Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
Related Authors
St. Louis University
James Madison University
Boston University
University of Maryland, College Park
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
University of Pittsburgh
Stanford University
Uploads
Papers by Robyn M Powell
The disability rights movement originated in the 1970s with the aim of securing civil rights protections for disabled people. Unfortunately, notwithstanding the disability rights movement’s many achievements, people with disabilities—especially those who live at the intersection of disability and other historically marginalized identities—continue to experience widespread and assiduous injustices. Consequently, elucidating the root causes of these pervasive and persevering inequities is essential to finally confronting them. Importantly, the Trump presidency’s further marginalization of people with disabilities illustrates the fragility of disability rights in the United States and underscores the urgent need to reimagine a more equitable approach to disability rights.
This Article critically examines the panoply of injustices experienced by people with disabilities and demonstrates why the prevailing approach to disability rights is insufficient for challenging the long-lasting and deeply entrenched subjugation of people with disabilities. Then, drawing from the tenets of disability justice, this Article proposes a vision to help activists, legal professionals, scholars, and policymakers conceive of and articulate the basic contours of a paradigm shift that supports reimagining the fight for justice for disabled people in a way that finally disrupts the widespread oppression experienced by disabled people. In particular, the Article suggests normative and transformative legal and policy solutions necessary for achieving and delivering justice for all people with disabilities. In light of the 2020 election and President Joe Biden’s professed commitment to people with disabilities, this Article offers essential and timely insights for reimagining the fight for justice for all people with disabilities by moving beyond the prevailing approach to disability rights and instead adopting disability justice.
This study found that the ADA was only raised in six percent of the decisions and only applied in two percent of the opinions. After controlling for parent, family, court, case, and policy characteristics, courts had a decreased likelihood of raising the ADA in cases involving mothers with psychiatric disabilities. Likewise, after controlling for parent, family, court, case, and policy characteristics, courts had lower odds of applying the ADA in cases involving mothers with multiple disabilities. Other factors were also associated with courts raising or applying the ADA, including criminal history, substance use history, prior child welfare system involvement, the presence of a disabled child, when the case was decided, geographical location, negative expert testimony, provision of family preservation or reunification services, and state dependency statutes that included parental disability as grounds for termination of parental rights. The Article concludes by discussing the policy and practice implications of the study’s findings and identifying directions for future research.
Methods: This digital and participatory action research study used semistructured video or telephone interviews to evaluate the experiences of breastfeeding among 24 disabled women through descriptive content analysis. The cross- disability sample was composed of women with self-identified intellectual, developmental, physical, sensory, and psychiatric disabilities. Some women had multiple disabilities.
Results: Qualitative analysis revealed four themes relating to breastfeeding among disabled women: 1) communication difficulties with lactation consultants, 2) milk supply and latch problems, 3) intense pressure to breastfeed, and 4) positive interactions with health care providers.
Conclusions: This study provides new information about the breastfeeding experiences of women with disabilities. Our findings suggest that disabled women should be better supported in their breastfeeding decisions and require greater access to disability-affirmative and informative clinical resources and accessible communication.
This Article responds to that scholarly void and offers novel and critically needed data on the barriers and facilitators to compliance with the ADA by the child welfare system. This Study draws qualitative data from forty-five in-depth interviews with parents with disabilities, child welfare workers, and parents’ attorneys. Three themes emerged from the data indicating barriers and facilitators that affect compliance with the ADA by the child welfare system. First, knowledge, training, and information about the ADA by parents with disabilities, child welfare workers, and legal professionals impede or enable ADA compliance. Second, institutional support—especially well-defined agency policies and procedures about the ADA, agency culture and leadership, and resource availability—impact compliance with the ADA. Third, factors related to the legal and social context in which cases involving disabled parents occur—particularly tensions between children’s rights and parents’ rights and issues relating to the intersection between disability and child welfare law—are barriers or facilitators to ADA compliance. This Article concludes by identifying critical areas for further research and discussing the policy and practice implications of the findings.
This Article responds to the scholarly void and offers new and much-needed data on the real-world experiences of these parents. This Study draws qualitative data from in-depth interviews with twelve former clients of a legal services program in Massachusetts that provides representation to parents with psychiatric disabilities. First, this Study shows that the legal profession lacks understanding of mental health, which some parents believe negatively affects representation and case outcomes. Second, attorneys may need to provide parents with psychiatric disabilities assistance beyond litigation, including taking more time to explain the legal process, assisting with administrative tasks, and coordinating with other supports and services. Third, our data suggest that parents with psychiatric disabilities may have ongoing legal needs that require access to additional legal services beyond those related to the child welfare and family law systems. This Article concludes by identifying critical areas for further research and discussing the policy implications of the findings.
The benefits of breastfeeding are well established, and breastfeeding is now widely practiced in the United States. Although increasing numbers of women with physical disabilities are having children, little information is available about breastfeeding practices among these women. Nonetheless, the children of women with physical disabilities should benefit from breastfeeding just as children of nondisabled mothers do.
Research aim:
This study aimed to explore the facilitators and barriers to breastfeeding among women with physical disabilities.
Methods:
This study involved semistructured telephone interviews with a convenience sample of women (N = 25) with diverse physical disabilities from across the United States. All participants had given birth within the past 10 years. Interviews were audio-recorded, professionally transcribed, and analyzed using content analysis.
Results:
Analyses found four broad themes indicating facilitators to breastfeeding: (a) adaptations and equipment, (b) use of breast pump, (c) physical assistance from others, and (d) peer support. We also found five broad themes suggesting barriers to breastfeeding: (a) lack of supports, (b) disability-related health considerations, (c) limited information, (d) difficulties with milk production, and (e) difficulties latching.
Conclusion:
The need for greater supports for women with physical disabilities who desire to breastfeed as well as information for women and their clinicians about facilitating breastfeeding.
While the United States has seen increased attention by policymakers on the rights of parents with disabilities, there is limited understanding of the health and economic well-being of parents with intellectual impairments. This study compares the health and economic well-being of mothers with and without intellectual impairments.
Methods
This descriptive, exploratory study is a secondary analysis of the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study. This study includes a subsample of mothers of three-year-old children (n = 1561), including mothers with intellectual impairments (n = 263) and without intellectual impairments (n = 1298).
Results
US Mothers with intellectual impairments are more likely to report serious health conditions, have less instrumental support, live in poverty, receive public benefits and experience certain material hardships.
Conclusion
Findings from this study indicate the need for policies and programmes to support parents with intellectual impairments by addressing their health and economic needs.
Historically, people with disabilities who become parents have confronted discriminatory societal attitudes and public policies. Today, although more women with disabilities are bearing children, little is known about the perceptions of their pregnancies, even among their family members. In addition, little is understand about how family members’ attitudes and reactions affect women with physical disabilities around the time of pregnancy.
Method
This qualitative study involved interviews with 25 women with physical disabilities from across the United States who had a baby within the past 10 years. Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted. Interviews were audio-recorded, professionally transcribed, and analyzed using an iterative, interpretive process.
Findings
Women reported a wide range of physical disabilities. Before, during, and after pregnancy, participants reported experiencing wide-ranging attitudes and reactions from family members concerning their pregnancies. These responses fell into six categories: 1) initial negative reactions, 2) concern about mother's well-being, 3) questioning of parenting capability, 4) negative perceptions of disability, 5) genetic concerns, and 6) excited and supportive.
Conclusions
This study sheds light on the attitudes and reactions toward pregnancy that women with physical disabilities experience from family members. Our findings suggest the need for increased social support and family education. Greater availability of peer supports as well as information for women with disabilities considering pregnancy is also needed.
The disability rights movement originated in the 1970s with the aim of securing civil rights protections for disabled people. Unfortunately, notwithstanding the disability rights movement’s many achievements, people with disabilities—especially those who live at the intersection of disability and other historically marginalized identities—continue to experience widespread and assiduous injustices. Consequently, elucidating the root causes of these pervasive and persevering inequities is essential to finally confronting them. Importantly, the Trump presidency’s further marginalization of people with disabilities illustrates the fragility of disability rights in the United States and underscores the urgent need to reimagine a more equitable approach to disability rights.
This Article critically examines the panoply of injustices experienced by people with disabilities and demonstrates why the prevailing approach to disability rights is insufficient for challenging the long-lasting and deeply entrenched subjugation of people with disabilities. Then, drawing from the tenets of disability justice, this Article proposes a vision to help activists, legal professionals, scholars, and policymakers conceive of and articulate the basic contours of a paradigm shift that supports reimagining the fight for justice for disabled people in a way that finally disrupts the widespread oppression experienced by disabled people. In particular, the Article suggests normative and transformative legal and policy solutions necessary for achieving and delivering justice for all people with disabilities. In light of the 2020 election and President Joe Biden’s professed commitment to people with disabilities, this Article offers essential and timely insights for reimagining the fight for justice for all people with disabilities by moving beyond the prevailing approach to disability rights and instead adopting disability justice.
This study found that the ADA was only raised in six percent of the decisions and only applied in two percent of the opinions. After controlling for parent, family, court, case, and policy characteristics, courts had a decreased likelihood of raising the ADA in cases involving mothers with psychiatric disabilities. Likewise, after controlling for parent, family, court, case, and policy characteristics, courts had lower odds of applying the ADA in cases involving mothers with multiple disabilities. Other factors were also associated with courts raising or applying the ADA, including criminal history, substance use history, prior child welfare system involvement, the presence of a disabled child, when the case was decided, geographical location, negative expert testimony, provision of family preservation or reunification services, and state dependency statutes that included parental disability as grounds for termination of parental rights. The Article concludes by discussing the policy and practice implications of the study’s findings and identifying directions for future research.
Methods: This digital and participatory action research study used semistructured video or telephone interviews to evaluate the experiences of breastfeeding among 24 disabled women through descriptive content analysis. The cross- disability sample was composed of women with self-identified intellectual, developmental, physical, sensory, and psychiatric disabilities. Some women had multiple disabilities.
Results: Qualitative analysis revealed four themes relating to breastfeeding among disabled women: 1) communication difficulties with lactation consultants, 2) milk supply and latch problems, 3) intense pressure to breastfeed, and 4) positive interactions with health care providers.
Conclusions: This study provides new information about the breastfeeding experiences of women with disabilities. Our findings suggest that disabled women should be better supported in their breastfeeding decisions and require greater access to disability-affirmative and informative clinical resources and accessible communication.
This Article responds to that scholarly void and offers novel and critically needed data on the barriers and facilitators to compliance with the ADA by the child welfare system. This Study draws qualitative data from forty-five in-depth interviews with parents with disabilities, child welfare workers, and parents’ attorneys. Three themes emerged from the data indicating barriers and facilitators that affect compliance with the ADA by the child welfare system. First, knowledge, training, and information about the ADA by parents with disabilities, child welfare workers, and legal professionals impede or enable ADA compliance. Second, institutional support—especially well-defined agency policies and procedures about the ADA, agency culture and leadership, and resource availability—impact compliance with the ADA. Third, factors related to the legal and social context in which cases involving disabled parents occur—particularly tensions between children’s rights and parents’ rights and issues relating to the intersection between disability and child welfare law—are barriers or facilitators to ADA compliance. This Article concludes by identifying critical areas for further research and discussing the policy and practice implications of the findings.
This Article responds to the scholarly void and offers new and much-needed data on the real-world experiences of these parents. This Study draws qualitative data from in-depth interviews with twelve former clients of a legal services program in Massachusetts that provides representation to parents with psychiatric disabilities. First, this Study shows that the legal profession lacks understanding of mental health, which some parents believe negatively affects representation and case outcomes. Second, attorneys may need to provide parents with psychiatric disabilities assistance beyond litigation, including taking more time to explain the legal process, assisting with administrative tasks, and coordinating with other supports and services. Third, our data suggest that parents with psychiatric disabilities may have ongoing legal needs that require access to additional legal services beyond those related to the child welfare and family law systems. This Article concludes by identifying critical areas for further research and discussing the policy implications of the findings.
The benefits of breastfeeding are well established, and breastfeeding is now widely practiced in the United States. Although increasing numbers of women with physical disabilities are having children, little information is available about breastfeeding practices among these women. Nonetheless, the children of women with physical disabilities should benefit from breastfeeding just as children of nondisabled mothers do.
Research aim:
This study aimed to explore the facilitators and barriers to breastfeeding among women with physical disabilities.
Methods:
This study involved semistructured telephone interviews with a convenience sample of women (N = 25) with diverse physical disabilities from across the United States. All participants had given birth within the past 10 years. Interviews were audio-recorded, professionally transcribed, and analyzed using content analysis.
Results:
Analyses found four broad themes indicating facilitators to breastfeeding: (a) adaptations and equipment, (b) use of breast pump, (c) physical assistance from others, and (d) peer support. We also found five broad themes suggesting barriers to breastfeeding: (a) lack of supports, (b) disability-related health considerations, (c) limited information, (d) difficulties with milk production, and (e) difficulties latching.
Conclusion:
The need for greater supports for women with physical disabilities who desire to breastfeed as well as information for women and their clinicians about facilitating breastfeeding.
While the United States has seen increased attention by policymakers on the rights of parents with disabilities, there is limited understanding of the health and economic well-being of parents with intellectual impairments. This study compares the health and economic well-being of mothers with and without intellectual impairments.
Methods
This descriptive, exploratory study is a secondary analysis of the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study. This study includes a subsample of mothers of three-year-old children (n = 1561), including mothers with intellectual impairments (n = 263) and without intellectual impairments (n = 1298).
Results
US Mothers with intellectual impairments are more likely to report serious health conditions, have less instrumental support, live in poverty, receive public benefits and experience certain material hardships.
Conclusion
Findings from this study indicate the need for policies and programmes to support parents with intellectual impairments by addressing their health and economic needs.
Historically, people with disabilities who become parents have confronted discriminatory societal attitudes and public policies. Today, although more women with disabilities are bearing children, little is known about the perceptions of their pregnancies, even among their family members. In addition, little is understand about how family members’ attitudes and reactions affect women with physical disabilities around the time of pregnancy.
Method
This qualitative study involved interviews with 25 women with physical disabilities from across the United States who had a baby within the past 10 years. Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted. Interviews were audio-recorded, professionally transcribed, and analyzed using an iterative, interpretive process.
Findings
Women reported a wide range of physical disabilities. Before, during, and after pregnancy, participants reported experiencing wide-ranging attitudes and reactions from family members concerning their pregnancies. These responses fell into six categories: 1) initial negative reactions, 2) concern about mother's well-being, 3) questioning of parenting capability, 4) negative perceptions of disability, 5) genetic concerns, and 6) excited and supportive.
Conclusions
This study sheds light on the attitudes and reactions toward pregnancy that women with physical disabilities experience from family members. Our findings suggest the need for increased social support and family education. Greater availability of peer supports as well as information for women with disabilities considering pregnancy is also needed.