Journal of Intellectual Disabilities

http://jid.sagepub.com Adolescents with intellectual disabilities as victims of abuse

Shunit Reiter, Diane N. Bryen and Ifat Shachar Journal of Intellectual Disabilities 2007; 11; 371 DOI: 10.1177/1744629507084602 The online version of this article can be found at: http://jid.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/11/4/371

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Journal of Intellectual Disabilities can be found at: Email Alerts: http://jid.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://jid.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav Citations http://jid.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/11/4/371

Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

a rt i c l e

Adolescents with intellectual disabilities as victims of abuse

SHUNIT REITER D I A N E N. B RY E N I F AT S H AC H A R
University of Haifa, Israel Temple University, Philadelphia, USA University of Haifa, Israel
Journal of Intellectual Disabilities 2007 sage publications Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore vol 11(4) 371387 issn 1744-6295(084602)11:4 doi: 10.11771744629507084602

Abstract

Abuse of persons with disabilities continues to remain largely invisible, in spite of estimates suggesting that it is perpetrated against them more frequently than against those without disabilities. The aim of this study was to conduct an exploratory investigation regarding the frequency and type of abuse of a selected group of students with intellectual disabilities in one high school in Israel and compare the ndings with the frequency and type of abuse reported by non-disabled youth from a similar socioeconomic background. A total of 100 students answered the Ending the Silence questionnaire, 50 of them with intellectual and other disabilities. The main ndings indicate that students with intellectual and other disabilities suffered from abuse more frequently than their peers; most of the instances of abuse occurred within the close social environment of the victim and were repeated over time. abuse; disabilities; intellectual disabilities; sexual abuse; victimization

Keywords

Introduction
Crimes committed against people with disabilities are largely invisible, in spite of estimates suggesting that crimes perpetrated against them are more frequent than against those without disabilities (Bryen et al., 2003). Research to date has revealed that persons with developmental disabilities face a four to ten times greater risk of becoming victims of abuse than do people without disabilities (Sobsey, 1994). Not only is there a higher incidence of victimization of children and adults with developmental disabilities, but the abuse often goes unreported; or when reported, it tends to be disregarded. Even if the offenders are prosecuted and convicted, they 371
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

11 ( 4 )

often receive a lighter sentence than offenders who commit crimes against those without disabilities (Bryen, 2002). According to Petersilia (1998), a professor of criminology, in the 25 years of research in the sphere of criminal justice there has never been a topic so in need of research, attention and a policy as the victimization of people with developmental disabilities. Some of the ndings of the research carried out so far point to the seriousness of the situation: it appears that differences in the rate of victimization are most pronounced in the case of sexual assault (10.7 times as high) and robbery (12.7 times as high) (Petersilia, 1998).There is also a high probability of repeated victimization, because over time those who victimize people with disabilities come to regard them as easy prey, since crimes can be committed against them with little chance of detection or punishment. Children with any kind of disability are more than twice as likely to be physically abused and almost twice as likely to be sexually abused as children without disabilities (Marini et al., 2001; Newport, 1991; Petersilia, 1998; Vig and Kaminer, 2002). Persons with developmental disabilities appear to face greater risk of victimization regardless of the environment in which they live, and the offenders are often the service providers (Mansell et al., 1992; Sullivan and Knutson, 2000). Offenders are drawn to victims with disabilities because they are considered to be vulnerable and unable to seek help or report the crime (Lang and Frenzel, 1988). More than half of the crimes committed against victims with developmental disabilities are never reported to the authorities, and when they are reported, they are often handled administratively rather than through criminal prosecution (Sobsey, 1994). When crimes are reported, there are lower rates of police follow-up, prosecution and convictions. When convictions do occur, sentences for the crimes committed are lighter, particularly for sexual assault (Sobsey and Doe, 1991). The trauma suffered by victims with all types of disabilities is just as severe emotionally, psychologically and socially as the trauma experienced by people without disabilities who survive crimes; in fact the emotional trauma may be even more severe and long-lasting (Finkelhor, 1998; Marchant and Page, 1992; Westcott, 1993). Persons with developmental disabilities are assumed to have difculty serving as credible witnesses in court, but the evidence does not support this stereotype (Perlman and Ericson, 1992). Existing crime prevention programs and service agencies for victims have largely failed to acknowledge the high risk of victimization among persons with developmental disabilities or their special needs (Baladerian, 1991). Among persons with intellectual disabilities, the reported rates of all types of abuse are higher for both children and adults (Khemka et al., 2005). Women are at a higher risk of sexual abuse and domestic violence (Furey, 1994; Swan, 2007). It 372
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

appears that apart from outright crimes, there is a grey area between crimes and bullying, the difference not being clearly denable. Even though bullying is not considered an offence against the law, the suffering inicted on the victim may not be less serious than offences perceived as crimes and punishable accordingly. The research presented here was conducted in Israel. The situation in Israel regarding offenders committing crimes or abuse against persons with disabilities is similar to that described above. There is a lack of awareness of the extent of the phenomenon by professionals such as teachers and social workers, as well as unwillingness by the criminal justice system to deal with it in a thorough way. Data regarding the extent of the problem are usually extrapolated from surveys carried out in other areas. For example, a general survey of children at risk in a particular town revealed that students attending special education schools were twice as much at risk of abuse than their peers within the regular education framework (Marom and Uziel, 2001). Apart from a lack of precise statistical data about the scope of the problem, any existing data are based on reports provided by parents, professionals and government ofcials rather than the victims or the offenders themselves. The purpose of the study was to address the following research questions: What was the extent and type of abuse inicted on students with intellectual and other disabilities in one area special education school in Israel, as reported by the students themselves? To what extent was the abuse reported similar to or different from the experiences of students without disabilities in this area living in similar neighborhoods?

Method
Research in this area is complex, since it elicits personal stories that might call for intervention by law enforcement ofcers and lawyers. Participants may also experience post-traumatic reactions when telling their experiences and may need emotional support. For this reason we were very careful in choosing the appropriate research instruments and taking ethical considerations into account (AERA, 2002; Belmont Report, 1978; Kodish, 2005).

Ethical considerations Since the use of students reports of abuse and crimes involves issues of professional ethics and adherence to condentiality, as well as possible referral to professional staff or law enforcement agencies, the project had
373
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

11 ( 4 )

to be vetted by the university ethics committee for approval to carry out the research. The permission was granted after strict condentiality had been ensured, as well as procedures planned for reporting any offences revealed and provision made for assistance to students under stress, in the wake of their preoccupation with traumatic experiences. At the next stage students and parents were asked for consent to participate in the research, with emphasis on condentiality. Only 10 percent of the parents approached did not agree to their childrens participation. The eld researcher served as the schools educational counselor, which encouraged the students to respond frankly. Nevertheless, the researcher explained to each pupil individually that she is obliged to report any offences against the law. In the course of the research, a few such cases did occur and were subsequently treated by law enforcement authorities and by social workers. By having a person known over a day-to-day basis to the students, we made sure that students had no need to please the researcher.

Participants In Israel, special education schools cater for students with special needs from a large geographical area according to certain categories such as students with autism, students with moderate mental retardation, students with severe learning disabilities and behavior problems. The present exploratory study was conducted with a population of students with mild cognitive disabilities and other developmental disabilities such as emotional disorders, learning disabilities and conduct disorders. Most students came from low socioeconomic backgrounds; some were children of new immigrants from the Soviet Union and from Ethiopia.The study used a convenience sample drawn from the total population in one area school. All higher-class students were interviewed, and they did not volunteer to take part in the study; thus we can say that the sample was representative and not biased to include mostly students that experienced abuse and wanted to talk about it. We enrolled 50 secondary school students, 25 girls and 25 boys, aged 12 to 21 years, who were attending a special education school for adolescents with mild intellectual disabilities and other disabilities including challenging behavior, cerebral palsy and severe learning disabilities. These were compared to a sample of 50 students attending regular schools, aged 12 to 18 years, who lived in similar neighborhoods.The non-disabled pupils were obtained by asking the disabled students to bring a friend, leading to groups matched as closely as possible on socioeconomic status. The difference in age between the two groups was due to the fact that the special education school includes young people up to the age of 21, while adolescents leave regular schools at the age of 18. The 50 non-disabled
374
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

respondents comprised 33 girls and 17 boys who agreed to answer the questionnaire. Demographic characteristics of the study and control groups are given in Table 1. Although there were some apparent differences between the two groups in Table 1, specically the higher number of girls in the control group, there were no statistically signicant background differences between the study and control groups.

Research instrument The study used the Ending the Silence questionnaire because of the emphasis on ethical considerations in its development. The authors of the questionnaire report:
The process of examining experiences of victimization reported by the survey participant involved a number of important and sometimes challenging considerations, key among them: (a) ensuring condentiality, (b) providing support measures to those who experienced trauma or stress as they recalled their experiences, and (c) identifying the researchers ethical and legal obligations with respect to reporting abuse. (Bryen et al., 2003, p. 128)
Table 1 Background data: age, gender, comparisons between students with and without disabilities Background variables Gender: Boys Girls Age (range, mean) Adolescents with disabilities N = 50 25 25 1221 mean 16.58 SD 1.90 34 12 4 37 9 4 44 6 Non-disabled adolescents N = 50 17 33 1218 mean 16.10 SD 1.58 40 6 3 1 1.62, n.s. 42 5 3 2.70, n.s. 48 2 t-test: t = 1.37, n.s. 4.05, n.s. Chi-square test

2.67, n.s.

Family status: Married Divorced Widowed One parent Country of origin: Israel Soviet Union Ethiopia Place of living: Home Boarding home
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

375
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

11 ( 4 )

The questionnaire Ending the Silence covers two major domains of abuse: physical and sexual. We added a third domain: emotional abuse. Each domain was divided into specic behaviors as follows: 1 Physical abuse: theft, threat of physical harm, physical attack, someone forcing the respondent to do something against their will, refusing something essential for wellbeing. 2 Sexual abuse: unwanted sexual touch, forcing to touch someone sexually. 3 Emotional abuse: humiliation, social rejection. For each behavior, respondents indicate whether they have been exposed to the abuse in question; if so, they are asked to provide a short description of the event and indicate the perpetrator, the setting and the frequency of the abuse over time. Respondents were also asked about their emotional response to the event, whether they had told someone about their experience, and whether they had approached a professional with their complaint. The Ending the Silence questionnaire was translated into Hebrew and adapted for the purpose of this study, as it had been designed for use with persons with physical disabilities. For the purpose of our exploratory study with students with intellectual disabilities, items were reworded in simple and matter-of-fact language. The content validity of the questionnaire was conrmed by ve reviewers working in welfare services and educational settings. A pilot study was then carried out with 15 students from the special education school. Following consent by the students and their parents, these students were interviewed with the questionnaire items. They were able to portray events and experiences verbally and clearly. Their answers were compared to information obtained from the parents, the teachers and the welfare services of the school. The data obtained from parents and professionals matched the pupils replies. The pilot allowed us to be condent that we could obtain statistical data about the extent of abuse among the students, as well as descriptive information about individual experiences. Following the pilot administration of the questionnaire, it was administered individually to the study and control group students. When a respondent could not read and/or write the answers, the questions were read aloud by the eld researcher, who lled in the answers for the student. All students were told that their answers were strictly condential and no names would be used in the nal report. However, they were alerted that in the case of a serious crime against them, the researcher would be obliged to report it to the social worker and in some cases to the police unless, of course, this course of action had already been taken. 376
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

In order to ascertain the frequency of different types of abuse of the disabled compared to the non-disabled pupils, analyses and comparisons between the samples were carried out using percentages and chi-square tests. Moreover, the students stories describing the events and indicating the perpetrators and the locations provided additional information. Here we shall focus on the statistical ndings and merely point out some salient aspects of the situation, since a detailed description of the qualitative investigation is beyond the scope of this article.

Results
Signicant differences were found between the students with disabilities and their peers regarding the frequency of abuse in all three domains, physical, sexual and emotional. Students with disabilities generally reported more cases of abuse than their non-disabled peers, as shown in Table 2. Table 2 shows that only in one domain theft was greater frequency reported by non-disabled students than by students with disabilities. In ve out of nine domains being forced to do something, being refused something essential for wellbeing, sexual threat, forced to touch someone
Table 2 Percentages of students exposed to abuse in the special education school as compared to their non-disabled peers Type of abuse Adolescents with disabilities N = 50 24 42 38 28 14 40 38 14 50 18 Non-disabled adolescents N = 50 52 24 32 8 16 18 4 30 10 Chi-square test

Physical abuse: Theft Threat of physical harm Physical attack Forced to do something Refused something essential for wellbeing Sexual abuse: Sexual abuse Unwanted sexual touching Forced to touch someone sexually against their will Emotional abuse: Humiliation Rejection
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

8.47** 3.69 0.39 7.10** 10.23*** 7.32** 5.04* 3.21 4.20* 1.34

377
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

11 ( 4 )

sexually against their will, and humiliation students with disabilities experienced signicantly more frequent abuse than did their non-disabled peers. In the remaining domains, they also tended to experience more abuse than their peers. For each domain, we examined the identity of the perpetrator (family member, neighbor, friend, stranger, etc.), and where and how often (once, several times, repeatedly) the abuse occurred. Signicant differences between respondents with and without disabilities are presented below, and because this is an exploratory study, ndings that were not statistically signicant but showed a clear tendency in a certain direction will also be reported. The description of the ndings follows the sections of the questionnaire and are provided in detail. Though it might be cumbersome to the reader, since this is an exploratory study it is important to give a detailed picture of the situation of abuse.

Physical (non-sexual) abuse

Theft Who stole from you? Among non-disabled students, most cases of theft were committed by other adolescents of similar age (73.1%); only a few mentioned a relative (3.8%) and the rest (23.1%) reported that it was a stranger. Among students with disabilities the picture is very different: 57 percent reported that the theft was committed by other youngsters, while 36 percent mentioned a relative and only 7 percent stated that it was a stranger.The differences were statistically signicant (2 = 6.36, p < 0.05). It is clear that in this case adolescents with disabilities are most often abused by someone they know, even someone close to them. Where did it happen? Here too we see a signicant difference (2 = 20.25, p < 0.001) between the two groups. While most non-disabled students had something stolen from them in school (57.7%) and in a public place (30.8%), hardly any reported a theft occurring at home (3.8%) or, if they do not live at home, in a dormitory in a hostel (7.7%). Among students with disabilities, only a few reported a theft in school (8.3%) or a public place (8.4%); most of them stated that things were stolen from them either at home (50%) or, if they do not live at home, in a dormitory in a hostel (33.3%). Threat Were you threatened? Twice as many students with disabilities (42%) were threatened with abuse than were students without disabilities (24%), although this was not statistically signicant. Where were you threatened? A signicant difference (2 = 10.61, p < 0.05) was found regarding the place where the threat took place. The nondisabled students reported being threatened most often at school (50.4%) 378
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

and in the neighborhood (41.3%), and rarely at home (8.3%); in comparison, students with disabilities experienced physical threats most often in the neighborhood (66.7%) and only very few at school (4.8%), some of them at home (19%) and a few on the way to school on the special school bus (9.5%). None of the non-disabled students reported any special event on the bus to and from school. Physical attack Where were you physically attacked? Results, though not signicant, showed an interesting tendency.The non-disabled students were physically attacked at school and in the neighborhood more often than at home (37.5% as opposed to 25%), while special education students reported far fewer physical attacks at school (10.5%) than at home (31.6%).They experienced most of the physical abuse in the neighborhood (57.9%). Forced to do something against ones will Were you forced to do something against your will? A signicantly (2 = 7.10, p < 0.01) higher percentage among students with disabilities (28%) reported being forced to do something against their will than non-disabled students (8%). Where were you forced to do something against your will? Students with disabilities reported that most of the events took place in the neighborhood (57.1%), at home (14.3%) and in public places (21.4%), and only very few were forced to do something against their will at school (7.1%).This tended to be different from the pattern for the non-disabled students, who reported an even distribution of places where these events took place: 25 percent of events took place in each of the school, the neighborhood, the home and public places. Refusal of something essential for ones wellbeing Were you refused something essential for your wellbeing? The difference in this area is signicant (2 = 10.23, p < 0.001): while none of the non-disabled students reported any such act, 14 percent among students with disabilities underwent such an experience, and in all the cases (100%) it happened at home. Frequencies of abuse We then compared frequencies of abusive events for students with and without disabilities. A signicant difference was found regarding repeated abuse (2 = p < 0.05). High percentages among the students with disabilities experienced repeated abuse: threats 95 percent compared to 58.3 percent among non-disabled students (2 = 8.03, p < 0.05); physical attacks 94.7 percent compared to 56.2 percent among non-disabled students (2 = 7.93, p < 0.05); refused something essential 85.7 percent compared to 0 cases among students without disabilities (2 = 10.23, p < 0.001). 379
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

11 ( 4 )

For the total sample (N = 100), a higher percentage of male students experienced physical abuse (47.6%) than did female students (25.9%) (2 = 5.05, p < 0.05).

Sexual abuse None of the students in our sample reported being raped. When these cases occur, they are dealt with by the school counselor, the social worker and eventually the police. However, sexual harassment and unwanted sexual touching are not usually reported. In our sample, these were common experiences of students generally, and students with disabilities were at higher risk.
Sexual harassment Table 2 shows a signicant (2 = 7.32, p < 0.01) difference between students with and without disabilities: 40 percent among students with disabilities reported having experienced sexual harassment, compared to 16 percent among students without disabilities. Because there were more girls than boys in the sample of non-disabled students, the difference between the two groups may be even greater. In the total sample, female students were more exposed to sexual harassment than male students: 41.4 percent of the girls experienced harassment, compared to 11.9 percent of the boys. Who did it to you? Because of the difference in frequency between male and female students, the data will be presented separately for each gender. The non-disabled girls were sexually harassed mostly by friends (57.1%), a few of them by service providers or others known to the victim (14.3%), and some by strangers (28.6%). Of the girls with disabilities, 29.3 percent reported harassment by friends, and 5.9 percent by members of the family. However, most cases of harassment were by service providers, such as the school bus driver, known to the victim (58.9%), and only in a few cases was the perpetrator a stranger (5.9%). Among males, only three (12%) disabled students reported sexual harassment, by a family member, a service provider or a stranger. Only two non-disabled boys reported harassment, one by a relative at home, the other by a stranger. Sexual abuse: unwanted sexual touching Unwanted sexual touching was signicantly (2 = 5.04, p < 0.05) higher among students with disabilities than their non-disabled peers. Of the students with disabilities (males N = 7, females N = 12), 38 percent reported such events compared to 18 percent of non-disabled students (males N = 2, females N = 7). Similarly, in the area of being forced to touch someone sexually, students with disabilities were at higher risk: seven (14%) students compared to only two (4%) of the non-disabled students. 380
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

Who abused you? A clear tendency of difference appeared regarding the person committing sexual abuse between students with and without disabilities. Female students with disabilities were sexually touched mostly during their interactions with those around them: friends (41.7%), service providers or others known to them (50%). Relatively few were abused by strangers (8.3%). Non-disabled female students reported more abuse by friends and at home: friends (71.4%), relatives (14.3%), and some by strangers (14.3%). In both cases, the abuser was usually known to the victim. Where did it happen? Sexual abuse of female students without disabilities occurred in school (28.6%), in the neighborhood (42.9%) and only in a few cases at home (14.3%) or in a public place (14.3%). Among students with disabilities, no abuse was reported at school, while most abuse was experienced in the neighborhood (47.1%); a few experienced abuse in public places (5.9%). A high percentage of the girls were abused by the driver of the special school bus (14.3%). Similarly, in the area of unwanted sexual touch, 41.7 percent of female students with disabilities were abused in their neighborhood, 25 percent in public places and 33.3 percent during the drive to and from school by the bus driver. Female non-disabled students experienced unwanted sexual touch at school (28.6%) and in the neighborhood (42.9%), while a few had such an experience at home (14.3%) and in a public place (14.3%). Among male students (N = 7) who experienced unwanted sexual touch, most incidents occurred in the neighborhood (57.1%), a few at school (14.3%), at home (14.3%) or in a public place (14.3%). Of the two non-disabled male students who reported that they experienced unwanted sexual touch, one occurred in the neighborhood and the other in public places. Forced to touch someone sexually Some students reported that they were forced to touch someone sexually: all of the non-disabled students were coerced by their peers. Among students with disabilities, 57.1 percent were coerced by other youngsters, 28.6 percent by adults known to them, and 14.3 percent by service providers. Where did it happen? Non-disabled students reported that all such cases occurred in the neighborhood; students with disabilities reported that 85.7 percent of the cases occurred in the neighborhood and 14.3 percent on the special school bus. Frequency of occurrence Did it happen once, several times or many times? Here too there was a tendency for a difference between the two disabled and non-disabled samples: more students with disabilities (82.4%) experienced 381
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

11 ( 4 )

repeated sexual harassment than the non-disabled students (57.1%). Experiences of unwanted sexual touch occurred repeatedly among 50 percent of disabled female students compared to 28.6 percent of nondisabled female students.

Emotional abuse: humiliation and social rejection

Humiliation Among the students with disabilities, there was a tendency for a higher percentage to be at risk of humiliation: 50 percent reported having been humiliated, while 30 percent of the non-disabled students reported these experiences. In both cases, the family was a place where students were humiliated: 20 percent of the non-disabled students and 24 percent of the disabled students. Non-disabled students reported being humiliated by friends and others (80%), and disabled students also did so (75%). There was a difference between the two groups in the place where the humiliation occurred: most students without disabilities experienced humiliation in school (73.3%), while students with disabilities had such an experience at home (24%) and in the neighborhood (76%). Social rejection Social rejection was experienced by both non-disabled students (10%) and students with disabilities (18%). While students without disabilities experienced social rejection mostly by friends (80%) and fewer by family (20%), students with disabilities experienced more rejection by family (66.7%) than by friends (33.3%). Signicant (p < 0.01) differences existed between the two groups in place of occurrence: students without disabilities reported most events (80%) took place in school, while students with disabilities reported most events at home (66.7%), 33.3 percent in the neighborhood and none at the special school. Frequency of social rejection was signicantly different between the non-disabled and disabled students (2 = 6.67, p < 0.01): 40 percent of the non-disabled students reported it was a one-time event, 40 percent repeated, and a few said that it happened constantly (20%). Most (77.8%) of the students with disabilities reported that humiliation and rejection occurred on a regular basis, 22.2 percent reported it occurred several times, and none only once.

The effect of abuse on the victim emotionally, physically, materially We wished to ascertain whether sensitivity to abuse differed in students with disabilities compared to those without disabilities. Signicant (2 = 7.20, p < 0.01) differences were found in the emotional sphere: 74 percent of
382
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

students with disabilities reported that the abuse had a negative emotional effect compared with 48 percent of students without disabilities. Thirty percent of students with disabilities and 26 percent of students without disabilities reported that abuse had a physical effect on them. Eight percent among students with disabilities mentioned that harm was done to their property, and 12 percent among non-disabled students reported this.

To whom was the abuse reported? The two samples were similar regarding physical abuse: 66.7 percent among the non-disabled and 65.2 percent among the disabled reported physical abuse to their families. However, 16.7 percent among the nondisabled shared their experience with their peers, while none of the students with disabilities did so. Among the non-disabled students, 16.7 percent reported to a professional, while a larger percentage among the disabled students did so (34.8%). Students with disabilities told their families (66.7%) and professionals (33.3%) about sexual abuse. Non-disabled students told their friends (66.7%); fewer among them told their families (33.3%), while none told a professional. Using the Ending the Silence questionnaire, we were able to compare our ndings with the survey carried out in the US with a sample of persons with physical, developmental and communication disabilities, all of whom had communication difculties and used augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices. Since the two samples were relatively small, we were unable to make statistically signicant comparisons. Nevertheless, we can extrapolate some general tendencies: apparently, while our sample population did not experience high levels of theft, nearly half (56%) of the US adults with physical disabilities, AAC users, reported that things were stolen from them. Both groups experienced similar levels of threat of physical harm; 44 percent of the respondents with physical disabilities and 42 percent of our respondents reported such occurrences.The ndings regarding actual physical attack were similar: 39 percent of the AAC users experienced it, and 38 percent of our respondents. There was a similar trend for reports of forced to do unwanted acts that are non-sexual in nature: 22 percent among AAC users compared with 28 percent of our sample. However, 28 percent of AAC users reported occurrences of being refused something essential for wellbeing, compared to only 14 percent of our sample. In the domain of sexual abuse there are differences due to the difference in age between the two samples, i.e. adolescents in our study compared to adults in the American study. In our sample no respondent reported being forced to have sex, while 22 percent of AAC users reported
383
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

11 ( 4 )

having been raped. However, a similar percentage in the two samples reported that they experienced sexual harassment (39% of the AAC users and 40% in our sample), and a similar percentage reported being forced to have unwanted sexual touching (28% of the AAC users and 38% in our sample). We also see similarities on forced to touch someone sexually: 17 percent of AAC users and 14 percent of the respondents in our sample mentioned it. Similar patterns were found among the AAC users and our sample of adolescents with intellectual and other disabilities in the other two areas investigated: the perpetrators and where the abuse took place. In both samples, most of the perpetrators were people known to the victim and most crimes or abuse occurred in the close neighborhood, at home, at the workplace (for adults) and in the car/van or other special transportation (Reiter et al., 2005).

Discussion
The present research was an exploratory descriptive study.Therefore a word of caution regarding conclusions and generalizations should be given. Reports were elicited from disabled students enrolled in one special school; while it draws students from a large geographical area, this may limit the generalizability of the ndings. The control group recruitment method, based on a friend brings a friend, could also have biased our ndings, although it provided an important similarity to the disabled group in neighborhoods and living conditions. However, in spite of its limitations, some conclusions regarding tendencies can be drawn to be further investigated in a larger, more representative group of adolescents using a stronger methodological approach. The data gathered in our survey conrm ndings by other studies, namely: there is a higher percentage of persons with disabilities who are victims of abuse than in the regular population (Bryen et al., 2003). In our exploratory study, most of the events reported took place within the social environment of the victim; the perpetrators were neighbors, the driver of the special school bus, the adolescents or the familys friends and even members of the family; incidences of sexual abuse were experienced twice as often by students with disabilities than by non-disabled students of similar age; and it was the girls who were most frequently abused. The special school seemed to be a sheltered area, and not many incidences of abuse were reported there. However, more research should be conducted in this area, which is a difcult eld for study, since the issues are private and painful, and the researcher must take action when crimes or severe abuse are reported (AERA, 2002; Belmont Report, 1978; Kodish, 2005). 384
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

The ndings of our exploratory study showed that there were differences between students with and without disabilities regarding the extent of abuse, with the former being at higher risk of undergoing physical abuse threats, attacks, forced to do something against ones will than their non-disabled peers. In the area of sexual abuse, again there were higher percentages reported by students with disabilities for harassment and being forced to touch someone sexually than by students without disabilities. In most instances of abuse of students with disabilities, the abuser was known to the victim, usually from the neighborhood or someone known to the family, or a service provider, such as the special school bus driver. As suggested by Mansell and Sobsey (2001), more counselling services should be provided in this area. Our ndings support other research (Bryen et al., 2003; Sobsey, 1994) that people with disabilities, irrespective of the kind of disability, experience abuse more frequently than the general population. The results of this preliminary study should lead to a large scale investigation of abuse among children and adolescents with disabilities. We should also re-examine our educational and therapeutic programs dealing with abuse and violence. The high incidence of abuse and harassment of students with special needs calls for action. Programs for children and adults with disabilities must encourage them to open up and disclose any experience of abuse.There should be formal and informal ways to deal with complaints. The whole staff professionals, paraprofessionals and support staff must be ready to listen and take action in this area. Apart from the staff, there should be open and ongoing communication with outside agents such as social workers, the police, lawyers, doctors and psychologists, and contact with treatment centers such as shelters for children at risk or for abused women, and clinics that provide assistance to traumatized persons and those suffering from PTSD. Moreover, preventive measures such as the decision-making curriculum, designed to empower women with mental retardation to resist abuse (Khemka et al., 2005), should be provided to all students and adults with intellectual disability. They should be taught how to ght back, to be assertive and to resist the abuser. The very rst step is helping students become aware of the fact that they are being abused, and that such acts are legally prohibited.
References
AERA

(2002) Ethical Standards. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. B A L A D E R I A N , N . (1991) Sexual Abuse of People with Developmental Disabilities, Sexuality and Disability 9 (4): 32335.

385
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

B E L M O N T R E P O RT

11 ( 4 )

(1978) Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Ofce. B RY E N , D . N . (2002) End the Silence, Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation 17 (2): 717. B RY E N , D . N . , C A R E Y, A . & F R A N T Z , B . (2003) Ending the Silence: Adults Who Use Augmentative Communication and Their Experiences as Victims of Crimes, Augmentative and Alternative Communication 19 (2): 12534. F I N K E L H O R , D . (1998) The Responses of Preadolescents and Adolescents in a National Victimization Survey, Journal of Interpersonal Violence 13 (3): 36282. F U R E Y, E . M . (1994) Sexual Abuse of Adults with Mental Retardation: Who and Where?, Mental Retardation 32: 17380. H OW E , K . R . & M O S E S , M . S . (1999) Ethics in Educational Research, Review of Research in Education 24: 2159. K H E M K A , I . , H I C K S O N , L . & R E Y N O L D S , G . (2005) Evaluation of a DecisionMaking Curriculum Designed to Empower Women with Mental Retardation to Resist Abuse, American Journal on Mental Retardation 110 (3): 193204. KO D I S H , E . (2005) Ethics and Research with Children. Oxford: Oxford University Press. L A N G , R . A . & F R E N Z E L , R . R . (1988) How Sex Offenders Lure Children, Annals of Sex Research 1: 31317. M A N S E L L , S . & S O B S E Y, D . (2001) Counselling People with Developmental Disabilities Who Have Been Sexually Abused:The Aurora Project. New York: NADD Press. M A N S E L L , S . , S O B S E Y, D . & C A L D E R , P. (1992) Sexual Abuse Treatment for Persons with Developmental Disabilities, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 23: 4049. M A R C H A N T, R . & PAG E , M . (1992) Bridging the Gap: Child Protection Work with Children with Multiple Disabilities, Child Abuse Review 1 (3): 17983. M A R I N I , Z . , F A I R B A I R N , L . & Z U B E R , R . (2001) Peer Harassment in Individuals with Developmental Disabilities: Towards the Development of Multi Dimensional Bullying Identication Model, Developmental Disabilities Bulletin 29 (2): 17095. M A RO M , M . & U Z I E L , L . (2001) Children with Disabilities in Risk Situations: A Literature Review. Jerusalem: JDCBrookdale Institute of Gerontology and Human Development. N E W P O RT, P. (1991) Linking Child Abuse to Disability. London: Barnardos. P E R L M A N , N . & E R I C S O N , K . (1992) Interviewing Handicapped Persons: The Ability of Developmentally Handicapped Individuals to Accurately Report on Witnessed Events, in J . C A S S E L M A N (ed.) Law and Mental Health, pp. 2026. Leuven: International Academy of Law and Mental Health. P E T E R S I L I A , J . (1998) Persons with Developmental Disabilities in the Criminal Justice System:Victims, Defendants, and Inmates. 15 January 1998. Statement before the Legislature, California Senate Public Safety Committee, California. R E I T E R , S . , B RY E N , D . N . , S H AC H A R , I . & L A P I D O T, N . (2005) Ending the Silence: Adolescents with Developmental Disabilities as Victims of Crimes, paper presented at the Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress ISEC, Glasgow, 14 August. S O B S E Y, D . (1994) Violence and Abuse in the Lives of People with Disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Brookes. S O B S E Y, D . & D O E , T. (1991) Patterns of Sexual Abuse and Assault, Sexuality and Disability 9: 24359. S U L L I VA N , P. M . & K N U T S O N , J . F . (2000) Maltreatment and Disabilities: A Population Based Epidemiological Study, Child Abuse and Neglect 24 (10): 125773. S WA N , D . (2007) Advocacy: Making Rights Reality, for Sexual Assault Victim/Survivors with a Cognitive Impairment. The Sexual Offences Stage 3 Draft Discussion Paper. Australia: The Federation of Community Legal Centres (Vic) Inc.

386
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009

REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

& K A M I N E R , R . (2002) Maltreatment and Developmental Disabilities in Children, Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities 14: 37186. W E S T C O T T, H . (1993) Abuse of Children and Adults with Disabilities. London: NSPCC.
V I G, S . P RO F E S S O R S H U N I T R E I T E R , Faculty

Correspondence should be addressed to: of Education, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel. e-mail: shunitr@construct.haifa.ac.il 20/07/07

Date accepted

387
Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com by on January 10, 2009