Diversity in Social Work

In order to fulfill the requirements of competency 2.1 on the learning contract. I opted to find a peer reviewed research article that discussed "the importance of diversity and difference in shaping life experiences in practice at the micro, mezzo, and macro levels." I chose Klotz's (2004) article Sociocultural study of intellectual disability: moving beyond labelling and social constructionist perspectives. This was a highly interesting article about how our labels and social constructionist perspectives. affect our treatment of those with intellectual disabilities and our interactions with them. The article began with Robert Edgerton's studies in the 1960s. In his study of mildly ID individuals in and out of institutionalized settings, Edgerton concluded that they were unable to live in situations deemed "normal" and "acceptable as an argument against deinstitutionalizing them (Klotz, 2004, p. 95). However he did attest that the great amount of literature in the field at the time was provided by people in the helping professions, so those with ID were never really perceived without their diagnosis. Thus, their diagnosis was the lens in which we treated them and perceived their abilities or lack thereof. He noted that because they didn't have language skills, they were without significant socialization and culture. This led to a conclusion that those who are profoundly ID, as being "less human than some infra-human species" (Klotz, 2004, p. 94). The author of this article notes that Edgerton never tried to conceive why people with ID are incapable of being a part of our culture and stigmatized in all parts of their lives. The author brings up the point of why is the societal view of intellectual disability is perceived as hopeless. Although Edgerton's views on the limitations of people with ID are no longer considered valid, he did open the door to studying them with more sensitivity to culture. In addition, his report on institutionalization and the ill effects it has was influential in changing US policies.
     The next study was considered pivotal because it involved the interview of two people who were mildly ID and formerly institutionalized. Bogdan and Taylor sought the perspectives of being labeled from these individuals and found that they felt it left them open to victimization, ostracizing, and abuse, as well as limited their opportunities. This was the first time that individuals were actually interviewed as opposed to observed. Interestingly enough, the two felt disdain at being put into the same category as those with severe intellectual disabilities, calling them "low lifes," in what may be a projection of their own experience with being labelled (Klotz, 2004, p. 97).
     Finally, the research of Goode was reflected upon. Goode immersed himself into the world of a woman named Chris, who was severely ID, blind, and deaf, as well as in an institution. Goode sought to translate Chris's actions in order to prove that there was meaning and purpose. He did find that she sought sensory stimulation through her interactions with her environment in a meaningful way. Too, although it was thought she did not communicate, she would engage in behaviors meant to convey messages to those around her, such as pull herself up to a dining table when she was hungry. 
     Klotz's article is a warning for those in the social work field to not limit the abilities of our clients based on the labels that society puts on them. It was a good reminder for me not to view individuals based on a diagnosis, but rather on personal experiences. 

Klotz, J. (2004). Sociocultural study of intellectual disability: moving beyond labeling and social constructionist perspectives. British Journal Of Learning Disabilities, 32(2), 93-104.

This entry corresponds with competency 2.2 (clients and constituencies as experts of their own experiences).