Page 53 - Social networks of people with mild intellectual disabilities: characteristics and interventions

Network Characteristics, Satisfaction, Wishes and Quality of Life
3.1 Introduction
Attention to the social networks of people with intellectual disabilities (ID) has
increased in recent decades. This has been under the influence of the quality
of life (QOL) concept, which encompasses interpersonal relations in addition to
personal development, self-determination, rights, participation and emotional,
physical and material well-being (Verdugo, Navas, Gómez, & Schalock, 2012).
QOL is increasingly being used to measure the well-being of the person in both
practice and research. QOL has both subjective and objective components (e.g.
Cummins, 2005; Nota, Soresi, & Perry, 2006; Verdugo et al., 2012). Objective 3 components represent externally manifested items such as income; subjective components consist of the perception of a person’s life in general or of specific
aspects of it (Miller & Chan, 2008). In QOL research structured questionnaires are used, yielding standardized results, but also more general measures on subjective well-being (SWB; i.e. satisfaction with life as a whole) (Cummins, 1995, 2005; Miller & Chan, 2008). SWB can be measured asking ‘How do you feel about your life in general?’ (Andrews & Withey, 1976 in Cummins, 1995). This global assessment of QOL is not framed by any objective conditions or ideas of the interviewer what might be important factors; instead it refers to all aspects of life relevant to the respondent (Barrington-Leigh, 2009).
The indicators used in QOL research differ, but indicators of the quality of interpersonal relations and social inclusion are most often referred to (Schalock, 2004). One of the indicators of the quality of interpersonal relations is the social network of the person (Verdugo et al., 2012). This network can be understood from two perspectives: a structural one (e.g. in terms of size and frequency) and a functional one (e.g. in terms of perceived emotional and practical support) (Lunsky, 2006). In investigations of people with ID, attention is paid to both the structural and functional characteristics (e.g. Forrester-Jones et al., 2006; Robertson et al., 2001; van Asselt-Goverts, Embregts, & Hendriks, 2013). With respect to structural characteristics, research shows that the social networks of people with ID are often small and that the only contact with people without ID is family and/or professionals (e.g. Lippold & Burns, 2009; Verdonschot, de Witte, Reichrath, Buntinx, & Curfs, 2009). People with ID have also recently been shown to have a high frequency of contact with their network members (van Asselt-Goverts et al., 2013). For instance, they saw their parents and friends almost twice a week; siblings, other acquaintances
51