Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The purpose of the study was to formulate and test a framework of a normalization-based approach to risk-taking and community living among individuals with mild- to medium-level intellectual disability (ID) and determine its effect on both adaptive functioning and risk-related incidents, community participation, and recidivism factors. A sequential exploratory design with a mixed-method was used on 124 offenders with ID. The participants were separated into a community living group that was based on normalization (n = 62) and a traditional supervision group (n = 62). Adaptive behavior scales, structured risk assessment tools, community participation index, quality-of-life measures, and official recidivism records were used to collect data during a 12-month follow-up duration. The statistical tests were repeated-measures ANOVA, regression modeling, and logistic regression. The adaptive functioning in the normalization group showed a large improvement (mean increase = 9.2 points, p < 0.01) than in the traditional group (mean increase = 3.4 points, p = 0.08). Serious incidents were lower in the normalization group (0.4 vs. 0.8). Community participation (74.6 vs. 61.3, p < 0.001), quality of life (78.9 vs. 66.7, p < 0.001), and perceived autonomy (72.4 vs. 59.8, p < 0.001) were significantly higher. The recidivism rates became lower (12.9% vs. 27.4%), and the chance of reoffending was lower by 58% (OR = 0.42, p < 0.05). The adaptive skills, serious incidents, and recidivism are reduced significantly, which promotes strengths-based and community-oriented rehabilitation of the offenders with intellectual disability, as demonstrated by the normalization-based frameworks.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Singh et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: