An Italian-Australian comparison of quality of life among people with intellectual disability living in the community.

Feldman et al. (1999) asked the adults with intellectual disability about their quality of life. Half lived in Australia, half in Italy. They used the same 40-item questionnaire given to adults without disability in both countries.

Staff helped people who needed reading support. Everyone answered questions about home life, work, friends, and happiness.

Adults with intellectual disability scored just as high on quality of life as other adults. The scores were the same in both Australia and Italy.

This means living with intellectual disability does not automatically lower life satisfaction when people live in the community.

Foley et al. (2018) extends these findings. Their data show Australian doctors now see more autistic youth with complex needs than in 1999. Together the papers paint a fuller picture: quality of life can be good, but service demand is rising.

Balboni et al. (2022) gives Italian BCBAs a faster way to diagnose intellectual disability. Their new scale takes less time than the old Vineland-II, freeing hours for teaching skills that support quality of life.

Repp et al. (1992) tracked the adults with severe intellectual disability for seven years. They found only tiny gains in daytime bladder control. Feldman et al. (1999) shows life can still feel good even when skill growth is slow.

Stop assuming disability equals unhappiness. Use quality-of-life scores as a real outcome in your behavior plans. When a client reaches their tooth-brushing or bus-riding goal, ask, "Does this make your day better?" If the answer is yes, the plan is working.