• To enhance your awareness of the effects of stigma on children with a learning disability
• To familiarise yourself with the concept of ‘double discrimination’ and how this can affect children with a learning disability
• To understand whether therapeutic interventions can improve self-esteem in children with a learning disability
Background Children with a learning disability can experience stigma in several ways, for example through abuse or barriers such as social rejection that limit their opportunities. The level of awareness of stigma can vary from person to person; however, those who perceive themselves to have a stigmatised identity have been found to have reduced aspirations and self-esteem. Research suggests that children with a learning disability have lower self-esteem than their typically developing peers.
Aim To explore whether having more than one potentially stigmatising characteristic or attribute (‘double discrimination’) influences the self-esteem of children with a learning disability; and to understand whether therapeutic interventions could improve self-esteem.
Method Data collected by teachers, including self-esteem scores for 20 children with a learning disability, were analysed to explore whether double discrimination was related to lower self-esteem, and whether receiving a therapeutic intervention in the form of input from a clinical psychologist, and/or participating in a gardening group, influenced self-esteem.
Results The pilot study found that those children who experienced double discrimination had significantly lower self-esteem than those who did not. Those in the therapeutic intervention group had increased self-esteem scores compared with baseline, while the scores of those in the control group and who received normal schooling fell slightly, although the difference was not significant.
Conclusion The results may assist nurses to develop interventions that improve the self-esteem of children with a learning disability.
Learning Disability Practice. 23, 3, 25-30. doi: 10.7748/ldp.2020.e2077
Correspondence Peer reviewThis article has been subject to external double-blind peer review and has been checked for plagiarism using automated software
Conflict of interestNone declared
PermissionTo reuse this article or for information about reprints and permissions, please contact permissions@rcni.com
Write for usFor information about writing for RCNi journals, contact writeforus@rcni.com
For author guidelines, go to rcni.com/writeforus
or
Alternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now
Are you a student? Our student subscription has content especially for you.
Find out more