Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38082208›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2024

What's Good About Inclusion? An Ethical Analysis of the Ideal of Social Inclusion for People with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities.

Simon van der Weele, Femmianne Bredewold

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Simon van der WeeleDepartment Citizenship and Humanisation of the Public Sector, University of Humanistic Studies, Utrecht, The Netherlands. s.vanderweele@uvh.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9931-2394
Femmianne BredewoldDepartment Citizenship and Humanisation of the Public Sector, University of Humanistic Studies, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6231-8263
University of Humanistic Studies · NL

Funding

ZonMw 854011001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

'Social inclusion' is the leading ideal in services and care for people with intellectual disabilities in most countries in the Global North. 'Social inclusion' can refer simply to full equal rights, but more often it is taken to mean something like 'community participation'. This narrow version of social inclusion has become so ingrained that it virtually goes unchallenged. The presumption appears to be that there is a clear moral consensus that this narrow understanding of social inclusion is good. However, that moral consensus is not clear in the case of people with profound intellectual and/or multiple disabilities (PIMD), who are not able to express their needs and preferences verbally. Moreover, social inclusion has proven to be difficult to conceptualize and implement for people with PIMD. Therefore, it becomes imperative to ask about the ethical rationale of the narrow understanding of social inclusion. For what reasons do we think social inclusion is good? And do those reasons also apply for people with PIMD? This article addresses these questions by providing an ethical analysis of the ideal of social inclusion for people with PIMD. It discusses four ethical arguments for social inclusion and probes their relevance for people with PIMD. The article argues that none of these arguments fully convince of the value of the narrow understanding of social inclusion for people with PIMD. It ends with advocating for an ethical space for imagining a good life for people with PIMD otherwise.

Indexed as

Intellectual DisabilityPersons with DisabilitiesSocial InclusionEthical AnalysisHumansEthicsIntellectual disabilityProfound intellectual and/or multiple disabilitiesSocial inclusion

Identifiers

PMID38082208
PMCPMC11133059
OpenAlexW4389549779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.