d i f the danger of p r o c r e a t i o n w i t h i t s a t t e n d e n t r i s k of m u l t i p l i c i t y of the e v i l by t r a n s m i s s i o n of the d i s a b i l i t y t o p r o g e n y were e l i m i n a t e d . (Institute p.171 ) . The  A c t was  of  Law,  reviewed  Research  i n 1937  and  and  Reform:Alberta,  amendments were  1988,  added:  i ) m e n t a l l y d e f e c t i v e p e r s o n s were mentioned for the f i r s t time.  specifically  ii) criteria g e n e t i c.  not  for sterilization  were  solely  i i i ) c o n s e n t o f t h e p e r s o n t o be s t e r i l i s e d o r o f t h e s p o u s e , p a r e n t o r g u a r d i a n was n e e d e d i n the case of p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y d e f e c t i v e p e r s o n s . The n e e d f o r c o n s e n t i n t h e c a s e o f mentally handicapped defective persons was removed.. (Institute p.175 ) .  During  the  o f Law  time  4730  cases  were  half  of these  that  Research  and  Reform:Alberta,1988,  this  Act  was  proposed  for  sterilization,  c a s e s were  approved.  in effect,  approximately and  more  than  Perhaps judicial  1987).  ruled  authorize  The  Case Eve  mildly  learning  The  of  Eve  was  a  Supreme neither  twenty  Court the  Eve  mother  court  year  was  During  the  was  nor  the  the on  the  (Rioux,  the  course  court of  of  October  parents  26, could  attractive, with  young  limited  man  in  to authorise  the  Eve  1987).  woman  a  Canadian  case  old, physically  dating  petitioned  in  Canada,  mentally retarded  capacity. Eve's  of  upon Eve  five  moderately  case  sterilization  sterilization  sterilization. stated  significant  involving  that  the  to  school.  most  history  (Rioux, 1986,  the  trial,  her Eve's  the  judge  that: ..she i s d e s c r i b e d a s b e i n g a p l e a s a n t a n d an a f f e c t i o n a t e p e r s o n , who, p h y s i c a l l y , i s a n a d u l t p e r s o n , q u i t e c a p a b l e of b e i n g a t t r a c t e d t o , as w e l l a s a t t r a c t i v e t o t h e o p p o s i t e s e x . W h i l e she m i g h t be a b l e t o c a r r y o u t t h e m e c h a n i c a l d u t i e s of a m o t h e r , under s u p e r v i s i o n , s h e i s i n c a p a b l e o f b e i n g a m o t h e r i n a n y s e n s e . . s h e w o u l d h a v e no concept of the i d e a or m a r r i a g e ; or i n d e e d , t h e consequential r e l a t i o n s h i p between intercourse, pregnancy and b i r t h . (Institute 1989,p.65).  Advocacy  groups  Community L i v i n g that  any  and  decision  without  the  violate  the  such the  of  rights  Research and  as  the  Reform:  Canadian  Alberta,  Association  Consumer A d v i s o r y C o m m i s s i o n  which  consent basic  o f Law  would  the of  party that  authorise involved, person  the would  for  argued  operation clearly  (Rioux,1987).  They  presented  the  Supreme  Court  of  Canada  with  the  following  arguments: i ) T h e r e i s no a u t h o r i t y u n d e r p r o v i n c i a l legislation for a non-therapeutic s t e r i l i z a t i o n . i i )The i n h e r e n t j u r i s d i c t i o n of the c o u r t s s h o u l d o n l y be u s e d t o o r d e r a t h e r a p e u t i c p r o c e d u r e . i i i ) T h e c o u r t s s h o u l d be i n v o l v e d w h e r e i t i s c l e a r t h a t the i n d i v i d u a l cannot consent p e r s o n a l l y , the a d j u d i c a t i o n b e i n g r e s t r i c t e d t o whether the s t e r i l i z a t i o n i s t h e r a p e u t i c . i v ) T h e c o u r t s h o u l d be s a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e r e i s c l e a r and c o n v i n c i n g e v i d e n c e t h a t sterilization is appropr iate. v ) I f s t e r i l i z a t i o n c a n be o r d e r e d u n d e r parens p a t r i e and w i t h o u t v i o l a t i n g the C h a r t e r , t h e n c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s must be met. vi )Non-therapeutic s t e r i l i z a t i o n i s a v i o l a t i o n s e c t i o n 7 of the C h a r t e r : l i b e r t y and s e c u r i t y (Rioux, The  final  decision  for  therapeutic  had  the  right  to  for  the  reason  of  of  the  Supreme  purposes,  mental  Court  was  contended  that  beyond  the  of  stated  reach i n the  the  case  neither  impose  Court  As  i n the  of  the  based  on  The two  non-therapeutic courts'  parens  p.28).  was  parents  sterilization handicap.  Eve  1987,  that  nor  the  upon p e r s o n s unanimous premises.  except court solely  judgement First,  sterilizations patrie  of  the were  jurisdiction.  judgement:  . . . t h e g r a v e i n t r u s i o n on a p e r s o n ' s r i g h t s a n d the c e r t a i n p h y s i c a l damage t h a t e n s u e s from nont h e r a p e u t i c s t e r i l i z a t i o n w i t h o u c o n s e n t , when compared t o the h i g h l y q u e s t i o n a b l e advantages t h a t c a n r e s u l t f r o m i t , h a v e p e r s u a d e d me t h a t i t c a n n e v e r s a f e l y be d e t e r m i n e d t h a t s u c h a  procedure i s for the b e n e f i t of that person. A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e p r o c e d u r e s h o u l d n e v e r be a u t h o r i s e d f o r n o n - t h e r a p e u t i c purposes under parens p a t r i a e jurisdiction. ( I n s t i t u t e o f Law 1988, p . 6 4 ) . Secondly,  the  sterilisations jurisdiction  court  are must  to  Research  held be  take  & Reform:Alberta,  that  i f  authorised,  the  the  non-therapeutic  then  appropriate  the  action  Canadian to  enact  legi slat ion.  If s t e r i l i z a t i o n of the m e n t a l l y incompetent i s t o be a d o p t e d a s d e s i r a b l e f o r g e n e r a l s o c i a l purposes,the l e g i s l a t u r e i s the a p p r o p r i a t e body t o do s o . I t i s i n a p o s i t i o n t o i n f o r m i t s e l f and i t i s a t t u n e d t o the f e e l i n g s of the p u b l i c i n making p o l i c y i n t h i s s e n s i t i v e a r e a . (Rioux,1987, And  finally,  "best only  the  interests" insufficient  Supreme as  Court  the b a s i s  but  i t was  asserted  p.43).  that  the  reason  o f p r e v i o u s j u d g e m e n t s was also  of not  depriving.  .. t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t s t e s t i s s i m p l y n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y p r e c i s e or a workable t o o l t o p e r m i t t h e p a r e n s p a t r i a e p o w e r t o be u s e d i n s i t u a t i o n s l i k e the p r e s e n t . . . I t i s d i f f i c u l t to imagine a case i n w h i c h n o n - t h e r a p e u t i c s t e r i l i z a t i o n could p o s s i b l y be o f b e n e f i t t o t h e p e r s o n on b e h a l f o f whom t h e c o u r t p r o p o s e s t o a c t . (Rioux,1987, Current  Laws  Regardless critics with  p.46).  of  mental  of  the  sterilisation handicaps  are  nature  of  the  maintain that not  future the r i g h t s  only being  legislation, of  persons  compromised but  are  also  being  totally  denied  sterilization  (Haavik,  this  assert  the  argument rights  equality  Although recognised  makes  the  that  with  right  Canadian  such  a  1987).  procedure  to security  to  non-therapeutic Proponents infringes  of upon  of the person,and  which  somewhat  mental  are  the Universal  the  1968 P r o c l a m a t i o n  procreate  i s  jurisprudence,  agreements  the courts  persons  undergo  to  thelaw.  in  international  they  1986; Rioux,  to procreate,  before  when  procreative f o r such  handicaps.  Examples  Declaration  o f Human  of Teheran  explicitly  i t s adoption  imply  responsible  not  of such Rights  of  rights  rights  of  documents (1948) and  (Law Reform and Commission,  1979 ) . As  stated  of  Human  inArticle  16(i) of the Universal  Declaration  Rights: Men a n d women o f f u l l a g e , w i t h o u t a n y l i m i t a t i o n due t o r a c e , n a t i o n a l i t y o r r e l i g i o n , h a v e t h e r i g h t s t o marry and t o found a f a m i l y . They a r e e n t i t l e d t o equal r i g h t s as t o marriage, d u r i n g marriage, and a t i t s d i s s o l u t i o n . (United  The  Proclamation  of Teheran  Nations,  1988, p . l ) .  (1968) s t a t e s  that:  The p r o t e c t i o n o f t h e f a m i l y a n d o f t h e c h i l d remains the concern of the i n t e r n a t i o n a l community. Parents have a b a s i c r i g h t s t o d e t e r m i n e f r e e l y a n d r e s p o n s i b l y t h e number a n d the s p a c i n g o f c h i l d r e n . (United Nations, 1988, p.43). From  these  persons,  documents,  one  i n c l u d i n g persons  can  logically  w i t h mental  assume  that a l l  h a n d i c a p s , have  both  the  right  freedom  t o be  of  Rights(1970)  was  be  the  and  the r i g h t s of  relationship  force  life,  This  to  of  on  section  of  April  liberty  i t would  Bill  ensured  equality  argued  guaranteed t o be  of  that  the  measure  could  deprive the mentally  participate  not  the  Charter  that  race,  (Institute  Two  the  Canadian  protective  in  sexual  security  acts. of a l l  deprived thereof  ethnic  and  of  17,  Rights  origin  security  of  the  &  the  and  except  Freedom  equal sex.  remains,  Reform,  7  and  7 protects person  before  However,  Charter which  Sections  Section of  or  Research  sections, 1982.  are  sterilization  Law,  sections the  of  a l l persons  of the C h a r t e r to  t h r e e major  addressed.  into to  are  and  law.  regardless  ambiguous  which  a  further  acknowledges  the  as  the  (1975)  as  to  Rights  law  be  right  of  the  There  Tarnopolsky  Preamble  explicitly  yet,  tool  another  justified,  process  The  yet  easily  Bill  due  (1975),  sterilisation  of  sterilization  sterilization.  of  individuals by  involuntary  Tarnopolsky  law.  handicapped The  to  the  presumption never  from  c h o i c e t o have  According  before  free  1989). need  12, the  (Vogel,  right 1987).  Everyone has the r i g h t t o l i f e , l i b e r t y , and s e c u r i t y o f t h e p e r s o n a n d t h e r i g h t n o t t o be deprived thereof except i n accordance w i t h the p r i n c i p l e s of fundamental justice. 1987 ,  p.32)  to  came  states:  (Vogel,  as  Section  12  of  cruelty  and  the  Charter  exposure  to  E v e r y o n e h a s t h e r i g h t n o t t o be s u b j e c t e d t o c r u e l and any u n u s u a l t r e a t m e n t or p u n i s h m e n t .  any  punishment.  prohibits  It  just  before  section of  the  is  third the  section,  Eve  case  concerned  with  equality.rights.  It  type  of  states:  (Vogel, Finally,  any  1987,  Section was  p.33). 15,  came  presented  the  into  in  force  court .  p r o t e c t i o n and  the  on  This  provision  states:  1) E v e r y i n d i v i d u a l i s e q u a l b e f o r e and under t h e law and has t h e r i g h t t o t h e e q u a l p r o t e c t i o n and equal b e n e f i t of the law w i t h o u t d i s c r i m i n a t i o n a n d i n p a r t i c u l a r , w i t h o u t d i s c r i m i n a t i o n b a s e d on r a c e , n a t i o n a l or e t h n i c o r i g i n , color,re1igion, sex age or m e n t a l or p h y s i c a l d i s a b i l i t y . 2) S u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) d o e s n o t p r e c l u d e any law, p r o g r a m or a c t i v i t y t h a t has as i t s o b j e c t t h e a m e l i o r a t i o n of c o n d i t i o n s of d i s a d v a n t a g e d i n d i v i d u a l s or g r o u p s i n c l u d i n g t h o s e t h a t a r e d i s a d v a n t a g e d because of r a c e , n a t i o n a l or e t h n i c o r i g i n , c o l o r , r e l i g i o n , s e x age or m e n t a l disabi1ity. ( I n s t i t u t e of Law,Research & Reform: 1988 , p . 6 2 ) . Although  Section  regardless  of p h y s i c a l  to  non-therapeutic  that  has  However, Supreme is  not  15(2)  been  faced with  has  mental  sterilization  in declaring Court  or  enunciates  addressed  basic  disability, still by  i t s judgement  undoubtedly  the  formulating legislative  up  t o be  an  judicial  i n the  opened  rights  i t s application  remains the  Alberta,  a  case new  policies  of  area  systems Eve,  chapter which  the which  are  in  1 4  turn  consistent  with  Law,  Research &  Reform:Alberta,  In  as  Canada,  statute  (Rioux,  Reform: A l b e r t a , left  both  Law  yet,  1989 and  there  Research  ).  The  is  found  treats  hysterectomy  Act  Alberta  and  of  the  is  no  to  the  and  (Institute  specific of  was  of  recent in  Research in  specific  report Alberta  Hospitals  sterilization  Law,  repealed  without  Reform  under  Charter  1989).  Institute  According  policy  provides  tenets  1987;  B.C.  sterilization. of  the  Act  sterilization  1972  &  which  statutes  by  on  the  Institute  (1989),  current  of  Alberta  separately.  which  The  Act  that:  i ) A c o n s u l t a t i o n by a n o t h e r p h y s i c i a n p r e f e r a b l y one who i s a s p e c i a l i s t i n the appropriate s p e c i a l t y s h a l l be h e l d f o r a l l . . . c ) hysterctomies i n p a t i e n t s u n d e r 40 y e a r s o f a g e , u n l e s s a d e q u a t e p r o v i s i o n t o p r e v e n t c r i m i n a l a b o r t i o n s i s made i n the m e d i c a l s t a f f by l a w s . . . . a n d e) o p e r a t i o n s for s t e r i l i z a t i o n s i n b o t h males and females. ( I n s t i t u t e of 1989, p.56 ) . However, the case  of  Eve  has  sterilization  characteristic  judgement  some u s e f u l  statutes  Reform:Alberta,  Law  of  R e s e a r c h and  the  1989). F i r s t ,  form:Alberta,  Supreme C o u r t  features  (Institute  Re  of  in  that  may  affect  Law,  Research  i t emphasized the  the future and  irreversible  of s t e r i l i z a t i o n .  I n l i m i t i n g i t s j u r i s d i c t i o n i n t h e Eve judgement, the Supreme C o u r t of Canada has vividly u n d e r s c o r e d the s e r i o u s n e s s of s t e r i l i z a t i o n as an i n t e r v e n t i o n ... The i r r e v e r s i b l e a n d serious i n t r u s i o n on t h e b a s i c r i g h t s o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l is s i m p l y t o o g r e a t t o a l l o w a c o u r t t o a c t on t h e b a s i s of p o s s i b l e advantages which from the  Second,  s t a n d p o i n t of the debatable .  i n d i v i d u a l , are  ( I n s t i t u t e o f Law 1989,p.71 ) .  Research  i t suggests  authority  that  superior  and  Reform:,Alberta,  c o u r t s do  to authorise non-therapeutic  highly-  not  have  sterilizations.  P A R E N T S W I T H MENTAL H A N D I C A P S Recent  Court  As  a  several  Cases  Involving  result  of  questions  have  handicapped  people's  be  parents?  adequate  types  of  support  parenting? have  inadequate  child.  to  meet  iv)failure (Hertz,  parental  Do  result a  the to  is  evidence are  of  of  for  their  able  to  children.  below.  What  to  assist  1986).  them  with  Criteria  that  as  behaviours  and  status  when  prove  evidence  of  iii)failure needs  and  stimulation  sometimes  without  apprehended with  themselves  as  of  i f the  parents  Examples  of  of  medical  are  before  basis  which,  appropriate  children  terminated  mentally  parenting skills?  However,  abuse,  Eve,  they  housekeeping,  and  present.  actually  are given  adequate  to  children.  of n e g l e c t f u l  nutritional  of  Can  established  iiinadequate  provide  rights  is  case  proceedings  of  finding  status  child's  raise  Feldman, court  the  in relation  available  consist  are  cases  are  in  i n the  abuse,  to  in  t h e y have any  used  handicaps caring  raised  abilities  services  been  1979)  sufficient  been  parenting  Such  i)physical  judgement  M i r a & Rody, 1980;  commonly  deficient,  the  Apprehension  three  such  and  mental capable court  1 6  Benjamin 1988  from  the  apprehension handicap. Child that was  care was  In  Diana given  that  several  felt  that  refusal, the  awarded  the  for  trial,  the  was  of  Diana  again.  July  initial mental  Family  to  and  the  court  Soon a f t e r ,  Diana  was  from  sign  various  given  various  demeaning.  apprehended  Barnett  sign  refused to  were  of  support  custody  and  The  petitioned  with  in  of Diana's  Benjamin.  the  cooperate  was  Jansen.  grounds  Columbia,  contracts  apprehended  Superintendent  s i x months  contracts,  Judge  the  However,  Diana  Benjamin  on  custody  services.  condition After  1988,  British  custody  care  i n 1986,  of h i s mother, Diana  August  be  born  instigated  S e r v i c e s of  child  of  Jansen,  on  the  contracts.  again  as  Following During  the  she this  course  stated:  . . . I am m o r e t h a n s a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e o n l y r e a l r e a s o n f o r t h e t h i r d a p p r e h e n s i o n was t h e f a c t t h a t D i a n a w o u l d n o r s i g n t h e c o n t r a c t . A n d I am q u i t e u n a b l e t o u n d e r s t a n d why t h e s o c i a l workers thought i t n e c e s s a r y to take the d r a s t i c s t e p of a p p r e h e n s i o n a g a i n . He c o u l d a n d s h o u l d h a v e p r o c e d e d under the F a m i l y and C h i l d S e r v i c e s A c t . (Court Section  13(6)  of the  of Appeal Act  Proceedings,August  explicitly  states  1988,p.5)  that:  The s u p e r i n t e n d e n t o r a p a r e n t o f t h e c h i l d may s u b j e c t t o t h e g i v i n g o f n o t i c e s i n t h e same way as u n d e r S e c t i o n 1 2 ( 2 ) , a p p l y t o c o u r t f o r r e c i s s i o n o r v a r i a t i o n o f , a n o r d e r made under s u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) or ( 5 ) of t h i s s e c t i o n , on t h e grounds t h a t the c i r c u m s t a n c e s have significantly changed. (Family During that  the  course  although  the  of  and the  Child  Services  hearing,  apprehension  Judge  itself  was  Act,1980,p.21). Barnett not  also  illegal,  held i t  17  was n o t t h e r i g h t proposed was  approach.  evidence  unable  to  that  care  In addition,  Ben was f o r him  abused could  he a r g u e d  and that not  be  that the  h i s mother  confirmed  or  e s t a b l i s h e d by the evidence presented t o the court.  In h i s f i n a l  judgement,  t h e judge  articulated  that:  1. D i a n a i s m i l d l y m e n t a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d . S h e i s slow and sometimes a c t s i m p u l s i v e l y and f o o l i s h l y . She i s n o t s t u p i d . S h e i s n o t i n c a p a b l e o f l e a r n i n g or u n w i l l i n g t o l e a r n . 2. D i a n a a n d B e n j a m i n h a v e a n a f f e c t i o n a t e a n d usually apropriate relationship. Benjamin relies upon h i s mother. There i s a b s o l u t e l y n o t h i n g t o make o n e e v e n s u s p e c t t h a t D i a n a h a s e v e r a b u s e d Benjamin. 3. D i a n a i s n o t a g o o d h o u s e k e e p e r . i s u s u a l l y i n a g r e a t mess.  Her  appartment  4. D i a n a f e e d s B e n j a m i n a p p r o p r i a t e l y , d r e s s e s h i m p r o p e r l y , keeps him c l e a n and g e n e r a l l y cares f o r him i n an a c c e p t a b l e manner. He d o e s n o t h a v e a n y unsual h i s t o r y of s i c k n e s s or i n j u r i e s and t h e r e i s r e a l l y n o t h i n g t o cause a r e a s o n a b l e p e r s o n t o be g r e a t l y c o n c e r n e d f o r B e n j a m i n ' s s a f e t y a n d well being. T h e r e a r e some d e f i n i t e a r e a s w h e r e Diana's s k i l l s and judgement r e a l l y s h o u l d improve. 5. B e n j a m i n m i l d l y so. (Court Based  on  custody. may  have  parental  these Thus  of  Appeal:Quesnel,1988.p,5).  statements,  i t seems  been  Diana  evident that  instigated  without  was  finally  the three sufficient  awarded  apprehensions evidence  of  incompetency.  Another attention  i s apparently delayed, but only  case  within  in  British  the judicial  Co;umbia  domain  was  that  the case  received of  Joanne  Pattersen  (Court  a p e 11 a n t ,  who  exact to  of  Superintendent at  1986,  the  placed  careon  best  the  given  1986,  custody  of  basis  that  and t o be  when t h e  lawyer  to  the  13(1)  of  addition, of  benefit  of  Section  15(1)  that  the  the  custody  British  law of  the of  the  for  agency  under  and  without  to  of  mother.  strength  of  the  the The the  hearings,  child.  was  not  look  not  in  15(1)  the  the  equal  the  mother  the  child's mothers. on  the  judgement evidence  of  court  her  mental  Charter Rights  the  and  Code.  that  the  right  p r o t e c t i o n and  from  May  number  claimed  Subsequent child  of  Human  apellant  a  that  basis  of  after  the  raised  in  foster  appealed  claimed the  to  surrogate was  the  However,  awarded  discrimination-  Charter.  release  numerous  on  the  and  order  She  to  the  Superintendent  Columbian  the  by  the  mother  on  denied  law  the  the  her  made  29,  i t was  the  Section  counsel  the  led to  the  was  prior  May  could  f o r the  the  Three weeks  a number o f  Charter.  contrary to  equality  fact  by  discriminated against  actions  the  mother  raised  handicap  birth,  see  result,  The  the  child  re-apprehension,  related  handicap,  case  a  to  the  the  as  by  Following  access  27,  1987,  care.  1988).  Services to apprehend  following  some  the  In  Child  apprehended  foster  mental  decision  was  interest  Section  a  child  Following  had  and  a  May  determined.  child,  of F a m i l y  herself  issues  not  week  the  child  was  had  One  was  November  mother,  birth.  into  mother  the  of which  birth  child  Appeal:Vancouver,B.C.,  was  nature  the  of  to  equal  a l l contrary hearings foster was  of  presented  the  care  based in  to  into  on  the  court  19  was  too  weak  mother's  to  e s t a b l i s h any  inadequacy  to  form  raise  of  her  conclusions  son  in  a  about  the  satisfactory  manner. The August a  third  19,  1989.  healthy  his  inherent  to  low  welfare  skills  average  the  the  upper  filed  under  Section  13(1)  claimed  that  equality thus of to  the  the his  access  of the  actions  the  law  After  parents a  of  the  with  a  performance the  child,  the  the  as  Code.  In  agency  in  was  of  24  had  13(1) the hour  the also  level  was  1989). was  discriminated well  as  addition denied  protection  Section  homemaker.  with  a petition  Charter  equal  plan  child,  were b e i n g  Rights  the  (Peltz,  intelligence (Peltz,  numerous h e a r i n g s ,  under  live-in  of  of  and  of  their  disabled,  overall intellectual  parents  Human  inconsistent  Code.  to  the  to  inteligence  and  of  couple  disability  of  range  apprehension  15(1)  "due  the  developmentally  borderline  Section  parenting  father  His  these  that  to  following  a representative  mental  on  gave b i r t h  basis  range  the  that  under  being  of  B who  courts,  Immediately  the  their was  B,  disabled.  claiming  against  to  borderline Mr.  range  Following  on  borderline  range.  deve1opmentally in  agency  who  i n the  Manitoba  Mrs.  20,1989.  effective  Mrs.B, in  the  a p p r e h e n d e d by  l i m i t a t i o n s and  functioned  in  involved  July  provid  p.4).  verbal  on  i n f a n t was  child  unable  occured case  boy  the  a Winnipeg  1989,  This  baby  birth,  was  case  and  under they  to  them  the  law,  Section  9(1)  of  b a b y was  returned  supervision  and  PURPOSE OF  THE  Today, adults  are  an  increasing  choosing  to  when  their  complicated terminated  STUDY  by  the  handicap.  Very  providing  them t h e  of  caring  resource  often,  rights  such  children  are  two  The  to on  rights  are  and  is  further  children  the  to prove  handicapped  issue  raise  sytems  basis  of  are their  terminated  without  themselves  capable  benefiting  legal presumptions  apprehensions. F i r s t , t o be  raise  from  children  Menninger,  1986;  mental  community  who,  as  and  handicaps  based  a  community  form the b a s i s  be  resources, such  the  result,  1989).  may  t o meet t h e n e e d s o f t h e i r  lack  physical  Schmidt,  that  mentally handicapped  " u n f i t " p a r e n t s who  emotional  To  mentally  children.  opportunities  cognitive,  with  of  programs.  believed to  have  judicial  for their  There child  number  imapairments Secondly,  support  may  from  (Haavik  while  (Feldman,  &  parents  support not  are  necessary  suffer  receiving  children  people  skills may  of  be  from  adequate  1986).  c h a l l e n g e these presumptions, t h e r e ' s a need t o : a ) I d e n t i f y p r o b l e m s common t o m e n t a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d p a r e n t s as p e r c e i v e d by t h e p a r e n t s t h e m s e l v e s , a n d b ) D e t e r m i n e who i s s u p p o r t i n g p a r e n t s i n t h e i r c a r e g i v i n g r o l e s and what i s t h e i r perceived q u a l i t y of these support systems.  The  purpose  understanding perceived  by  and  of the  study  i s to  investigate  the p e r c e p t i o n s of parenting  mentally handicappped  both skills  p a r e n t s as w e l l  as  the as their  perceptions support  this  and,  of  formal  o f Terms  study,  categories: and  and the q u a l i t y  systems.  Definition  In  of the a v a i l a b i l i t y  parenting  management,  finally,  derived  (1983 ) a n d H e r t z  (1979 ).  ability  home  interaction  were  Parental  be o r g a n i z e d  t o respond  and  cognitive  and p h y s i c a l  Parenting  Skills  safety  and from  competency/Adequate  Nutritional  will  n u t r i t i o n a l and meal p l a n n i n g  behaviour  categories  skills  skills,  discipline skills  stimulation.  These  social research  to  four  and emergency  studies  parenting-refers  cater  under  their  by  to a  child's  Rutter  parent's  emotional,  needs.  ( R u t t e r , 1983; H e r t z , 1979)  and Meal  Planning  Skills  * recognizes and understands the four food groups and i s a b l e t o r e l a t e them t o t h e i r c h i l d ' s d i e t . * has the a b i l i t y the family. *has nonDiscipline  to plan  a n d make b a l a n c e d  the a b i l i t y to distinguish nutritious foods. and Behaviour  Managemnt  * has the awareness children. * has the a b i l i t y strategies.  between  nutritious  any  Skills  of the importance  t o develop  meals f o r  and apply  of d i s c i p l i n i n g appropriate  Home S a f e t y a n d  Emergency  * awareness house .  Skills  of posionous  * a b i l i t y t o p r e v e n t and s ituat ions.  and  dangerous  respond to  items  emergency  * a b i l i t y to take precautions to prevent the home.  Interaction  and  * ability children.  Social  t o communicate  what  constitutes  parental of  two  the  parents .  will  love  community  review  adequate  competencies  accidents  in  Stimulation  * the degree t o which c h i l d r e n socialize with their peers.  Chapter  inthe  and  support  and are  factors  availability  services  to  to  encouraged  research which  parenting, the  affection  their to  focuses which  and  mentally  the  on  affect quality  handicapped  CHAPTER I I .  The and  case  terminations  handicapped for  law  their  legislation  are based  parents  are  children  and  from  cognitive,  1989;  Katzman, This  and  on  the  1981;  LITERATURE  authorising assumptions  as  a  result,  they  t h a t mentally-  review  Specifically,  likely  emotional  Budd & G r e e n s p a n ,  will  apprehension  i n c a p a b l e of p r o v i d i n g adequate  p s y c h o l o g i c a l and  chapter  assumptions.  R E V I E W OF  the  to  delays  suffer  (Schmidt,  1984).  research relating  i t will  care  focus  on  two  to  these  questions:  a) Which f a c t o r s a f f e c t the p a r e n t a l competency of m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d p a r e n t s a n d how do t h e s e i n t u r n a f f e c t the p a r e n t i n g s k i l l s of persons w i t h mental handicaps? b)  What t y p e s o f s u p p o r t s e r v i c e s a r e a v a i l a b l e t o m e n t a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d p a r e n t s and what a r e t h e i r perceptions of the q u a l i t y and the a v a i l a b i l i t y these services?  Within adequacy  the  is  legal  very  jurisdictions,  often  behaviours  which,  neglectful  s t a t u s of the  e s t a b l i s h e d where abuse, child's  parenting  provide  when r a i s i n g  result Such a  housekeeping,  needs  s a f e t y and  medical  child.  by  care  iv)  in  such  of  finding  of  the  as  neglect v)  to a t t e n d to the  child's  emergency needs) and Mira  or  presence  i i i ) failure  emotional  (Hertz,1979;  families.  the  status i s very  parental behaviours  ( i . e .failure  n e e d s , home  determined  i f deficient,  i i ) inadequate physical  p a r e n t a l competency  of  often  i ) physical t o meet  the  inadequate nutritional  vi) failure  & Roddy 1980)  to  present  The discuss the  review studies  parenting  part  will  handicaps  the  a  and  involves as  of  skills parents  family  life  further,  Rutter  function  of  the  the  mentally  role  directly  retarded.  of  skills  first  of  these  will  affect  The  second  support  services  persons  with  in  mental  services.  PARENTING of  provision  in time  role  of  s e c t i o n s . The  factors that  they perceive  concept  sustenance and  examine  parenting  c h i l d ' s emotional, the  i n t o two  parenting  how  CONCEPT OF  as  of  skills  and  The of  which  discuss  encouraging  THE  is divided  c o g n i t i v e and  of  supportive  a i d to crisis. and as  i s rooted  to  practices  (De'Ath,  such  activities  thus  1983).  social  on  a  De'Ath  To  that  and  this  and  basic  giving  day  basis  parenting in  their  transitions  is rather skills  the  a  as:  b)  The a b i l i t y t o l o v e relat ionships,  c)  The ability p e o p l e , and  d)  The a b i l i t y t o c o m m u n i c a t e , t h r o u g h a c t i v e l i s t e n i n g , g i v i n g a p p r o p r i a t e v e r b a l and nonv e r b a l messages .  care,  to  even  The a b i l i t y t o b a s i c needs,  and  cater  well  concept  parenting and  as  a)  to  respond  to  (1983),  stages take  skills  day  enable people  the  (1983) p o s t u l a t e d  having  needs  which  they negotiate  fulfillment  phyiscal  children both According  i n the  child's  undertake  support  (Rutter,  and  nurture  1983  , p.80  other  ) .  how  The  acqusition  an  individual  of  experiences  addition,  parenting  as  the  time  available  rearing all,  is  the  is also  a  1989;  shared  between the of  in  as  were  not  incidental 1983).  other  emotional to  and  In  variables state,  which  most  on  the child  important  support  of  services  1984).  handicapped  models were  of  social  parents  and  not  to  very  such  persons,  available  exposed  may  applying  institutionalized  role  they  adequate  acquiring  and  extent  parents  Budd & G r e e n s p a n ,  have d i f f i c u l t y Frequently,  the  dependent  Rutter,  function  for parenting,  However, m e n t a l l y  result,  to natural  p a r e n t s ' p s y c h o l o g i c a l and  1983;  parenting  is generally  (Schmidt,  availability  (Rutter,  skills  i s exposed  learning  such  such  often skills.  appropriate  t o them and,  natural  and  as  a  learning  exper i e n c e s .  Who  i s a Competent The  probably one  challenges the  most  society,  lifetime  no  no  and  responsibilities  difficult  one  and  means an  aspects  i s ever  responsibilities  parenting, by  Parent?  quite that  of  adulthood.  ready  to take  accompany  certainly.personswith exception  of p a r e n t i n g  mental  (Gallagher,  In on  the  are any the  role  of  handicaps  are  Beckman  &  Cross,  1983 ) . Although interested licensed  to  educators  in  children be  a  and have  plumber  other  observed or  a  paraprofessionals that  teacher,  one  must  licensing  be for  parenthood the  obviously  criteria  Dangel level and  that  (1984) of  defined  define  adequacy  by  some  one  safe  Although  the broad to  infer  parental  a  a  following  parenting, care. as  minimal  Hertz  (1979),  essential  focused  for  child's  physical  as these  &  status  abuse  Rody  of  of c h i l d the  needs.  handicapped parents  "life  care  and  may b e  o f some  i n may  lead  In defining stated  that  i fdeficient, result in This  involved  t o provide  were b a s e d lack  care  of  abuse,  skills  skills  However,  are involved,  in many  1975). in  in  Such  on s u c h  medical findings  stimulation  (Wald,  system  parenting.  housekeeping  of  housekeeping,c)inadeqate  legal  on t h r e e  time,  Abidin,  (1980)  and e) f a i l u r e care  the  broadly  neglect:a )physical  or  &  1984;  of the c h i l d .  attention,  adequate  affection,  provision  of interpretations.  Mira  i n adequate  scheduling  consistently  and  range  supervision  parental  been  Dangel,  are those which,  d)sexual  has  over  i n which they are applied  categories  Deficits  haphazard to  wide  determined  health  &  t o judge  Polster  considerably  the  Polster  of n e g l e c t f u l  b)inadequate  as  i s able  parent?  parenting  d e f i n i t i o n s such  practices  finding  the  1983;  context  Who  which  environment,  competencies,  parental  varied  researchers  education"(Rutter,  use,  practices  c u l t u r e s . Adequate  necessities,  1982).  absurd.  an adequate  found that  parental  across  i s quite  the  neglect  skills and  and  According U.S. cases  has as  involve  love  fulfilling  the  cases where  mentally  states  included  have  a  fourth  the  factor,  child  that  Concern  issue  PARENTAL  with  to  with parents  have  Schmidt,1988).  as a  parents  Mira  &  Roddy,1980).  If  the  access  intellect  (Budd  results  coping (Budd  with &  cope as  &  from  mentally  parenting,  or  the  other degree  adjusted  t o support  mental  the  central  majority  such  raising  factors which  services(Mira  studies  have  parents  families  indicate  than  that mentally  i tdifficult  to  i s commomly p o s e d i s to their  such  as  they  are  degree  come  (Fotheringham,1980;  parents find  and the  parents  a s t h o s e p a r e n t s who  are related  to  of  Greenspan,1986;  handicapped  the question that  difficulties to  with  Greenspan,1986;  well  mentally retarded  intelligence, emotionally  The  socio-economic backgrounds  their  abilities  jurisdictions.  However, o t h e r s t u d i e s  similar  whether  been  group,  parents  from  cope w i t h  persons  compared m e n t a l l y handicapped  difficulties  non-handicapped  of  care has  Undoubtedly,  that,  handicapped  ability  of normal  Feldman,1986).  have more  the  by legal  studies  indicated  to stimulate  COMPETENCE  p r o v i d e adequate  addressed  research  having the a b i l i t y  intellectually.  FACTORS A F F E C T I N G  handicaps  is  to  intellectual  the  socially  which  & Roddy,1980;  level  they  of and have  F e l d m a n , 1 9 8 6 ).  Intel1igence To  date,  intelligence one  in  into  probably as  which  three  along  most  a possible  90  families  groups  three  the  based  levels  factor  indicated  42%  given  their  children  care  and  23%  low  IQ  was  as  necessarily  Mickelson number  of  distribution  of  children,  the  ages  between  adjustment adequate level  &  Reed,  and  was  the  IQ  the  rated as  in  and  number of  (Mickelson,  number home,  in  marital  indicated  marital  of age  difference  that  adjustment,  children  1947;  that  inadequate  wife,  Results  more t o  found  the  the  having  questionable  of  IQ  study  as  s u c h as  mothers'  income.  the  i n the  home  1986;  Reed  Feldman,  1965).  degree  study of  handicaps  reporting  marital  Rosen,and Z i e s f e n  similar  adjustment  (1975) found  of  that  f a c e d p r o b l e m s w h i c h were  handicapped parents. child  living  the  related  of  Mickelson  factors  husband  l e v e l of  income, and  Another the  the  than to  children  the  parenting  of  rather  the  and  predictive  considered  pregnancies,  Questionable  32%  care.  divided care  were  s a t i s f a c t o r y care,  was  child  Results  families  unsatisfactory  not  parenting.  the  examining  were  adequacy of  Satisfactory,  ( M i eke 1 s o n , 1 9 4 9 ) . of  IQ=58.6)  upon the  :  study  affecting parenting,  (average  Unsatisfactory that  extensive  discipline  These  problems.  included In  findings eighty  investigated  couples.  persons  with  s i m i l a r to  those  Floor, mental of  non-  money management,  and  addition,  their  findings  indicated  that  receiving  out  o f 32  adequate  appropriate  children,  medical  stimulation  52%  of the  attention,  from  both  children  were  affection  parents  and  (Floor  et  a l . ,1975 ) . Other  authors  parents'  age,  families  and  skills Mira  the  history  of  t h e y were  factors  support  of handicap, a l s o parents  Tymchuk,  (1989)  has  also  affect  &  added  extended the  coping  & Craft,  1979;  Unger  1987).  In  factors  s u c h as  the  the degree  to  Adjustment  a  encountered Grant,  as  handicapped.  studies  plays  such  from  (Craft  Andron  have  indicated  a mentally retarded parent  adjusted  that  i n s t i t u t i o n a l i s a t i o n of p a r e n t s and  Several  1947;  education,  degree  Schmidt  Social/Emotional  are  of  Roddy, 1980;  addition,  which  suggested  of mentally handicapped  &  which  level  have  key by  1980;  role  that  is socially  degree  and  et al.,1975;  parents Budd  to  emotionally  i n determining the problems  mentally handicapped Floor  the  that  (Mickelson, &  Greenspan,  1986 ) . In her parents care  study, Mickelson  who  were p r o v i d i n g  (1947)  drinking, Budd programs  well  being.  marital &  Such  disharmony,  Greenspan's  indicated  that  that  q u e s t i o n a b l e or  showed e v i d e n c e of problems  emotional  found  related  problems and  (1985) out  of  included  evaluation the  total  of  the  unsatisfactory  to their  personality  81%  social  and  excessive  disturbances. of 52  training families,  approximately of  25% of t h e parents  marital  emotional  abilities Geijer  Karlsson  (1987)  handicapped  up-bringings, alcoholism The  that  and  50%  from  the  social  problems  role  in  children 1947;  (Gillberg  to  & Geijer  ability  handicapped  children  is  of  support The  a f f e c t e d by  that  not  sole  i t is  the  i n mentally  the prevalence  ability  adequate  of  care  play  a  mentally for  1987;  of  their  Mickelson,  handicapped  parents,  t o adequately  the existence  care  l i k e nonfor their  and the a v a i l a b i l i t y  networks w i t h i n t h e community. research  indicates  benefit  support  s e r v i c e s (Budd  will  indicate  SERVICES  parents,  parents  study  are  -Karissons,  of mentally  mentally  unstable  1986).  THE A V A I L A B I L I T Y OF SUPPORT The  15  illnesses,  inadequacies  the  provide  Budd & Greenspan,  the  of  t h a t , t o some e x t e n t ,  determining  handicapped parents  out  studies  for parenting  emotional  care.  mental  limitations  But r a t h e r ,  bigger  of  their  of c h i l d  o f them h a d h a d  above  handicapped parents. and  that  sort  predominant.  intellectual  responsible  some  were a f f e c t i n g  standards  incidences  and abuse were  experiencing  showed  mothers,  where  findings  cognitive factors  problems  i n providing acceptable  and  mentally  were  considerably  distinguish  that  mentally  from v a r i o u s  & Greenspan,1986; between  formal  types  handicapped of modified  Schmidt,1989). and  family  This  support  networks  that  are  available  to  the  mentally  handicapped  parents.  FORMAL S U P P O R T The  Need  SYSTEM  for Professsional  Brown  (1978)  professional  Help  addressed the  help?"  The  data  e x p e r i e n c e d more  troublesome  didn't  The  lives  seek of  help.  this  was  studied.  The  author  contacted  in  situations  levels  of  reliance  role on  asking  with  understanding entailed  where were  and  in  stressful  systems  for  episodes the  and  For t h i s  gruops were higher  group,  the  to reflect  a reluctance  assistance. marked a t u r n i n g  coping with  who  i n the  other  events  seemed  s u p p o r t s , and  helpseekers  professionals  exhibited.  organization  the  to  keep  Very  often,  point  i n the  the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s  that  are  i n parenthood.  Support  and  Many m e n t a l l y manner  that  seeks  individuals  stressful  suggested  associates  an  of  group  that  than  than  informal  informal  contact  Formal  strain  of  events  greater  formal support  inadequacies  suggested  magnitude  group  question,"What  similar  Parenting  handicapped  (Mickelson,  Similarly,  has  benefitting  i t of  parents  t o o t h e r p a r e n t s who  characteristics  percentage  Skills  also  1947; been  interventional  Budd  found  mentally handicapped  from  have  function similar  a  parents are  a  demographic  & Greenspan, that  in  1985).  significant capable  programs d e s i g n e d t o  of  improve  their  parenting  skills  ( M i eke 1 s o n , 1 9 4 9 ;  Greenspan,1985 ) . In a d d i t i o n , Budd & G r e e n s p a n that  interventional  methods  that  are  mentally  handicapped  parents  mentally  handicapped  parents,although  modified.  I n an  and  Greenspan  for  clients  "elaborate, for  extensive  can  be  review  of  who  are  more  mentally  directive  non-handicapped  and  parents"  may  parent  (p.7).  in caretaking  feeding,  bathing  safety, nutrition,  need  to  programs,  training  than  be  Budd  pograms  were  more  typical  programs  Such programs  involved  skills  positive  non-  successfully with  they  longer  parents  and  for  handicapped  training  home e n v i r o n m e n t s  used  &  ( 1985 ) s t a t e d  designed  training  (1984) i n d i c a t e d that  Budd  such  as  providing  diapering, stimulating  mother-child  interactions  (Feldman,1986). Feldman handicapped their  (1986)  mothers provided  children.  (average  age  them showed interest  There  13.7  vocalisations". homes. A f t e r were target  of  this play  were  trainers  were  boys  except  study behaviour"  f o r one  child,  encouraged to  and  The  were  followed modelling  provide  on by  of  own  sessions interactive  discussions segments.  positive  of  "child  in their  training  focused  none  "talking",  encouraging observed  for  girls,  behaviours  "praising",  and  sessions  interactions  mentally  three  b a s e l i n e , the  specifically  which  and  delay.  were  obtaining a  to  stimulating interaction  four  These mothers  behaviours,  degree  developmental  implemented.These  mother-child  a  months) and  signs  in  "prompting  s t u d i e d the  feedback  of The and  reinforcement.  When  inappropriately, target  behaviour  again.  The  they  indicated and  observed  in  mothers  up  given  that  a  ten  were  their  months  behaviours  benefit  indicated  to  chart"  interactive  parents  eight  appropriate  requested  behaviours  from  performed  the  "home p l a y  mothers d i d  non-handicapped  at  mothers modelled  appropriate  increased  interactive in  and t h e  to record  sessions  follow  therapists  mothers were  were  Results  the  however,  on  t r y which  behaviours. from  to  training  the  levels  (Feldman,1986). a  mean  p e r cent  increase t o 33 p e r  A of cent  maintenance. In  an  earlier  procedures  to  increase  interactions. g r o u p home. directed  The  sessions  activities  from q u e s t i o n i n g latter,  behaviours, play  were  was  argued that because  more  from  (1981)  parents  were  "..of intensive i n vivo  relatively  simple  rules that  activities.  In the  praise and  found  when t h e nine  child-  refrain  provide that  involved  the  rich  training  of  training  addition,Eyberg  t o master  experiences  In  appropriate  number  t o 20. I n able  were  reinforce  children.  to  in a  parts:  a t t h e same t i m e ,  their  successful  training  positively  vocalisations  Eyberg  increased these  while  trained  child  environments.  sessions  o f two  to  similar  mother-child  consisted  encouraged  used  of  similar  o r commanding  imitate  programs were  frequency received  behaviours  parents  (1981)  and p a r e n t - d i r e c t e d  were  children's  Eyberg  the  Ten parents  former, parents their  study,  the  skills  provided  and t h e  i n the  parents'  application  of  the treatment  program"  (Budd  &  Greenspan,  1982 ) . THE  Q U A L I T Y OF  Evaluation  of  Program client 1979;  evaluators  Rosenberg and  from  services  SERVICES  Parent-Training  satisfaction  Rosenberg help  PROFFESSIONAL  are  & Tate Tate  (1982),  needing  the m a j o r i t y  outlets  assistance  from p r o f e s s i o n a l s  help  received  from  friends  have  evaluated  the  client  studies for  have  and  inclusion  (Sommers  was  children,  and seek  with  the  they found that  for  family problems,  the  more  satisfactory  relatives.  Numerous of  however,  client  of  Ncyz,  (1969)  satisfied  with  &  o f p e o p l e who  satisfaction  e v a l u a t e d the  than  studies  programs  only  a  for  handful  satisfaction  of  of  programs  mentally handicapped parents. Peterson  were d e s i g n e d families their  which  study,  questionnaire four  point  that  the  well  as  a  are  In a d d i t i o n ,  received  handicapped  the  According to H i l l  help  mentally  about  assessments  1982).  they receive.  e d u c a t e d women  concerned  in their  professional  that  Workshops  and  L i t t m a n (1983)  to teach  parenting  included 72  scale.  Nearly  therapists,  were  the  life-skill  other professionals,  sympathetic  half  had  manner,showing  to  of  to  which  "high  handicapped  asked  degree  one  programs  skills  mentally  parents  indicating  assessed  risk"  adults.  In  respond  to  a  satisfaction  on  a  of the parents  workers, teaching  reported staff,  as  p r e s e n t e d the workshops  in  dignity  and  respect  for  mentally  handicapped  indicated  that  parents.  although  However,  the sessions  workshops were  valuable, very  on"  activities  which  the  real  some  parents  at the parent  training  few o f them gave  would have  allowed  them  them t o  "hands-  experience  situation.  In another  evaluation study,  (1986,) c l i e n t s They a l s o "nothing  stated that  complained more  than  that  difficult  the  taught.  skills  extension  of  that  time  most  one o f  both  and  and  Greenspan  not long  of these those  for clients In  Budd  s e s s i o n s were  another  w h i c h were  by  sessions  jargon  t o understand  studies,  modification  the of  enough. were  classes" and apply  need  for  terminology  an was  indi cated.  Counselling  Services  In a d d i t i o n ones d e s c r i b e d take  to benefitting  above,  advantage  services parents  from  are  raising  & Nycz  (1978) monitored  counselling  services  parents  and  their  to  "at r i s k "  100  associated evaluate  with  the  problems, families  provided  families. parents them.  Both  availability  as  as t h e  handicapped  to  mentally  parents  and/or  who may  be  (Budd  &  client  satisfaction  to  well  Greenspan,  mentally  as  groups well  as  the  were  These  handicapped having 1984). with the  handicapped  A q u e s t i o n n a i r e was as  such  counselling services.  beneficial  marital  services  mentally  community  often  with  difficulties Sommers  many  from  distributed  professionals  to  assess  the quality  of  and the  services parents  that  indicated  received.  workers  felt  that  remaining  six  indicated  t o be  60%  that  of the  felt  lack  felt  often  they  a  that  which  r e q u i r e d more t i m e  studies  were  done  time  was  parents  a crucial were  constraints,  almost  were and  just was  ten per  cent  not  helpful.  time.  needed  Similar  found  satisfied  despite a  In  emotional  available.  indicated  The  counsellors  ( 1 9 8 2 ) who  However,  a l l parents  the  for  i n d e t e r m i n i n g how  services.  found  the  pressured  than  services  communication.  German & M a i s t o  factor  with  of  many c o u p l e s  support  by  clients  services  felt  70% of t h e  the  and c o l d ;  therapists  they  with  of the  impersonal  was  per cent  Approximately  satisfaction  per cent  there  Approximately  addition  overall  Twenty-five  life-skill of  t h e y were r e c e i v i n g .  that these  the  high  time  level  of  sat i s f a c t i o n . FAMILY  SUPPORT  Benefactor  to parent  F a m i l y members feel  a  parent the to  (Tucker  a  who  of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y  f o r the  & Johnson,1988;Edgerton,1967). inability  teach the parent Floor  of  (or benefactors) p r o v i d i n g support  s t r o n g sense  parents'  parents  support  et  t o cope and t h e i r  t o be  al.(1975)  h a v e made  child.  institutionalised  independent studied  Their mentally  study  handicapped They  accept  eventual goal i s  (Winik,1981).  the  a successful  often  characteristics  adjustment  included  handicapped  to the  80  parents.  of  birth  previously The  data  from the  this  study  children  affection  indicated  were  from  these  results  with  at  Zetlin,  the  Close  one or  of  of  addition,  emotional  an  interaction  earlier of  indicated  that  the  frequency member  Gilmore  of  contact  (such  (1985)  provision  as  improvements and  moral  a  the  child  maternal  care  grandmother.  maternal  grandmothers  in  skills.  support  mothers  studied  of adequate  with  coping from  t o adapt  of a  to  maintenance needs,  giving  the  In  grandmothers  to the  demands  benefit  needs  a  from  Interaction  the  advice,  ensure  and  that  of  six  to  f a m i l y member  ability skills  months  to  cope w i t h  a l l showed  role  both (e.g  of  In  survival  and  food,  medical  indicated  support  household  improvement.  in  the  year), a  the  of  Results  one in  children  benefactor.  the  money m a n a g e m e n t ) .  having a  caregiving  as  o f t h e m o t h e r w e r e met  span  and  law  encouraging to  et a l . (1983) examined  mothers w i t h t h e i r  mother-in  was  housekeeping  (over  study, Z e t l i n  handicapped  mother-in-law  and  However, t h e y  contact w i t h the  handicapped  presence  addition  that  and  a parent . In  the  attention  family  parents  substantial  being  and the  indicated  encouraged  of  cousin).  between  contact  63%  medical  on  other  Weisner  frequency  i n g e n e r a l , more t h a n  proper  were dependent  grandmother,aunt  and  receiving  both parents.  least  relationship  that,  mothers role.  management  In  their  study, Tucker  and Johnson  between  "competence  support  systems  t o demonstrate  support  network  was n o t  competence.  Rather,  specifically  of  skills  support  In t h e i r study These families  well  as  local  five  received  families as  as  and  impatient to  respond  needs. to  with  results  of  members promot i n g .  handicapped  received  were  t o the  found needs  no s u p p o r t  from  ) became  from  their this  also  children's study  basic  found  successful.  frustrated,  disciplinary  indicated  community  that  organizations  that  emotional  i n adapting  c h i l d r e n . The  and  i tdifficult  as  remaining  more  more  hygiene  their  indicated  f a r better  of t h e i r  coping  two-parent  the  received  t o be  as t h e  benefactors  and  were  and  results.  parents  angry  t h e i r c h i l d r e n . As a r e s u l t , t h e y w e r e  parents  and  support  five  and  support-  as w e l l  were  a t a l l . The r e s u l t s  support  the  parents'  o f 15 f a m i l i e s , f i v e  to their children's  These  manage  support  support  parental  negative  no s u p p o r t  they  received  of family  community  of  of a  independence  organizations,  responding  (who  of  community  moral  .Furthermore,  nature  promoting"  existence  predictor  or  (benefactors),  receiving  well  t h e mere  positive  on  distinguished  "competence  encouraged  families  extended  that  the  i t  the effects  such  families.  was  determined  They examined  and  a sufficient  i t  whether  competence-that  nature  inhibiting"  (1988)  and unable  nutritional  and s t r e s s f u l  problems.  support are  from  The family  competence  Similar which  Gallagher,  mother's Mothers help  family who  from  extended  their  study,  reported Cross  had a s i g n i f i c a n t the  husbands,  least  i n an e a r l i e r (1983)  impact stress  sisters  found  study that  on m a t e r n a l  the  stress.  were r e c e i v i n g  and other  in  more  members  of the  design  of the  family.  the  collect  were  Bechman a n d  reported  Chapter  to  results  three  will  statement data.  describe  the research  of the problem  and the procedures  used  40  CHAPTER  This  study  that  mentally  most  difficult  involving will  investigated handicapped to  to  about  enable  quality  study  being  interviewing  questions  encounter  a l l o w the respondents of t h e i r  the  procedure  (See Appendix  the subjects t o openly  addresses  two i s s u e s :  handicapped  parents  and their  perceptions  of the support  More  as  skills  A  )  express  their  as p a r e n t s .  Open-  t o p r o v i d e an i n -  coping  strategies.  Problem  mentally  children  of parenting  perceived  An  the problems they  of  This that  with.  explanations and f e e l i n g s  Statement  types  parents  cope  ended q u e s t i o n s w i l l depth  those  a s e t o f open-ended  be u s e d  feelings  I I I . METHODOLOGY  The t y p e s  encounter  of problems  when  raising  of the a v a i l a b i l i t y  and the  services.  specificaly,  i t seeks  to  answer  two  specific  quest ions: a ) What t y p e s o f p a r e n t i n g s k i l l s do m e n t a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d p a r e n t s p e r c e i v e a s t h e most d i f f i c u l t t o cope w i t h ? b ) What a r e t h e m a j o r s o u r c e s o f s u p p o r t s e r v i c e s f o r m e n t a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d p a r e n t s a n d what a r e t h e i r perceptions of the q u a l i t y and t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of the support services?  Identification In  this  handicapped local in  parent  and Demographic study,  mothers training  the who  Information of Subjects  sample  were  workshops  the State of Washington.  consisted  receiving  of  support  i n t h e Lower  The p a r t i c i p a n t s  mentally from  Mainland  were  the and  contacted  41  through the  local  associations  mentally handicapped.  began  in April  research  20,  five the  to  Marital  process  of  time,  letter  mailed  a  to  the  A  finding  e x p l a i n i n g the  local  community  Washington. to  contacted  follow-up that  most  Out the  25  of  handicapped  of  obtaining subjects  20  C o l u m b i a and  associations  Information  Age Status  of of  Education Income  Number o f C h i l d r e n Per F a m i l y Ages  organizations  the  proposal  mothers  the of  of  who  remaining  them  did  not  parents.  1  M o t h e r 's  Source  led  that  services for mentally  Demographic  Level  These  The  and  a s s o c i a t i o n s responded  participate.  associations provide  was  community  to  At  in British  study.  agreed  Table  1989.  project  associations  of  community  of M e n t a l l y Handicapped  Mothers  Mean=22years  Range=19-32  Married=6  Single=19  Elem.=17  Secondary G r a d e 10:  Employed=4 Range=1 t o Range= 1 to 8 yrs  years  8  A s s i s t a n c e from G o v e r n m e n t =21 3  Sex: F = 20  M=12  A v e r a g e Age of the child=3.3years  42  Table mothers  1  and  shows  32  children.  mothers,  who  mean o f  22 y e a r s ,  families, single the  were  father  families,  the  assisatance education mothers  were  had  information indicated  and  32  two-parent  In four  i n the Table,  25  of age, with  received  some  the goverment .  I n terms  had r e c e i v e d ,  were  families,  of  21  monetary  o f t h e amount  of  o u t o f t h e 25 f a m i l i e s ,  17  elementary level  a n d 19  i n the remaining sort  a  O f t h e 25  of the two-parent  parents  at the secondary  25  families  and  completed  for  t o the questionnaire.  full-time  they  the  years  employed  from  that  19  responded  families.  was  As  between  s i x families  parent  studied  demographic  school  and  but had only  eight  had  completed  grade  ten.  Instrument An  open-ended  developed skills  to  questionnaire  gain  of persons  an  in-depth  with  mental  (See  understanding handicaps.  initial  questionnaire  was  choose  particular  responses.  associations not  only  which  suggested  stigmatise  may  not  an  open-ended  to  respond  these  answer  there  one  which  questions  the research  During  was the  The  o f such  used  of  of the  the a  yield  As  a  to  local  format  t o encourage  course  was  subjects  also  questions.  )  parenting  format  forced  , i t may  A  of  However,  parents  questionnaire  freely.  questionnaire,  that  appendix  may data  result, subjects  developing  the  was t h e c o n c e r n t h a t , t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e  was or  too long  and subjects  otherwise  the  less  study  mothers  t o determine  within  of  forty  was  the  local  made  written ensure  conducted  best  no l o n g e r  distracted  estimate  than  forty  The  was  that  minutes.  the  accuracy  place  Audiotapes check  be  completed  difficulties  at the offices  of each  of responses  interview.  and  could  handicapped  possible  i n t e r v i e w s took  a cross  during  mentally  interview  associations.  form  four  and t o i d e n t i f y  to provide  the  with  i f the  minutes  questions.  were  take  The  fatigued,  Study  A pilot  with  become  cooperative.  questionnaire should  Pilot  would  This  completeness  was  interview  recorded i n important  of the  to  information  collected. After  the  interviews,  comment .  Several  comments.  Firstly,  many q u e s t i o n s the  difficult.  they  answering believed items at  order  this  other of  to  a minimum  level.  result  that  there  for  would  The  i n the i n t e r v i e w schedule  a  i t was  the  participants  people  occur.  invited  of the questions  the questions.  would  were  Secondly,  check  items,  as  felt  category.  threatening  any  made  and the phrasing  In  believed  were  participants  i n each  terminology  potentially  changes  participants  None  inclusion  these  were  too  felt  that  were t o o  presence were  feel of  of  to  of  asked  i f  uncomfortable  the of  participants threatening  was t h e r e f o r e a s s u m e d  t o be  44  The  final  questions  skills,  the  into  and  major  nutritional  safety  behaviour  questionnaire  s i x  i n f o r m a t i o n ,i i )  i i i ) home  discipline  and  Of  v)  the  life-skill  25  workers  planning  skills,  iv)  Interaction,  play  and assessment  of  12  13 m o t h e r s  at the local 13  check  were  conducted were  of responses  a l l were recorded  the  interviewed  associations.  interviews,  by  by  Therefore,with audiotaped  i nwritten  to form.  Analysis this  opportunity discussing possible, each  were  of  a cross  In  for  interviews,  The r e m a i n i n g  exception  Data  i )  Procedures  investigator.  provide  meal  emergency  management,  of  services.  Interview  the  consisted  categories: and  s t i m u l a t i o n , and v i ) i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  support  t o make  question  report  experiences  were  four w i l l with  responses i n raising interview,  transcribed.  f o rpatterns  together  respondents  subjective  a t the end of each  analysed  results,  questionnaire,  their  Chapter  to  of  organised  demographic  and  form  of  provide graphs  the findings of the  were  given  the  i n d e s c r i b i n g and children. verbatim  These  Where  responses  transcriptions  responses. a descriptive analysis of the and t a b l e s which study.  will  be  used  45  CHAPTER I V . RESULTS This data  chapter  is  organized  Interventions the  children  discipline  from  and  regarding  support  Interventions  care  results  the  study.  The  following  categories:  i )  i i ) types  of handicaps  in  the M i n i s t r y ,  of had  and were  management,  vi ) interaction,  and f a m i l y  Ministry  under  behaviour  and  Out  the  of  the  i i i )n u t r i t i o n a l and menu-pianning  emergency  formal  presents  systems  play  v)  and  iv)  safety  and  stimulation.  is classified  support  home  skills,  into  two  Data groups:  systems.  from the M i n i s t r y the  25  mothers,  temporarily  removed  subsequently  shows t h e number  eight  of children  their  placed who  indicated children  i n foster  were p l a c e d  that  the  from  care.  their  Table  i n foster  2  care.  Table  2  Number o f C h i l d r e n  Removed P e r  Number o f C h i l d r e n  Family Sex  M 2  1  F  Age a t t h e of removal  1  1  time  8 mos . 3  1  1 3 1  1  1  1  2  1  6 mos .  1 2  i t can  be  ages  of the  The  average  anywhere  1  reasons were  not  mothers of  their  such  for  from  children length one  the  always  2  of  month  removal  2,  6  mos  mos  number  as  well  as  the  care  varied.  the  care  ranged  stay two  of  the  understood  by  p e r c e p t i o n s were:  mos 16  were p l a c e d i n f o s t e r  to  their  inadequacies  the  mos.  11  1  Table  that  perceived that own  1  1  seen  from  4 1  1 10  1  As  1  1 1  2  2  and  in  foster  years. children the  Although were  mothers.  children  were  specific  given, As  they  a  result,  removed  because  incompetencies.  Examples  of  47  " I d o n ' t k n o w . . . . t h e y s a i d t h a t I was n o t w e l l enough" "He s a i d t h a t I w o n ' t be a b l e t o m a n a g e o n my own" " T h e y t h i n k I'm dumb" "I bet t h e y d i d i t because t h e y f e l t t h a t I won't l o v e my b a b y "  Since  a l l  the  subjects  in  the  h a n d i c a p p e d , d a t a were a l s o c o l l e c t e d manifested indicate  the  handicaps  Table  any  forms number  are  of  study to  handicaps.  see The  of  children  with  represented  i n Table  3.  were  mentally  i f the  children  results  different  which  types  of  3  Frequency  of  Handicaps  i n C h i l d r e n by  Gender  Disability/Handicap  Male  Learning  Disability  2  1  3  Autistic  Tendencies  1  2  3  9  6  15  2  2  4  Deve1opmentally Speech  Delayed  Delay  Female  Total  Behaviour  Disorders  2  0  2  Mentally  Handicapped  0  1  1  2  2  No  Disabilities  Total  18  14  4 32  It number  can  be  seen  of children,  specific  handicaps.  children  were  handicaps  t o be  found  to  example, in  have  This  may  Figure handicaps  1  manifested  two  sort  degrees  out of  of 20  12 girls  t o have  of  boys and  28  or were For  of delay  children  language  no  these  delays  were  formation.  varied. specific  out of twenty  of developmental  that  some d e g r e e  Such  breakdown  total  of handicaps.  of handicaps  Two  the  the remaining  training,and  and boys.  s i x out some  developmental  milestones.  the  of  to the fact  However,  forms  out  indicated  (47%) manifested  of other  in girls  while  disordered;  for  t o moderate  shows  that  be due  identified. mild  3  ( 1 2 % ) were  young  walking, toilet  Manifestations  autism  4  developmental in  Table  only  15 o u t o f 32  their  delayed  too  from  were nine  types girls  of had  behavioural ly out  delays..  of  12  boys  NODISAB.  Female  MENT.HAND.  •  BEH.DIS0R  E2 DEV.DELAY  SPEECH DEL  AUTISTIC  Male  LEAR.DISAB.  1 2  1  0  1  r  Number  Figure  1:  - r 6  4  of  I  8  '  10  Children  F r e q u e n c y o f H a n d i c a p s b y Gender  In  addition  t o the varying  handicaps,  t h e ages  handicap.  Figure  of  children  with  number  of children  2 graphically specific  of children varied  represents  with  with  specific  t h e type  t h e average  of ages  handicap.  M LEARDISAB.  us o  0  AUTISTIC  H  SPEECH DEL  E2  DEV.DELAY  •  BERDISOR  H  MENT.HAND.  M  NODISAB.  CD  <  e  CO  Types lSiire_2:  Mean  Ages  of of  Handicaps Children  With  Handicaps.  5 1  Nutritional In of  and Meal  order  the  to  Planning  determine  importance  of  the  degree  understand  the  importance  children.  Where  to  mothers'  The  an  to  identify  of  the  awareness asked  to  mothers  were  able  to  appropriate will  that  diet  be  question  foods  of  were  results  first  level  questions  which  of  possible,  questions.  mothers'abi1ity  the  nutrition,  determine  specific  Skills  was  for  reported related  belonged  in  their under to  the  specific  food groups . . The  names  four  food  groups  were  given  to  the  mothers. Interviewer:  Table  4  I f I gave you the four food g r o u p s , I w o u l d l i k e y o u t o g i v e me a n e x a m p l e o f 3 items (food) that belongs i n that group.  shows  responses  per  the  frequency  food group  of  the  number  of  .  4  Table  Frequency of Mothers Number o f  Three  Giving  Items  Items  Correct  Food  Responses  Group  F/V  M/D  M  B/C  23  18  2  5  Two  Items  2  4  21  18  One  Item  0  3  2  2  0  1  0  Incorrect  Responses 0  correct  52  As  i t c a n be  responses able  low.  could  healthy  Table  4  one i t e m  mothers  groups,  seven  rate  were  for  "one  twenty-five  group.  of the mothers'  were  incorrect  mothers  out of  per food  an understanding  foods,  of  The r e s p o n s e  low i n that  identify  the rate  For a l l food  two i t e m s .  very  further gain  of  from  at least  was a l s o  mothers To  was v e r y  to give  item"  seen  asked  the  awareness following  quest ions: Interviewer:  What do y o u t h i n k a r e g o o d e x a m p l e s o f nutritious (healthy)foods? What do y o u t h i n k a r e g o o d e x a m p l e s o f foods t h a t a r e n o t h e a l t h y  Table  5  represents  p e r ce i ved  as  be i ng  the  di s t r i bu t i on  nut r i t i ou s  and  of  f ood s  t hat  non- nu t r i t i ous  were  by  mot h e r s-  Table  5  Types o f Foods Item  Perceived  as N u t r i t i o u s and Not N u t r i t i o u s  Frequency Nutritious  o f Responses Not N u t r i t i o u s  Ice-Cream  8  -  Milk  20  -  -  18  Candy  -  23  Cookies  -  1  Fruit  19  -  Potato  Chips  t he  In  addition  which  were  also  asked  t o see i f t h e y h e a l t h y from  nutritious  why  were  those  they  able  which  considered  or n o n - n u t r i t i o u s .  Some  to distinguish  were  not , mothers  these  foods  of the reasons  as  i s good because  "He w o n ' t g r o w e n o u g h "They w o u l d  get too  i t ' s made  i f he d o e s n ' t f a twith  were being  were:  "Too many c o o k i e s c a n b e b a d f o r l u n c h - h e ' 1 1 of c a v i t i e s " "Ice-Cream  foods  get  lots  of milk" have  a l l those  energy" fries"  " M i l k i s g o o d ' c a u s e i t c a n make y o u r b o n e s s t r o n g a n d . . . a l s o i t c a n make y o u r t e e t h w h i t e "  With give  r e s p e c t t o balanced meals,  examples  o f two meals  considered  t o be  of  who  mothers  that  nutritious.  served  meals  mothers  they  Table which  served  6 shows they  were  asked t o  and which  they  the percentages  p e r c e i v e d as  being  nutr i t ious. Table  6  Typical  Meals  Served  and P e r c e i v e d as being  Meal  Percentages  Hot Dogs and Chips Hamburgers and Chips Chinese Food Lasagne Sandwiches Soups After  stating  of  Nutritious Mothers  85% 75% 10% 5% 60% 75% the type  o f meals  s e r v e d , mothers were g i v e n a l i s t  that  they  typically  o f meals and were asked t o  indicate for  i f they  their  in Table  considered these  children.  Results  showing  7  Meals  P e r c e i v e d as Type  of  Nutritious  Meal  Overall  results  importance  children.  Discipline  are  tabulated  in this  area  Behaviour section,  children. why  indicated  they  that  disciplining able don't  Meal  Not  Nutritious 7 5  15  10  25 21 19 15 19  0 4 6 1 6 that  mothers  were  providing appropriate nutrition they  "We're s u p p o s e d  specific  I can't  an  they  i t to  were  children.  asked  being  addition,  a l l mothers  know-  were  as  considered  to give  not  of  for  their  perceive  any  Management'  questions  In  their  did  aware  of p a r e n t i n g .  perceived discipline  indicate  "I  data  nutritious  18 20  indicated  addition,  and  this  raising  were not  of  In  difficulties  mothers  the  being  or N o t - N u t r i t i o u s  Nutritious  McDonalds Eggs and Toast Mashed P o t a t o e s and Beans S t i r - f r i e d Beef veg.and r i c e W i e n e r s / H o t Dogs V e g e t a b l e Soup Macaroni & Cheese F i s h S. C h i p s  In  as  7.  Table  the  meals  think  of  t o - t h a t ' s what  also  important. of  the  However,85% reasons  determine  important  were  be  aware  to  of  i f  part asked  they  said"  of  mothers  f o r i t s importance. any".  to  Results  importance the  of  Some o f  the  typical  mothers were  responses  from  the  remaining  15%  " . . . i t ' s i m p o r t a n t b e c a u s e he c a n ' t g e t away w i t h s t u f f "  has  "...or up"  else  t o a n y o n e when t h e y  To  i f m o t h e r s knew when c h i l d r e n  see  t h e y won't  that  needed t o  I n w h a t t y p e s o f c i c u m s t a n c e s do y o u n e c e s s a r y t o d i s c i p l i n e your c h i l d ?  responses  categories  as  were r e v i e w e d  reported i n Table  as  Perceived  Perceived  grow  be  asked: feel i t ' s  o r g a n i z e d under  four  8.  Eating  be  dsisciplined toward  discipline rooms  (  60%  80%  bedroom  Table  children  their putting  Mothers  60%  from  of  of  Discipline  60%  behaviour  seen  to  Frequency  c l e a n up  their  others;  important  Habits  Doesn't  can  be  bedtime  Aggressive  i t  to  Occasion  During  their  and  he  8  Occasions Children  to  q u e s t i o n was  learn  Interviewer:  Table  following  listen  to  the  Mothers'  the  :  disciplined,  As  of  the  8,  when  mothers  children their  60%  they  of  the  mothers  behaved a g g r e s s i v e l y  indicated  when  toys  most  they  away);  that didn't  60%  they  tried  clean  indicated  up  that  they  disciplined  bed  them  when  their  a n d when t h e y w o u l d n o t f i n i s h In  order  children, they  to  mothers  used.  determine  how  were  to  Figure  3  asked  reports  children their  would  disciplined  indicate  what  responses  categor i e s .  20 T  ,  Strategies  F  i  c  ?  u  r  e  3  :  Strategies  Used t o D i s c i p l i n e  to  food.  they  their  n o t go  Children.  their  strategies under  4  As  indicated by Figure  experienced their  great  children.  often  led  their  children; two  aware  many  added  two of  of  children  how  their  of  frustration,  three  sat  of  down  the mothers  results  felt  that  feelings  children to their Overall  were  They  i n deciding  Approximately  children,and their  of t h e mothers  difficulty  to  helplessness.  3, 17  and  they  discipline  inability  the  got  to  that  to  decide  anger  mothers  talked  spanked  to  frustrated  and  their  and  sent  rooms. indicated  of the importance  them  perceived  t o be  difficult  that  although  of disciplining  the  process  of  a l l mothers  their  children,  discipling  their  Home S a f e t y a n d E m e r g e n c y This  section  abilities  of  of the parents  emergency  situations.  related  the  specific In  to  emergency the  precautions children the  questionnaire  t o respond It  part,  that  they  would  the  relating to  questions  which  be  undertaken  in  certain  mothers would  were  asked  the kinds  of  take  accidents  in  preventing  i n t h e home.  For  falling  their example,  asked:  I n y o u r home,what s t e p s w o u l d y o u t a k e p r e v e n t i n g ( s t o p p i n g ) your c h i l d from: a)  from  from t h e window?  mothers responded t o t h i s Some  included  on  situations.  f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n was  ways.  also  focused  to scenarios  s t r a t e g i e s which  first  from  Interviewer:  The  the  of the t y p i c a l  question  responses  i n many  included:  different  I would put a lock  on t h e  I'd get r i d of the  window  Put a screen look out. I wouldn't  window  on t h e window  so he  l e a v e t h e window  can't  open-keep i t c l o s e d  S h o u l d remove c h a i r s o r t a b l e s from t h e window and have n o t h i n ' b e s i d e t h e w i n d o w - s o she c a n ' t c l i m b up.  The how  they  floor". as  second  part  would The  well  responses  prevent  results  as  the  Be  types  asked  "slipping  that parents precautions  items  that  parts This  mother's  ability  child Mothers and  on wet  floors  knew to  the  take.  decide on  the  dangers Typical  floors  w h e n my  the floor  other  Specifically, of  walk  to these  about  bedroom.  pots  of  from  up t h e t h i n g s f r o m  sure  addition  various  their  indicated  c l e a n my Pick  home.  child  to  were:  I  also  their  types  ...don't  In  o f t h e q u e s t i o n r e q u i r e d them  of  the  types of  be  potential  the  decide  as  a)Kitchen  investigator what  was  dangers  to identify  considered  house:  allowed  floor  of q u e s t i o n s , mothers  mothers were a s k e d would  i s sleeping  is dry  types  the  to  girl  to  safe  i n the possible  being and  unsafe  b)  in  Child's  determine  and  were  the  unsafe  for  stoves,  hot  a t home. indicated  messy  that  kitchens  items  were  such  dangerous  as  hot  f o r the  child.  In  addition,  parents  considered  were  then  asked  t o be d a n g e r o u s . not  Modal responses  safe because  because  to explain  children  why  these  were  were:  he c a n g e t a l l b u r n t like  t o p l a y around  with the  p o t s a n d p a n s , .. . a n d t h e p a n s may b e h o t o r s o m e t h i n g c a n s p i l l on them. if the kitchens are d i r t y can e a s i l y t r i p over.  When p a r e n t s  were  bedroom  unsafe,  the  were  form  asked  what  some  types  a n d messy,  of items  of the typical  the baby  i n the child's  responses  were i n  of : I don't k e e p a n y p l a s t i c bags i n t h e rooms o r e l s e he c a n e a s i l y p u t i t o n h i s h e a d a n d w o n ' t be a b l e t o b r e a t h e . no b i g w i r e s i n t h e r o o m - s h e strangle herself  can e a s i l y  When my d a u g h t e r w a s w e e , I a l w a y s mde s u r e t h a t t h e r e w o u l d n ' t be s m a l l o b j e c t s on t h e f l o o r o t h e r w i s e s h e ' d e a t i t up a n d p r o b a b l y choke t o d e a t h No p i l l s candy  i n t h e h e r room-she  make s u r e Other those  that  poisonous dealing  types would items, with  emergencies.  of  that the crib questions  indicate ways  of  situations The  results  i s n o t b y t h e window  regarding  i f the storing which from  may t h i n k i t ' s  home  mother  such  these  was  items  involved were  safety  were  aware  of  a n d ways  of  accidents  and  tallied  and  60  converted these  to percentages.  Figure  4  graphically  results.  100  -i  75-  50-  25-  0  B  A  C  D  E  Needs of Services  Legend A  Discipline and Behaviour Management  B  Socially Stimulating Environment  C  Time Management  D  Shopping/Menu Planning  E  Budgetting  Fiqure  4:  D i s t r i b u t i o n o f M e n t a l l y Handicapped M o t h e r s ' S a f e t y and Emergency S k i l l s .  summarises  61  As  i t can  able the  to  be  seen  indicate  child.  from  Figure  which  Typical  items  responses  Ajax  oven  4,  85%  were  of  the  poisonous  to this  mothers or  were  unsafe  q u e s t i o n were  for  :  cleaner  bleach pills pet The  remaining  that  was  and  food  15%  isn't  indicated  poisonous  I  other  i n the  o n l y have  stuff  from  very good that  doctors  f o r the  they  house.  the  child  d i d not  have  Their responses  a l l the good  stuff  anything  were:  i n the  house  Why w o u l d a n y o n e w a n t t o k e e p a n y t h i n g was p o i s o n o u s i n t h e h o u s e . . . I d o n ' t understand. When t h e as :  i n t e r v i e w e r provided these  Interviewer:  as  being  p e r c e i v e and  harmful  I don't  unsafe would "in  terms for  would  the  either  the not  of  think  knowing  child,  store  the  c a b i n e t s " . The  /or  for their  22  know  use  these  harmful  (bleach, ajax) harmful?  how  to  (90%)  items  d i d not  you  such  children.  i t was  Are those t h i n g s d i d n ' t know? In  mothers w i t h probes  W e l l , w h a t t y p e s o f c l e n s i n g a g e n t s do t o c l e a n your b a t h t u b s or k i t c h e n ?  the mothers d i d not items  that  "up  remaining  store  mothers high 3  k e e p a n y t h i n g t h a t w o u l d be  I  things  that  were  indicted  that  they  on  the  mothers harmful  shelves"  said  that  i n the  and they  house.  Results all  mothers  and  relating were  able  questions.  to medical to respond  Scenarios  of  emergency  indicated  successfully  the  to  following  that  scenarios  types  were  presented: Interviewer:  Mothers child  You're f e e d i n g your c h i l d anda l l of a sudden, your c h i l d b e g i n s t o choke. Why d o y o u t h i n k t h a t h e c h o k e d ? How w o u l d y o u s t o p h i m f r o m c h o k i n g ? Who w o u l d y o u phone?  were, a b l e  c o u l d have  to generate choked.  several  Typical  reasons  reasons  a s t o why t h e  were:  M a y b e he a t e s o m t h i n g b i g He  c o u l d have e a t e n s o m e t h i n g t h a t was t o o h a r d - l i k e a b i g chunk o f c a r r o t  he  a t e t o o much  maybe s h e s w a l l o w e d s o m e t h i n g l i k e a p e n n y or s o m e t h i n g he p i c k e d up f r o m t h e f l o o r . In  addition  able  to giving  to indicate  these  reasons,  how t h e y w o u l d  ...hit  a l l the  stop the c h i l d  mothers from  choking.  h i m on t h e back  C o u l d s e a r c h i n t h e mouth f o r t h e s t u f f h i t s o f t l y on t h e back Bend them over back Such  findings  regarding  lend  to  fact  the  were  t h e knee a n d p a t them  home  that  safety  with  and  exposure  medical to  and  on t h e  emergency  support  from  parenting to  workshops,  respond  to t h e i r  Results  mentally  children's medical  relating  importance  of  handicapped  to  the  providing  and  a  safe  the  mothers d i d not  as  a  part  of  I n t e r a c t i o n and  types  of  types  the  children  their of  were  a  asked  to  their  children. of  you",  "I  four  used  25  three  the  terms four  in.  for  they  From  vi)  used  15  of  their area  r e i n f o r c i n g an  to  clubs  four  "talking  that  choices  i i i )pr irnary  they  gently and  used as to  "I  for  hugs love  him"),  giving  three  were  the  used  a  expressions.  appropriate  (verbal  their  affection  remaining  verbal  the  families,  (such  expressions  and  which  possible  and  the and  know, m o t h e r s  love  the  love,  other  expressions  c a n d y ) and  choices  with or  mothers  approve  degree  I don't  verbal  physical contact  possible  to  indicated that  verbal  how  expressions,  you,sweetie"and  ( e.g.  of  the  expressed  mothers,  combination  of  the  this  their  used  the  activities  candy) and  something  combination  of  the  care a  they  ii)verbal  i n d i c a t e how  kisses,  In  social  on  expressed  children associated  contact,  r e i n f o r c e r - e .g  Out  of  for  perceive  centered  c h i l d r e n and  involved  physical  child  category  c e r t a i n behaviours,  and  and  this  their  of and  awareness  parenting.  reinforcing strategies  families  i)  in  with  disapprove  able  Social Stimulation  Questions interacted  are needs.  environment  showed t h a t difficult  safety  mothers'  children being  parents  behaviour,  praise, give  a  out  primary  reinforcer-a mothers their the  candy/sticker,  indicated  child,  five  remaining  verbally and  The  When  that  their  area  friends  and  families  they  their  know),  praised  would  and  hug t h e i r  used  child  socialisation i n this  asked  a  but  part  12  they  a  hugged and  combination  of  primary  reinforcer  didn't  other  families  questionnaire.  associated  with  f r e q u e n t l y went associated  that  many  socialise  was  at a l l .  out w i t h  with  friends  other  their  and the  Responses  of  mothers were : I don't here .  really  know anyone b e s i d e s  the people  I don't have t h e t i m e . . . B y t h e t i m e I doing everything w i t h h e r , i t ' s time s1eep. P e o p l e d o n ' t t a l k t o me w h e n d o n ' t l i k e my b o y - s o I d o n ' t w i t h them. In  16  child  of the  mothers  d i d not have  s i x mothers  with  i f they  indicated that  neighbors,  only  remaining  of  were  seven  they  don't  child.  of concern  mothers  and  verbally  indicated that  degree  families,  three  said  they  praising, giving  hugging  another  4  that  hugging,  terms  of  children,  encouraging  70%  encouragement,  of  their  the mothers  they  often  wanted by f a m i l i e s o f other  Overall provide  a  results  socially  children felt  felt  that,  their  finish t o go t o  I go out-they l i k e going out  t o mix  with  inspite children  of  other their  were  not  children.  relating  to  the  mothers'  s t i m u l a t i n g environment,  ability  indicated  to that  65  some  mothers  did  perceive  part  of p a r e n t i n g .  I D E N T I F I C A T I O N AND This  study  also  perceptions  Formal  Support  the 3  and  with  the  an  helpful.  these  to  planning,  home  the  playing  the  instructional  workers  then  and  When m o t h e r s without  and  were  asked  from  their  they would  feel  "lost,  wouldn't  be  able  to  cope.  were  these  i f they  workshops,  An  frustrated  very  example  to  indicated supportive to  attend small  involved in  menu-  to  would  done  this, the  parents be  a l l of  a  1  in  week,  of  from  worked  T h i s was  and  the  attending  parents  skills  a  spent  mothers  workers  once  observed  support  The  and  support.  I t ranged  In a d d i t i o n  sessions,  helped  family  required  discipline.  difficult  availability  and  year.  a  SERVICES  varied.  basic  modelling.  being  mothers had  skill  parents nad  the  programs  life  safety  role  one  workshops  where  teach  of  training  These  sessions  groups  programs  average  parenting  formal  t h a t the  parenting training  that  that  of b o t h  as  SUPPORT  investigated  l e n g t h of time  years  skill  P E R C E P T I O N OF  general  The  this  at  both  following life-skill home.  able them  helpless" response  by  to  cope  expressed as  they  from  mother: I hope t h a t never happens because t h e y ' d t a k e h i m a w a y f r o m me. I l o v e ray s o n b u t t h e y w o n ' t b e l i e v e me t h a t I c a n be a g o o d mum. They t o o k him away once and t h e n I s t a r t e d coming here f o r h e l p and t h e y gave J o e y back t o me .  one  In  addition  to receiving  prorams,  some m o t h e r s  of  associations.  their  Additional  Type  Types o f Support  parent  from  training  other  S e r v i c e s Received by  members  8  Homemaker S e r v i c e s  5  Counsellors  1  Public  Health  Social  Worker  9  that  associations. training  In  Support  visits  visits  types  mothers  were  addition  to  some  from  i n such  and  the baby and b a s i c  child  from  hygiene.  also  receiving  by once  parent  workers,  one  health  a  public workers.  visit  to  nurses  was  the mother. a week  of  their  from  from  public  meals  from  development  ranged  mothers  as making  combination  help  social  infant  i f requested  visited  skills  were  from  homemakers  or  the  receiving  parents  p e r week. Support  workers  and  receiving  services  counsellors  i f necessary  development  the  of support  nurses,  8 10  workshops,  combination health  Nurse  illustrates  services  Mothers  Number o f M o t h e r s Receiving Services  development  Table  them  received help  of Support  Infant Worker  given  from  9  Table  three  also  support  and  f o r the baby,  Infant helped bathing  67  In an  attempt t o see i f  prenatal classes,  i t was  mothers  found t h a t  mothers had attended the c l a s s e s as  a  had attended total  of  any  sixteen  i n d i c a t e d i n F i g u r e 5.  80-1  20  0  A  B  C  Legend A  Mothers attending classes  B  Bothers completing classes  C  Bothers not attending classes  ic[ure_5: D i s t r i b u t i o n o f M e n t a l l y Handicapped P e r c e p t i o n s o f Needs o f S e r v i c e s .  Mothers'  Figure the  5  shows  full  The  that  out  of the  16,  only  8 mothers  attended  session.  remaining  reasons.  stopped  Typical "I  attending  responses  were  was  too hard  classes  i n the form  couldn't understand  "It  the  the  for  several  of :  stuff"  f o r me"  " I was a l l a l o n e - i t w o u l d h a v e b e e n n i c e t o h a v e some c o m p a n y " "They were g o i n g  too  " I d i d n ' t know what was b o r i n g " Feelings  of  experienced because per  they  cent  classes  questions  the  incompetencey felt  understand  the  told  them  "too hard-it.'s  like  going  final  part  relating  services although  to  of  the  the  they  were  they  were  satisfied  of help,  about  receiving.  there  with  were  discipline  their  help  children.  them"  amd  because  mothers  were  and  quality  the  asked of  stated  the a v a i l a b i l i t y  6,  areas  and  with  i n Figure  l o t of  of prenatal  t o cope more e f f e c t i v e l y  As  a  form  they  their  needed  Thirty-six  i n which  able  they  "stupid"  A l l mothers  some  i n t o be shown  and  also  to school".  study,  n e e d e d more h e l p children.  any  ask-it  were  concepts.  availability  that  frequency  "dumb"  attend  "nobody  the  of questions t o  m o t h e r s who  couldn't  because  In  that  these  and  of the mothers d i d n ' t  t h e y were  the  kinds  frustrations by  fast"  85% o f them  i n deciding From  the  25  how  and  mothers,  felt  that  when 13  to  (52%)  69  felt  that  socially  they  needed  stimulating  out  o f 25 ( 6 0 % ) f e l t  and  needed  spending that  with  a t home, t h e y  schedule  t o spend  graphically  exposure  environment that they  life-skill  time  more  workers  their  for their always  children.  summarised  with  of providing a  children.  "wasted  a l o tof time"  their  In addition,  children.  ! Needs of Services  Legend  B  Socially Stimulating Environment  C  Time Management  D  Shopping/Menu Planning  E  Budgeting  Figure 6 : D i s t r i b u t i o n  felt  The r e s u l t s a r e  100  Discipline and Behaviour Management  they  organising and planning a  i n F i g u r e 6.  A  Fifteen  t o show t h e m e f f e c t i v e ways o f  had d i f f i c u l t y time  t o ways  o f M e n t a l l y Handicapped Mothers'  In  addition,  satisfied  with  presented  in  that it  rather  would  increased the  Family  the  of  were  structure  workshops. going  more  the  number  the  than  be  mothers  to  useful  number "hands  the  the of  them  their  degree  to  f a m i l i e s was  Table  i f the  Very  which also  Perceiving  mothers  Supportive Available  shown  highly  i n Table  10,  s u p p o r t e d by their  children. Results  their  husbands The  also  perceived  a  week,  workers  increasing  support  as  from  Supportive  that  extended and at  ten  4  2  6  15  14  eight  their did  not 15  parents  families.  Six  mothers  reported  husbands and  support  mother - i n - l a w s home.  Extended  8  remaining  regarding  indicated  them  times  investigated.  Families  Supportive  Not  aunts  indicated  life-skill  thus  was  experiences.  Spouse  that  that  mothers three  were  10  Mothers  As  they  material  the  visits,  i f  Support  The  Not  asked  workshops  home  on"  of 80%  for  of  also  help  them  mothers  at  were  were  supported  came home on indicated  they  home  with  family by  as  were  indicated  single  extended  such  that  mothers  from  Members  mothers  two  Family  the  parents. members  members  of  grandmothers,  a weekly basis  to  help  that  no  such  they  had  71  support  and  relatives  the  lived  Chapter findings, future  the  remaining in their  five  nine  will  the  that  none  of  their  neighborhoods. present  conclusions  r e s e a r c h and  indicated  of  the  limitations  the  discussion  study, of the  of  the  suggestions  for  study.  CHAPTER V This  chapter  conclusions and  the  D I S C U S S I O N AND will  discussed  present  of the f i n d i n g s ,  limitations under  CONCLUSIONS  of  the  discussion  suggestions  the  study.  and  the  for future research  The  results  will  be  of  the  children  A l l children  i n two-  specific categories.  DISCUSSION  Handicaps  i nChildren  This  study  manifested parent  some  sort  families  had  learning delays  or  mental  also  some t y p e s  chances  of  is  the  had  any  handicap  when  i s even  father  is  higher  when  of  studies  or  retardation  where  delays  Therefore  role  and  relating that the i s 40%  are handicapped.  t o the handicap)  may p l a y a b i g g g e r  parent  delays  indicated  the mother,  handicapped.  single  have  i n cases  having  developmental  speech  Research  parents  the prevalance  ( a s opposed  the child  in  delays,  handicaps  that  from  tendencies,  parents  both  ranged  when o n l y one p a r e n t  indicated  handicapped,  whic  disorders.  of  50%  Children  developmental  form  than  handicap.  autistic  i s decreased  interaction and  a  of handicapped  (1973)  children  a  more  handicaps.  i n children  occurence Scally  of  of behavior  children  higher  that  disabilities,  families  to  found  Its  i s handicapped. only or  one  parent  handicaps  rather  that  the  degree  between  in child  in than of  t h e mother  development.  1  Interventions  from t h e M i n i s t r y  Mothers homes  who  perceived  providing  Such  rights  to  necessary,  needs, o f , t h e  parents  identify  foods  the  groups.  were in  their  be  as adequate  infringing  upon  inevitably  ability  support  without  ot  care  services  their  requires and  where  that  meet  the  were  able  to  1 9 8 7 ).  Planning  they  specific  foods  that  were  to  aware of  specific  of the food  foods were  that  not only  able  to the specific  t o s t a t e why t h e y  belonged  i n the  to  distinguish  nutritious  nutritious to give  these  and  for their  examples  categories,  perceived  groups. as w e l l  as b e i n g  as not b e i n g  food groups  aso able  perceived  perceived  belonged  also able  they  were  a l l mothers  belonged  types  which  Mothers  whcih  but  foods  of they  t o be  groups.  However, nutritious certain  themselves  parent  their to  which  which they  those  to  In a d d i t i o n , mothrs  children. foods  well  right  indicated  showed t h a t  those  t o prove  (Vogel,  a n d Menu  Results  between  may  access  from  SKILLS  Nutritional  of  the  c h i l d r e n removed  the Ministry intervened  a chance  demonstrate gain  PARENTING  often,  actions  i n that.  parents  as  that  them w i t h  parents.  This  had had t h e i r  their  balanced  meals  perceptions meal  ( e.g.hot  of  varied.  dogs and f r i e s )  what Their  constituted perception  as b e i n g  a of  healthy for  'i  their  c h i l d r e n may  afford  rather  constituted  and  of  aspect the  that  behaviour  in  frustrated  and  due  role  models  and  experiences. as  and  indicate  their  This  skills  i n every  indicates  that but  were they  inappropriate  result,  to  they  their  felt  to  appropriate  important  application life  difficulties  incidental  are  learning for  of  (Rutter,  that  the  they  perceived  they  scenarios that  mentally  necessary  children,  exposure  exposure  day  most  chidlren.  limited  the  the  the  appropriate  1983).  Emergency  chidlren,  workshops,  as  a  indicates that  their  suggested  to  what  a l l mothers  manage  as  their  as  their  to  and  experiences  items  successfully  k n o w how  minimal  well  skills  Findings to  to  Although  disciplining  area  to  Such  Home S a f e t y  of  helpless with  more  actually  determine  disciplining  children,  may  could  Management  didn't  in this  they  inabilityto  parenting.  they  what  meal.  of  their  be  to  perceived  Research  acqusition  due  their  importance  perceived  caregiving  be  Behaviour  mothers  difficult aware  than  a balanced  Discipline All  well  were  with  safe  were  as  also  related to  not  being able  mothers  environment.  from are  only  able  unsafe  for  to  emergency  support  handicapped  for a  mothers  respond  situations.  the able  training to  learn  75  In  terms  similar their  t o those study,  training take the  of previous  Tymchuk  precautions  provide  reinforcers and  relating  used as  In mothers  terms  that  they  are  consistent  Hanrahan  setting,  isolation  from  contrast,  Winik  their  s i t u a t i o n s and a  decrease  in  they  with  others  didn't  adults  that  to primary  their  children  were  not wanted.  previous  found  handicapped  "are v i r t u a l l y  h a d f r i e n d s who programmes  and  participated in social  in a  i n a world  the majority they  that  despite  live  a r o u n d them" of  In  Such  in  that  adults  living  many  friends.  research  (1981)  that  them,  many  with Lusthaus  around  have  they  found  indicated  behaviour.  non-handicapped people (1987)  to interact  as opposed  that  mentally  recreational study  felt  and  many  community  social  parent to  interact with  of s o c i a l i z i n g  findings  handicapped  to  appropriate  often  that  to  ability  reinforcement  they  fact  In  i n their  s t i m u l a t i n g environments  addition  the  (1987).  exposure  t o the mothers' a b i l i t i e s  strategy  indicated  Lusthaus,  increase  are  Stimulation  verbal  a  t o encourage  that  here  accidents.  socially  many m o t h e r s  & Anderson  found  i n emergency  and S o c i a l  Findings and  et a l .  l e d t o an  o f home  Interaction  the findings  o f Tymchuk, A n d r o n  workshops  numbe  research,  of  (p.25).In mentally  met a t w o r k s h o p s o r  that  many  activities.  subjects  in  SUPPORT  SERVICES  Similarities In  i n Formal  both  formal  and Family  and f a m i l y  underlying  principle  handicaps.  Particularly,  and and to  procedures i n times  parents  systems  support  areas  made  individual.  The  parameters  offered  this  which  many  enables  the  The m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l n a t u r e  i s based  i n both  of  formal and family  Support  the provision  The r e q u e s t s  the  provision  services  i s palced within of behaviour  same  extent  as  the r e l a t i o n s h i p  of  rendered  i t  a  between  service  may t a k e  formal  to  within  the c l i e n t  support  in  from  organization i s  t h e same t i m e  is  dissimilar  are placed  i n family  of care i n  a n d e x p e c t a t i o n s made  The p r o f e s s i o n a l  scope  therefore,  upon  and t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p  organization  the  of  and Family  of relatives. for  to  mental  behaviours  and resources  organizations are inherently  responsible  The  support  i s apparent  o f need.  professional  those  with  a n d a i d on a d a y t o d a y b a s i s  impcat  between Formal  Formal  of  i s an  of support.  Differences  specific  persons  there  p a r e n t s may b e p r o v i d e d t h r o u g h  supported.  of support  for  systems,  supportive a c t i v i t i e s ,  The  i t i s the  to feel  concept  care  of c r i s i s .  and  support  sustenance  mentally handicapped  channels  the  give  of  Support  the time  and the  constraints. i s not defined support,  any course.  and  77  Formal  Support  In  this  receiving  study,  parents  support  from  workshops,additional when  required,  Life-skill  empathetic-showing  being  of  the  parents  Support readily of  workers  from  available  the  mentally  material  t h a t was  and  where  the  undestanding  was  not  the  low  mainly The  parent  presented  to  results  the the  of  complexity  indicated but  adapt  content  t o meet  Mothers t h e y were very  good,  they  would  children.  and have  from  without great  However,  the  that  the  only  t o meet t h e  needs  example,  simplified,  such  For  prenatal  only also  is a  example,  classes  bing there  need  facilitate  modification  programs.  material  the  to  was  presented. a  need  modify  to and  needs.  the  their  not  was  modified to  in  the  their  being well  w o r k s h o p s was  other  is  in  the  For  However,  there  indicated  receiving  tailored  skills.  not  as  for  workshops  was  of  supportive  concern  mothers.  in  Mothers  described  content  that  support  very  were  children.  attendance  provide the  also  i n the  implemented  percentage due  the  handicapped  of  and  training  i t was  necessary,  always  as  they  services.  were  to  associations,  therefore,  being  interest  addition  training  local  of  workers  as w e l l  but  and  as  in  parent  their  availability  life-skill  very  from  the  perceived  roles.  support  available  with  that,  the  was  satisfied  their  indicated  general  parent support  difficulty parents  quality  training from in  stated  support  workshops  these  coping that  of  was  workshops, with  changes  their in  the  structure  of  Specifically, sessions home  sessions  such  changes  visits,  so  that  training  should  a longer period  skills  include  mothers  to  those  discipline.  i n helping  provide  socially  than  "hands-on"  i n the focus  of the  parenting  on o t h e r s . E x a m p l e s  of parenting which  also  appropriate indicated  them t o d e v e l o p  stimulating  study  satisfied received  the  of  skills of such  would  enable  strategies  t t they needed  ways by w h i c h  of more  they  could  mothers  were  environments.  Support  This  not  more  on c e r t a i n  apply  Some m o t h e r s  support  Family  and  get  t h e number  Many m o t h e r s p e r c e i v e d t h a t t h e  aspects  develop  would  focus  of time  beneficial.  d e c r e a s i n g t h e number o f  f o r changes  expressed.  workshops  more  and i n c r e a s i n g  they  Suggestions  content were a l s o  be  included  at the associations  experiences.  for  would  with from  extended home  family  the local to family the  members  In  that  their  they  also  chidlren.  support.  were  two  Such  from  support  satisfaction  was  to  with  interact which  of family  their  most  extended  affected  the  support. mothers  husbands.  involved  also  support  o f a spouse i n  not only shared  actively  such  of  The p r e s e n c e  families,  support  were  and the q u a l i t y  factors  and the q u a l i t y  husbands  although  associations,  opportunity  two-parent  considerable  that  the availability  and  availability  indicated  received  They  indicated  the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s but themselves  affected  how w e l l  with  their  the mothers  79  coped w i t h role  of  the  their  family  least  their  children. support  levels  of  Previous  indicated  stress,  parents  respect  were  indicated  to  support  that  such  their  extended  families  them.  Those  m o t h e r s who  members  of t h e i r  support  lived  failies  and  support.  Conclusions In  handicaps  mental  results  t o persons  as t h o s e  who  who  they  handicpas  providing This  and  study  structured, focus  on  More  such  this the  as  study same  from that  them  can  degree  i n this  t h e most  showed  with moral  of  an  be  mental Mothers  understanding The  were  skills  those  discipline  of and  environments. that  t o meet  support  where  discipline  services  should  the needs of persons  specifically, and  of  only  study.  difficult  strategies  indicated  directive,  skills  since  reported  p r o v i d e d them w i t h  study  stimulating  also  handicaps.  support  d i s c u s s e d i n the study.  be m o d i f i e d a n d s i m p l i f i e d mental  of  in this  applying  socially  also  have  p e r c e i v e d t o be  developing  most  not a v a i l a b l e  not o n l y helped  participated  the parenting s k i l l s  which  families,  Study  conclusion,  generalised  of  of the  extended  from  at considerable distance  chores, but they  emotional  support 1983).  was  the  reported  & Cross,  did receive  extended  m o t h e r s who  receiving  from  the household  with  that  h u s b a n d s ( G a l l e g h e r , Bechman, With  research examining  they  should  be  with more  necessary,  they  and  stimulation,  social  should  which  the  mothers  cope  with.  Limitations  size  the  study  and  therefore, who  was  limited  by  mentally  of  the  nature  and  the  findings.  In  various  local  affected  the  of  affected  the  Future whose  the  socially  validity  Future  research  socio-economic  of  a  data  also  spent  in  that  were  a l l local  control  group  to  generalize  was  of  local  not  associations in  the  possible and  selected  training  variability  consistency of  i t was  their  sample  types  Such i t was  of  of  the  had  have  sample from  to  who  surveyed  it difficult  their  varied.  accuracy  those  lack  since  they  lack  to  support  from  that  and  this  assocations,the  for  Suggestions For  to  sample  generalized  In a d d i t i o n ,  in  made  small  be  population  result,  addition,  the  the  potential  difficult  only  study  the  r e s u l t s . Since  affected  most  relatively  handicap.  support  have  interviews,  have the  a  time  may  the  can  i n the  mothers were r e c e i v i n g  workshops  the  such  of  the  mothers  as  receiving  amount  by  training  not  the  being  results  mental  parent  associations  the  the  handicpped  receiving  from  limited  participated  same d e g r e e  as  Study  The  persons the  of  perceived  and  training may  to  that  have  tape a l l  uniformity  may  c o l l e c t i o n . Furthermore,  desirable  responses  may  have  data.  Research could  include  backgrounds  are  a  group  similar  of to  families those  of  81  persons  with  mental  studied  could  workers  of  handicaps with  also  the  and  mental  handicaps. include  parenting  compare  between  of  skills  parenting  from  parent  m o t h e r s who  training  the  useful  aspect  p e r c e p t i o n s of  skills  of  persons  to the  of  identify two  groups.  mothers  workshops  a r e nor r e c e i v i n g  and  with  are  can  be  such  of  mental persons any  perceptions  receiving compared  support.  be  skill  investigate  Finally,  who  to  life  such p e r c e p t i o n s w i t h those  handicaps  discrepancies  Another  support to  those  REFERENCES A b i d i n , R. ( 1 9 8 2 ). P a r e n t i n q Sciences Press .  skills.  New Y o r k :  Human  A n d r o n , L . , & S t u r m , M.L. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . " I s I d o " i n t h e r e p e r t o i r e of the retarded? A study of t h e functioning of married retarded couples. Mental R e t a r d a t i o n , 11., 3 1 - 3 4 . B r o w n , B. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . S o c i a l a n d p s y c h o l o g i c a l c o r r e l a t e s o f h e l p s e e k i n g b e h a v i o u r among u r b a n a d u l t s . American J o u r n a l o f Community P s y c h o l o g y , 6 ( 5 ) , 425-439. B u d d , K, & G r e e n s p a n , S ( 1 9 8 6 ) . R e s e a r c h o n m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d p a r e n t s . I n J . G a l l a g h e r a n d P. V i e t z e (Eds.), F a m i l i e s of handicapped persons: Research programs and policy issues London: B a l t i m o r e . B u d d , K. , S. G r e e n s p a n , S. ( 1 9 8 4 ). M e n t a l l y retarded m o t h e r s . I n E.A. B l e c h m a n ( E d . ) , B e h a v i o u r modification w i t h women ( p p . 4 7 7 - 5 7 6 ) . New Y o r k : G u i l d f o r d Press . Court  o f A p p e a l - Q u e s n e l . ( 1 9 8 8 ) . The S u p e r i n t e n d e n t W e l f a r e v s D i a n e J a n s e n . Q u e s n e l , B.C.  of Child  Court  o f A p p e a l - V a n c o u v e r . ( 1 9 8 8 ) . The S u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f C h i l d W e l f a r e v s J o a n n e P a t t e r s o n . V a n c o u v e r ,B.C..  C r a f t , M., & C r a f t , A. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . S e x a n d t h e m e n t a l l y handi capped. London: Rout ledge & Kegan P a u l . D e ' A t h , E. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . T e a c h i n g p a r e n t i n g F a m i l y T h e r a p y , 5, 3 2 1 - 3 3 5 .  skills.  Journal of  D e ' A t h , E. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . I n t e r v e n t i o n s w i t h f a m i l i e s : Preparing the way f o r t e a c h i n g p a r e n t i n g s k i l l s . J o u r n a l o f F a m i l y T h e r a p y , 4, 2 2 9 - 2 4 5 . D i c k e r s o n , M.A. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . M e n t a l h a n d i c a p a n d p a r e n t i n g : R i g h t s o f f u l l c i t i z e n s h i p . C a n a d i a n J o u r n a l on M e n t a l R e t a r d a t i o n , 3 5 , 4 0-43. D i c k i n , K . L . , & R y a n , B.A. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . S t e r i l i z a t i o n a n d t h e m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d . C a n a d a ' s M e n t a l H e a l t h , 31_, 4 - 8 . E d g e r t o n , R.B. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . I s s u e s r e l a t i n g t o t h e q u a l i t y o f l i f e among m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d p e r s o n s . I n M.J. Begab & S.A. R i c h a r d s o n ( E d s . ) , The m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d a n d society: A s o c i a l science perspective (pp.127-141). B a l t i m o r e : U n i v e r s i t y Park P r e s s .  8 3  E d g e r t o n , R.B. Cambridge  ( 1 9 6 7 ) .The c l o a k o f University Press.  competence.  London:  E y b e r g , S. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . A p a r e n t - c h i l d i n t e r a c t i o n m o d e l treatment o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l d i s o r d e r s on e a r l y childhood. Unpublished Manuscript. San D i e g o .  for  the  F e l d m a n , M. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . R e s e a r c h o n p a r e n t i n g b y m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d p e r s o n s . P s y c h i a t r i c P e r s p e c t i v e s on M e n t a l R e t a r d a t i o n , 9, 7 7 7 - 7 9 6." ~" ~ F l o o r , L . , B a x t e r , D., R o s e n , M., & Z o f e n , L. ( 9 1 7 5 ) . A s u r v e y o f m a r r i a g e s among p r e v i o u s l y i n s t i t u t i o n a l i s e d r e t a r d a t e s . M e n t a l R e t a r d a t i o n , 1 3 , 3 3-37. Fotheringham, parents. Centre  J.B. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . M e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d p e r s o n s as Unpublished Manuscript. Ontario: Surrey Place  F o t h e r i n g h a m , J.B. ( 1 9 7 1 ) . The concept of s o c i a l competence as a p p l i e d t o m a r r i a g e and c h i l d ere i n t h o s e c l a s s i f i e d as m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d . C a n a d i a n M e d i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n J o u r n a l , 104 , 8 1 3 - 8 7 6 . G a l l a g h e r , J . , B e c k m a n , P., & C r o s s , A. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . F a m i l i e s h a n d i c a p p e d c h i l d r e n : S o u r c e s of s t r e s s and i t s a m e l i o r a t i o n . E x c e p t i o n a l C h i l d r e n , 5 0 ( 1 ) , 10-19.  of  G e i j e r - K a r l s s o n , M, & G i l l b e r g , C. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . C h i l d r e n b o r n t o m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d women: A 21 y e a r f o l l o w - u p s t u d y o f 41 c a s e s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l M e d i c i n e , 13_j_ 8 9 1 - 8 9 4 . G e r m a n , U., & M a i s t o , A. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f a p e r c e i v e d f a m i l y support system t o the i n s t i t u t i o n a l placement of m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d c h i l d r e n . E d u c a t i o n and T r a i n i n g o f the M e n t a l l y R e t a r d e d , 17(1 ) , 17-23. G i l h o o l , T., & G r a n , J . ( 1 9 8 5 ) . L e g a l r i g h t s o f d i s a b l e d p a r e n t s . I n K. T h u r m a n ( E d . ) , C h i l d r e n o f h a n d i c a p p e d p a r e n t s : R e s e a r c h and c l i n i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s (pp 1 1 - 3 2 ) . Baltimore: Academic Press. Greenspan,S. (1979). S o c i a l i n t e l l i g e n c e i n the r e t a r d e d . In N . E l l i s ( E d . ) , Handbook o f m e n t a l r e t a r d a t i o n (pp.4 0 67)New J e r s e y : E r l b a u m . G r e e n s p a n , S., & B u d d , K. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . R e s e a r c h on mentally r e t a r d e d p a r e n t s . I n J . G a l l a g h e r & P. V i e t z e ( E d ' s . ) , F a m i l i e s o f h a n d i c a p p e d p e r s o n s (pp 1 1 5 - 1 2 7 ) . B a l t i m o r e , Maryland:: Academic Press.  H a a v i k , S. (1.986 ). M a r r i a g e a n d p a r e n t h o o d . I n J.Summer ( E d . ) , The r i g h t t o g r o w u p - A n i n t r o d u c t i o n t o a d u l t s w i t h d e v e l o p m e n t a l d i s a b i l i t i e s (pp 67-90). B a l t i m o r e , M a r y l a n d : P a u l B r o o k e s P u b l i s h i n g Company. H a a v i k , S., & M e n n i n g e r , ( 1 9 8 1 ) . S e x u a l i t y , l a w a n d t h e person d e v e l o p m e n t a l l y d i s a b l e d person. Mary1and: B r o o k e s P u b l s i h i n g Company. H e r t z , R.A. (1979). Retarded persons i n neglect proceedings: Erroneous assumptions of p a r e n t a l inadequacy. S t a n f o r d Law R e v i e w , 3 1 , 7 8 5 - 8 0 9 . I n s t i t u t e o f Law , R e s e a r c h and Reform. (1989). Competence a n d human r e p r o d u c t i o n . E d m o n t o n , A l b e r t a . I n s t i t u t e o f Law, R e s e a r c h d e c i s i o n s : M i n o r s and Edmonton, A l b e r t a .  a n d R e f o r m . ( 1988 ). S t e r i 1 i z a t i o n m e n t a l l y incompetent a d u l t s .  J o h n s o n , P. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . The s e x u a l i t y o f m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d p e o p l e : A d r a g o n w i t h two h e a d s . I n R . B r o w n & M. Bayer (Eds. ) , R e s e a r c h , d e m o n s t r a t i o n and p r a c t i c e s : Ten y e a r s of p r o g r e s s . K a t z m a n , S. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . P a r e n t a l r i g h t s o f the m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d : The a d v i s a b i l i t y a n d c o n s t i t u t i o n a b i 1 i t y o f t h e t r e a t m e n t o f r e t a r d e d p a r e n t s i n New Y o r k S t a t e . C o l u m b i a J o u r n a l o f Law a n d S o c i a 1 _ • P r o b i ems, 16 5 2 1 529 . L  Law  Reform Commission of Canada. (1979). P r o t e c t i o n of L i f e : S t e r i l i z a t i o n . (Working Paper No.24). Ottawa, Canada.  L u s t h a u s , E . , H a n r a h a n , J . , & L u s t h a u s , C. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . I s s u e s i n improving q u a l i t y of l i f e . Mental R e t a r d a t i o n , 2 9 ( 3 ) , 24-27. M a c k l i n , R., & G a y l i n , W. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . M e n t a l r e t a r d a t i o n s t e r i l i z a t i o n : A problem of competency and p a t e r n a l i s m . New Y o r k : P l e n i u m P r e s s .  and  M a t t i n s o n , J . ( 1 9 7 3 ) . M a r r i a g e a n d m e n t a l h a n d i c a p . I n F.de L a C r u z & C. L a V e c k ( E d s . ) , Human s e x u a l i t y a n d m e n t a l r e t a r d e d ( p p . 1 6 9 -186 ) . New Y o r k : B r u n n e r / M a z e 1. M i c k e l s o n , P. ( 1 9 4 9 ) . C a n m e n t a l l y d e f i c i e n t p a r e n t s b e helped to give t h e i r c h i l d r e n b e t t e r care? American J o u r n a l of M e n t a l D e f i c i e n c y , 53, 516-534.  85  M i c k e l s o n , P . ( 1 9 4 7 ) . T h e f e e b l e m i n d e d p a r e n t : A s t u d y o f 90 f a m i l y cases. American J o u r n a l of Mental D e f i c i e n c y , 51, 644-653. Mira,  M., & R o d y , I . ( 1 9 8 0 ) . P a r e n t i n g c o m p e t e n c i e s o f retarded persons: A c r i t i c a l review. Unpub1ished M a n u s c r i p t . The U n i v e r s i t y o f K a n s a s M e d i c a l Centr e.  P e l t z , A. ( 1 9 8 9 ) . B a r r e t s v s C h i l d a n d f a m i l y s e r v i c e s o f W i n n i p e g W e s t . P u b l i c Law I n t e r e s t C e n t r e . Winnipeg, Manitoba. P o l s t e r , R., & D a n g e l , R. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . P a r e n t t r a i n i n g : F o u n d a t i o n s o f r e s e a r c h a n d p r a c t i c e . New Y o r k : Guildford Press. R a e t z e n , M. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . L e g a l r i g h t s o f m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d c i t i z e n s i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . V a n c o u v e r , B.C: Law F o u n d a t i o n o f B.C. R e e d , C , & R e e d , W. study. Toronto:  ( 1 9 6 5 ). M e n t a l W.B.Saunders.  retardation:  A  family  R i o u x , M. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . T h e r i g h t t o c o n t r o l o n e ' s own b o d y : look a t Eve's d e c i s i o n . E n t o u r a g e , 2 ( 1 ) , 25-30.  A  Rosenberg, & M c T a t e , S. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . I n t e l l e c t u a l l y handicapped m o t h e r s : P r o b l e m s a n d p r o s p e c t s . C h i 1 d r e n T o d a y , 3, 24-26 . R u t t e r , M. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . P a r e n t i n g i n t w o g e n e r a t i o n s : b a c k w a r d s a n d l o o k i n g f o r w a r d s . I n N. M a d g e F a m i l i e s a t r i s k ( p p . 6 0 -8 4 ) .  Looking (Ed.),  S c a l l y , B. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . M a r r i a g e a n d m e n t a l h a n d i c a p : Some o b s e r v a t i o n s i n N o r t h e r n I r e l a n d . I n F. d e L a C r u z & C. L a V e c k ( E d s . ) , Human s e x u a l i t y a n d m e n t a l r e t a r d e d ( p p . 1 8 6 - 1 9 5 ) . New Y o r k : B r u n n e r / M a z e 1 . S c h m i d t , R. ( 1 9 8 9 ) . M e n t a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d a d u l t a s p a r e n t . U n p u b l s h e d M a n u s c r i p t . V a n c o u v e r , B.C.: M i n i s t r y o f S o c i a l S e r v i c e s and Housing. S h a m a n , J . ( 1 9 7 8 ) . P e r s o n s who a r e m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d : T h e i r r i g h t t o m a r r y a n d h a v e c h i l d r e n . F a m i l y Law Q u a r t e r l y , 1 2 ( 1 ) , 61-84. S o m m e r s , P., & N c y z , G. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . M o n i t o r i n g c o n s u m e r s a t i s f a c t i o n with the c l i n i c a l services provided to  exceptional c h i l d r e n . American H e a l t h , 6 8 ( 9 ) , 903 - 9 0 8 . " T a r n o p o l s k y , W. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . The C a n a d i a n Toronto: McClelland & Stewart.  J o u r n a l of  Bill  of  Public  Rights.  T u c k e r , M.B., & J o h n s o n , 0. ( 1 9 8 8 ) . C o m p e t e n c e p r o m o t i n g v s . competence i n h i b i t i n g s o c i a l support f o r m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d mothers. U n p u b l i s h e d M a n u s c r i p t . U n i v e r s i t y of Oregon. T y m c h u k , A., A n d r o n , L . , & A n d e r s o n , S. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . Home d a n g e r and s a f e t y t r a i n i n g w i t h m e n t a l l y retarded mothers: L i v i n g i n d e p e n d e n t l y or w i t h a r e l a t i v e . Unpublished M a n u s c r i p t . U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a : Los A n g e l e s . T y m c h u k , A., A n d r o n , L. & U n g e r , 0. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . P a r e n t s w i t h m e n t a l h a n d i c a p s and adequate c h i l d c a r e - A r e v i e w . M e n t a l H a n d i c a p , 15, 49-54. United Nations General Assembly. (1988). r i g h t s o f t h e m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d . New Nations Publications.  D e c l a r a t i o n on York:United  the  V i t e l l o , S., & S o s k i n , R. ( 1 9 8 5 ). M e n t a l r e t a r d a t i o n - I t s s o c i a l a n d l e g a l c o n t e x t . New J e r s e y : P r e n t i c e H a l l . V o g e l , P. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . 33-39 . Wald,  The  right  to parent.  Entourage,  M. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . S t a t e i n t e r v e n t i o n o n b e h a l f o f children": A search for r e a l i s t i c standards. Law R e v i e w , 2 7 , 9 8 5 - 1 0 4 0 .  W i c k e r , L . , Wasow, M., & H a t f i e l d , E. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . s t r e n g t h s i n f a m i l i e s of deve1opmentally c h i l d r e n . S o c i a l Work, 2 8 ( 4 ) , 313-315.  2(1). "neglected Stanford  Seeking disabled  W i n i k , L. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . The m i l d l y r e t a r d e d a s p a r e n t s : A d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e p r a c t i c e s o f two m i l d l y r e t a r d e d couples. Unpublished Manuscript. Unpublished M a n u s c r i p t . U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , Los A n g e l e s . W o l f e n s b e r g e r , W. ( 1 9 8 4 ). A r e c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f n o r m a l i z a t i o n as s o c i a l r o l e v a l o r i z a t i o n . Canadian J o u r n a l o f M e n t a l R e t a r d a t i o n , 3 4 . ( 2 ) , 19 5 - 2 0 1 . W o l f e n s b e r g e r , W. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . The o r i g i n a n d n a t u r e o f o u r i n s t i t u t i o n a l m o d e l . I n R.B. K u g e l & A. Shearer ( E d s . ), C h a n g i n g p a t t e r n s i n r e s i d e n t i a l s e r v i c e s f o r the m e n t a l l y r e t a r d e d (pp.78-91). Washington: D.C: P r e s i d e n t ' s C o m m i t t e e on M e n t a l R e t a r d a t i o n .  8 7  Z e t l i n , A., W e i s n e r , T., & G a l l i m o r e , R. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Diversity, s h a r e d and f u n c t i o n i n g : A s t u d y of p a r e n t i n g by retarded persons. I n S.K. Thurman ( E d . ) , C h i l d r e n of h a n d i c a p p e d p a r e n t s : R e s e a r c h and c l i n i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s (p.69-94). B a l t i m o r e : Academic Press.  88  APPENDIX PERSONAL  PROFILE  SHEET  NAME AGE  SEX  DISABILITY/HANDICAP EDUCATION  L E V E L OF  OF  PARENT  PARENT  i ) Secondary School i i ) Elementary School---i ii )College iv)Other INCOME  (Source)  i)Welfare Assistance i i)Employed i ii )Other OTHER SUPPORT  SERVICES  i )Infant Development Worker i i)Homemaker iii Counselling i v ) P u b l i c H e a l t h Nurse v) S o c i a l Worker v i ) L i f e S k i l l Workers NUMBER OF C H I L D R E N AGE  S E X -  S P E C I F I C H A N D I C A P OF  CHILD  A  DISCIPLINE 1. Do y o u t h i n k  i t i s important t o d i s c i p l i n e  2. ( I f  y e s ) How  do y o u d i s c i p l i n e  3. ( I f  n o ) Why  your  your  child?  child?  not?  4.In what c i r c u m s t a n c e s do y o u f e e l d i s c i p l i n e your c h i l d ?  i t i s important t o  NUTRITION l.If give  I gave you t h e four f o o d groups, I would l i k e you t o me a n e x a m p l e o f t h r e e f o o d s t h a t b e l o n g t o t h a t g r o u p .  2.What d o t h i n k  a r e good examples  of nutritious  foods?  3.What s o r t o f a m e a l w o u l d y o u c o n s i d e r t o b e g o o d c h i l d ? ( T h e y may g i v e a n e x a m p l e o f a c h i d l ) .  f o r your  4 .What child?  f o r your  b)Why  kinds  of  do  you think  a r e not good  not?  HOME S A F E T Y AND 1. How  foods  EMERGENCY  do y o u make y o u r  2 . I n y o u r home, w h a t your c h i l d from: i)failing  from  ii) slipping 3. W h i c h h o u s e h o l d  home  s a f e f o r your  steps  would  child?  you take  from  preventing  t h e window  on t h e k i t c h e n items would  floor  y o u c o n s i d e r t o be  poisonous?  90  4. I f y o u r c h i l d h a s s o m e t h i n g p o i s o n o u s w h a t w o u l d f i r s t t h i n g y o u w o u l d d o ? Who w o u l d y o u p h o n e ?  5. I f your chidl d o e s c h o k e , how c h o k i n g ? Who w o u l d y o u p h o n e r i g h t  7.At h e r / h i s child? Why?  a g e , what  sort  would away?  of toys  I N T E R A C T I O N AND S O C I A L  STIMULATION  1.How  child  do y o u show y o u r  that  i ) p h y s i c a l c o n t a c t (hugs i i ) Verbal expressions i i i ) Other 2 . When y o u r c h i l d d o e s you r e i n f o r c e him? i )verbal praise i i ) give the chils i i i ) hug h i m i v ) d o n ' t know  something  you love  from  f o r your  her/him?  that  you approve  o f , how d o  something  do y o u c u d d l e y o u r  that  you don't  approve o f ,  child?  i t ' simportant t o hug your  6.Do y o u m i x w i t h age a s y o u r s ?  othr  n o t , why n o t ?  him  are not safe  5.Why do y o u t h i n k  b)If  stop  etc.)  3. When y o u r c h i l d d o e s s o m e t h i n g how d o y o u l e t h i m k n o w ?  4.How o f t e n  you  be t h e  families  who  have  child?  children  thesame  91  7.Do with  7b)  you feel i t ' s important other children?  Why o r Why  t o encourage  2.If  you attend  not,  child  any prenatal  SERVICES  classes?  why n o t ?  3. ( I f y e s ) D i d y o u f i n d not?  4.How l o n g h a v e associations?  5.How h a s t h i s  you been  type  these  classes  receiving  of support  helpful?  support  helped  from  I f not,  your  7.How d o y o u f e e l you would support that you a r e getting?  8.Do y o u f e e l asscociation?  that  areas  cope  do y o u f e e l  that  enough  organizations  help  you  for  from  you are getting  i )Time Management i i )Shopping/Menu P l a n n i n g i i i )Dudgetting iv)Child Discipline v) P r o v i d i n g a s o c i a l l y s t i m u l a t i n g 10.Which other  local  that  i f i t weren't  you a r e g e t t i n g  why  you?  6 .Wher w o u l d y o u g o i f i t w e r e n ' t f o r t h e s u p p o r t were r e c e i v i n g from your l o c a l association?  9 .In what help in?  t o mix  not?  I D E N T I F I C A T I O N AND A S S E S S M E N T OF S U P P O R T  l.Did  your  the  your  t h e most  environment  are you receiving help  from?  c  11.Do  you f r i e n d s  or family that  come a n d h e l p y o u a t h o m e ?  12.If  s o , how o f t e n d o t h e y h e l p y o u a n d how d o t h e y  you?  !2  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054623/manifest

Comment

Related Items