resulted from impairment and barriers and argued that restrictions to activities and both participation stemmed from impairment effects, to and to ‘barriers doing’ ‘barriers being’. Indeed, Anastasiou and Kauffman (2013, p. 454) argue is needed is a unified and multidimensional understanding of disabilities, clarifying “what the relationship among the biological and cultural, individual and social, psychological and behavioural, intrinsic and external factors affecting the lives of people without eliminating one of these levels of analysis.” This view is supported by emerging evidence that children with speech and language disorders attributed some restrictions in activities and participation to themselves and other restrictions to societal barriers (Connors & Stalker, 2007; McCormack, McLeod, McAllister, & Harrison, 2010; Merrick & Roulstone, 2011). Therefore within a social model of disability framework, risks to the well-being of children with speech and language disorders may arise from a range of factors such as potential negative feelings associated with having a communication disability and difficulties related to social inclusion. In terms of social inclusion, evidence is mixed regarding children with speech and language disorders. For example, it is not clear whether or not these children are more at risk in relation to bullying. Sweeting and West (2001) found that 14% of 11 year old children, in a sample of 2,237, reported that they were bullied or teased on a regular basis as compared with 39% of children with speech problems. Redmond (2011) cautions that the term ‘speech may have been used as an umbrella term for a range of communication difficulties. difficulties’ Some researchers found that children with specific language impairment (SLI) were at increased risk of bullying (Conti-Ramsden & Botting, 2004; Knox & Conti-Ramsden, 2003, 2007;
resulted from both impairment and barriers and argued that restrictions to activities and participation stemmed from impairment effects, ‘barriers to doing’ and ‘barriers to being’. Indeed, Anastasiou and Kauffman (2013, p. 454) argue “what is needed is a unified and multidimensional understanding of disabilities, clarifying the relationship among the biological and cultural, individual and social, psychological and behavioural, intrinsic and external factors affecting the lives of people without eliminating one of these levels of analysis.” This view is supported by emerging evidence that children with speech and language disorders attributed some restrictions in activities and participation to themselves and other restrictions to societal barriers (Connors & Stalker, 2007; McCormack, McLeod, McAllister, & Harrison, 2010; Merrick & Roulstone, 2011). Therefore within a social model of disability framework, risks to the well-being of children with speech and language disorders may arise from a range of factors such as potential negative feelings associated with having a communication disability and difficulties related to social inclusion. In terms of social inclusion, evidence is mixed regarding children with speech and language disorders. For example, it is not clear whether or not these children are more at risk in relation to bullying. Sweeting and West (2001) found that 14% of 11 year old children, in a sample of 2,237, reported that they were bullied or teased on a regular basis as compared with 39% of children with speech problems. Redmond (2011) cautions that the term ‘speech difficulties’ may have been used as an umbrella term for a range of communication difficulties. Some researchers found that children with specific language impairment (SLI) were at increased risk of bullying (Conti-Ramsden & Botting, 2004; Knox & Conti-Ramsden, 2003, 2007;
Final%20Version%20Resilience%20Paper%20110917.docx