Children and Adolescents with Disabilities : Myths
Commonly held myths hinder society's ability to prevent and identify abuse in children and adolescents with disabilities. Some of these are:
Nobody would abuse children or adolescents with disabilities because everyone feels pity toward them. Multiple studies have demonstrated the increased prevalence of maltreatment among children and adolescents with disabilities. As with non-disabled children, most abuse happens at the hands of a person well known to them. Filicide is so prevalent in this population that March 1 is known internationally as the Disability Day of Mourning, which memorializes disabled children and adults who have been killed by their parents. In addition to abuse by family members or other caretakers in their homes, children and adolescents who live in residential facilities may be abused by employees of those facilities.
Moreover, the idea that pity would prevent abuse has been widely challenged by disability advocates. Pity is often linked to stigma toward people with disabilities, potentially compounding the likelihood of abuse. Pity is sometimes cited as a rationale for violence, such as in so-called “mercy killings,” where a family member kills or attempts to kill a disabled relative whose care needs are perceived to be too burdensome on others.
If children and adolescents do not know that they are being abused, they won't suffer any consequences. There is no empirical support for the concept that children and adolescents with disabilities are any less vulnerable to the devastating mental health consequences of abuse than their non-disabled peers. Typical cognitive capacities are not required for abuse to be traumatic or for a child to understand that they are being abused. Children with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) should never be assumed incapable of experiencing the consequences of abuse. Note, too, that people with physical disabilities are often assumed to have IDD when they do not, and that, in general, non-disabled observers are often incorrect in their assumptions about disabled people’s capacities.
Abuse is a natural consequence of the overburdening of family caregivers. While it is true that our society fails to support the care needs of people with disabilities and their families, high support needs do not explain or excuse violence toward disabled children. At the same time, it is important to recognize that structural barriers can create conditions that are harmful to a child (e.g., lacking access to 24/7 care staff or accessible housing) but are not the products of abuse. When abuse is suspected involving a child with complex care needs, health professionals must guard against potential biases that would exculpate abusive family members, while also being discerning about how structural barriers can produce harms that may be best addressed through connection to resources.
