Page 32 - Social networks of people with mild intellectual disabilities: characteristics and interventions

Chapter 2
Groenewegen (2011) found people with mild ID to have more friends (either with or without ID) than people with moderate ID although the majority of the people with mild ID still interacted very little with people without ID. Several studies found people living in a supported living accommodation to have more social contacts than people living in group homes or residential facilities (Forrester-Jones et al., 2006; McConkey, 2007; Robertson et al., 2001). However, physical presence within a community does not guarantee greater social inclusion and taking part in activities does not necessarily lead to meaningful social contact – particularly meaningful contact with individuals without ID (Ager, Myers, Kerr, Myles, & Green, 2001; Lippold & Burns, 2009). People with an ID living and working in society can still fall into isolation (Chenoweth & Stehlik, 2004). The social networks of people with ID are often small and the only contact with people without ID tends to be the family and professionals (e.g. Lippold & Burns, 2009; Verdonschot et al., 2009). To date, the main focus of research on the structural characteristics of social networks has been on the size and composition of the social network. Although this gives relevant information, there are more structural characteristics like (a) variety with regard to demographic characteristics; (b) accessibility; (c) structure of the ties, including length of the relationship, initiation of contact, frequency of contact and origin of the relationship (Baars, 1994). These characteristics are of importance because they provide insight into (a) the heterogeneity or homogeneity of the network; (b) the geographical distance between persons and their networks, possibly due to a move, which can contribute to social isolation; (c) the condition and nature of the ties, which provides information on the possibilities and limitations for the person with his network and the extent to which the client is able to maintain existing contacts and make new contacts (Baars, 1994). Interventions can be tailored to the results of analyses of these characteristics (van Asselt-Goverts et al., 2012).
With respect to the functional characteristics of the social networks of people with ID, research shows the main providers of both emotional and practical support to be support staff. Other network members with ID were the second most frequent providers of all types of support (Forrester-Jones et al., 2006). Obviously such support tends to be more reciprocal than the support provided by professionals. Meeting a need for ‘‘stability’’ and ‘‘connection’’ is underexposed in the research literature. According to Baars (1994), ‘‘stability’’ is the need to have ties which are maintained with a certain degree of preference
30