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 at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

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
Journal of
Intellectual Disabilities
University of Haifa, Israel © 2007
sage publications
Temple University, Philadelphia, USA Los Angeles, London,
New Delhi and Singapore
vol 11(4) 371‒387
University of Haifa, Israel issn 1744-6295(084602)11:4
doi: 10.1177⁄1744629507084602

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 findings 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 findings 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.

Keywords abuse; disabilities; intellectual disabilities; sexual abuse;

victimization

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 at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

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 findings 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 dis-
ability 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 adminis-
tratively 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 experi-
enced 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 difficulty
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 acknowl-
edge 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 at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

 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 definable. Even though
bullying is not considered an offence against the law, the suffering inflicted
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 officials 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 inflicted on students with intel-
lectual 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 officers 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 consider-
ations 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 confidentiality, as well as possible
referral to professional staff or law enforcement agencies, the project had

373

Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

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 confidentiality 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 confidentiality. Only 10 percent of the parents
approached did not agree to their children’s participation. The field
researcher served as the school’s 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 dis-
abilities 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 popu-
lation 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 includ-
ing 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 at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

 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, specifically the higher number of girls in the control
group, there were no statistically significant 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 confidentiality, (b) providing
support measures to those who experienced trauma or stress as they recalled
their experiences, and (c) identifying the researchers’ ethical and legal obli-
gations 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 Adolescents with Non-disabled Chi-square test

variables disabilities adolescents
N = 50 N = 50

Gender: 2.67, n.s.

Boys 25 17
Girls 25 33
Age (range, mean) 12–21 12–18 t-test:
mean 16.58 mean 16.10 t = 1.37, n.s.
SD 1.90 SD 1.58
Family status: 4.05, n.s.
Married 34 40
Divorced 12 6
Widowed 4 3
One parent – 1
Country of origin: 1.62, n.s.
Israel 37 42
Soviet Union 9 5
Ethiopia 4 3
Place of living: 2.70, n.s.
Home 44 48
Boarding home 6 2
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

375

Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

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 specific 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 experi-
ence, 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
confirmed by five 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
confident 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 admin-
istered 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 field researcher, who filled in the answers for the student.
All students were told that their answers were strictly confidential and no
names would be used in the final 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 at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

 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 findings 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
Significant 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 five
out of nine domains – being forced to do something, being refused some-
thing 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 Adolescents with Non-disabled Chi-square test

abuse disabilities adolescents
N = 50 N = 50

Physical abuse:
Theft 24 52 8.47**
Threat of physical harm 42 24 3.69
Physical attack 38 32 0.39
Forced to do something 28 8 7.10**
Refused something essential
for wellbeing 14 – 10.23***
Sexual abuse:
Sexual abuse 40 16 7.32**
Unwanted sexual touching 38 18 5.04*
Forced to touch someone
sexually against their will 14 4 3.21
Emotional abuse:
Humiliation 50 30 4.20*
Rejection 18 10 1.34
* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

377

Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES 11 ( 4 )
sexually against their will, and humiliation – students with disabilities
experienced significantly 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. Significant differences
between respondents with and without disabilities are presented below,
and because this is an exploratory study, findings that were not statistically
significant but showed a clear tendency in a certain direction will also be
reported. The description of the findings follows the sections of the ques-
tionnaire 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 significant (χ2 = 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 significant difference (χ2 = 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 significant.
Where were you threatened? A significant difference (χ2 = 10.61, p < 0.05)
was found regarding the place where the threat took place. The non-
disabled students reported being threatened most often at school (50.4%)

378

Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

 REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

and in the neighborhood (41.3%), and rarely at home (8.3%); in compari-

son, 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 signifi-
cant, showed an interesting tendency.The non-disabled students were physi-
cally 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 experi-
enced most of the physical abuse in the neighborhood (57.9%).

Forced to do something against one’s will Were you forced to do something

against your will? A significantly (χ2 = 7.10, p < 0.01) higher percentage
among students with disabilities (28%) reported being forced to do some-
thing against their will than non-disabled students (8%).
Where were you forced to do something against your will? Students with dis-
abilities 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 one’s wellbeing Were you refused

something essential for your wellbeing? The difference in this area is significant
(χ2 = 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 significant difference was
found regarding repeated abuse (χ2 = 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
(χ2 = 8.03, p < 0.05); physical attacks 94.7 percent compared to 56.2
percent among non-disabled students (χ2 = 7.93, p < 0.05); refused some-
thing essential 85.7 percent compared to 0 cases among students without
disabilities (χ2 = 10.23, p < 0.001).

379

Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

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%)
(χ2 = 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 experi-
ences of students generally, and students with disabilities were at higher risk.

Sexual harassment Table 2 shows a significant (χ2 = 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 significantly (χ2 = 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). Simi-
larly, 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 at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

 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 at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

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 non-
disabled 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%). Significant (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 significantly different between
the non-disabled and disabled students (χ2 = 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. Significant (χ2 = 7.20,
p < 0.01) differences were found in the emotional sphere: 74 percent of

382

Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

 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 non-
disabled 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 findings with the survey carried out in the US with a sample of persons
with physical, developmental and communication disabilities, all of whom
had communication difficulties and used augmentative and alternative
communication (AAC) devices. Since the two samples were relatively small,
we were unable to make statistically significant 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 findings
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 differ-
ence 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 at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

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 findings. The control group recruitment method,
based on a ‘friend brings a friend’, could also have biased our findings,
although it provided an important similarity to the disabled group in
neighborhoods and living conditions.
However, in spite of its limitations, some conclusions regarding tenden-
cies can be drawn to be further investigated in a larger, more representa-
tive group of adolescents using a stronger methodological approach. The
data gathered in our survey confirm findings 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 adolescent’s or the family’s 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 difficult field 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 at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

 REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

The findings of our exploratory study showed that there were differ-
ences 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 one’s 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 findings support other research (Bryen et al., 2003; Sobsey, 1994)
that people with disabilities, irrespective of the kind of disability, experi-
ence abuse more frequently than the general population.
The results of this preliminary study should lead to a large scale investi-
gation 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 psy-
chologists, and contact with treatment centers such as shelters for children
at risk or for abused women, and clinics that provide assistance to trau-
matized persons and those suffering from PTSD.
Moreover, preventive measures such as the ‘decision-making curricu-
lum’, 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 fight back, to be
assertive and to resist the abuser. The very first 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): 323–35.

385

Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

JOURNAL OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES 11 ( 4 )
B E L M O N T R E P O RT (1978) Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of
Research. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
B RY E N , D . N . (2002) ‘End the Silence’, Issues in Special Education & Rehabilitation 17 (2):
7–17.
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): 125–34.
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): 362–82.
F U R E Y, E . M . (1994) ‘Sexual Abuse of Adults with Mental Retardation: Who and
Where?’, Mental Retardation 32: 173–80.
H OW E , K . R . & M O S E S , M . S . (1999) ‘Ethics in Educational Research’, Review of
Research in Education 24: 21–59.
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 Decision-
Making Curriculum Designed to Empower Women with Mental Retardation to
Resist Abuse’, American Journal on Mental Retardation 110 (3): 193–204.
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: 313–17.
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: 404–9.
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): 179–83.
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 Identification Model’, Developmental Disabilities Bulletin 29 (2): 170–95.
M A RO M , M . & U Z I E L , L . (2001) Children with Disabilities in Risk Situations: A Literature Review.
Jerusalem: JDC–Brookdale 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. 202–6. 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, 1–4 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: 243–59.
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): 1257–73.
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 at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010

 REITER ET AL.: VICTIMS OF ABUSE

V I G, S . & K A M I N E R , R . (2002) ‘Maltreatment and Developmental Disabilities in

Children’, Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities 14: 371–86.
W E S T C O T T, H . (1993) Abuse of Children and Adults with Disabilities. London: NSPCC.

Correspondence should be addressed to:

of Education, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905,
P RO F E S S O R S H U N I T R E I T E R , Faculty
Israel. e-mail: shunitr@construct.haifa.ac.il

Date accepted 20/07/07

387

Downloaded from http://jid.sagepub.com at University of South Australia on April 5, 2010