Page 45 - Social networks of people with mild intellectual disabilities: characteristics and interventions

Structural and Functional Characteristics
A second noteworthy finding is that although the participants were living independently in the community for more than two years, approximately
a quarter of their social network consisted of professionals (e.g. support
staff). These professionals are highly appreciated by individuals with mild
ID, as indicated by the scores produced on the functional characteristics of
affection, preference (comparable with family/acquaintances) and practical/ 2 informational support (significantly higher when compared to family and
almost significantly higher when compared to acquaintances). Professionals
thus play an important role in the social networks of people with mild ID living
in the community. Staff members can be seen to be key agents in a wide range
of areas including the attainment of social inclusion goals for people with ID (McConkey & Collins, 2010) and behavioural interventions for people with ID
and challenging behaviour problems (Felce, Lowe, Beecham, & Hallam, 2000).
In recent research, however, support staff have indicated that they may be too
important for clients living in a community (van Asselt-Goverts et al., 2014).
This finding is in line with other research showing support staff to be the main
providers of both emotional and practical support (Forrester-Jones et al., 2006).
This situation can perhaps be explained by – on the one hand – so-called learned dependence which refers to the predisposition of individuals to rely on others
when they do not know what to do rather than trying to help themselves and
– on the other hand – the predisposition of professionals to act on the behalf
of people with ID rather than help them learn to do things themselves (van
Gennep, 1994). Support staff must thus recognize their importance and, when
it is decided to reduce their support, clearly discuss this with the client so that
he or she can work on meeting his or her needs for affection, connection, and practical/informational support via their informal network (i.e. family, friends, colleagues, neighbours and other acquaintances).
Several findings are noteworthy with respect to the other structural characteristics we examined: (a) the participants had a high frequency of contact with family and acquaintances; (b) the participants with ID considered themselves more often the main initiator of contact than the other members of their social networks; (c) only seven of the 33 participants mentioned neighbours on the MSNA and the neighbours who were mentioned were often reported as also having an ID and highly valued with respect to various functional characteristics; and finally (d) involvement in work or school appeared to be an important way of making friends. In professional practice, it is thus important that these findings be taken into account. In such a manner, interventions can
43