Characteristics of children and adolescents in the Dutch national in- and outpatient mental health service for deaf and hard of hearing youth over a period of 15 years.
Deaf youth entering Dutch mental health clinics carry more autism, ID, and family stress than hearing peers—plan for layered assessments.
01Research in Context
What this study did
van Gent et al. (2012) looked at every deaf or hard-of-hearing child who entered Dutch mental health care over 15 years. They counted how many had autism, intellectual disability, or family stress. The goal was to see if deaf referrals look different from hearing referrals.
What they found
Deaf and hard-of-hearing youth arrived with more labels. More autism. More intellectual disability. More chaos at home. The clinic had to plan for extra layers of need.
How this fits with other research
de Leeuw et al. (2024) adds a number: each extra neurodevelopmental label means worse behaviour scores. Tiejo showed deaf kids often carry three labels at once.
Oliver et al. (2002) gave the Netherlands a valid Dutch checklist for emotional problems in kids with ID. Tiejo’s clinic likely used that tool to spot the high-ID subgroup they reported.
Cashon et al. (2013) looked at the same Dutch deaf kids but measured reading instead of diagnoses. Together the papers paint one picture: deaf youth need help with language, learning, and mental health all at the same time.
Why it matters
If you serve deaf or hard-of-hearing clients, expect a mixed pile of needs. Screen early for autism and ID. Use Dutch-validated tools like the DBC. Build teams that can handle language, behaviour, and family stress together.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add the Dutch DBC to your intake packet for any deaf or hard-of-hearing client and flag for dual diagnoses.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
In this study socio-demographic, deafness-related and diagnostic characteristics of hearing impaired children and adolescents referred to a national mental health service for deaf and hard of hearing children and adolescents were examined. Socio-demographic and diagnostic characteristics were compared to corresponding characteristics of hearing referred peers with identified mental health problems. The difference in characteristics between them and hearing referred peers with identified mental health problems was analyzed. A total of 389 deaf and hard of hearing and 3361 hearing children and adolescents was extracted from a database, all first referrals of patients of a center for child and adolescent psychiatry over a 15-year period. With deaf and hard of hearing patients we found higher rates of environmental stress, as indicated by conditions such as more one parent families (38.6% versus 25.8%), and more parents with a low educational level (44.2% versus 31.1%). Moreover, deaf and hard of hearing patients were older at their first referral (10.8 versus 9.4 years) and had higher rates of pervasive developmental disorders (23.7% versus 12.3%) and mental retardation (20.3% versus 3.9%). Within the target group of deaf and hard of hearing patients, most patients were deaf (68.9%; 22.3% was severely hard of hearing), relatively few (13.7%) had a non-syndromal hereditary hearing impairment, and more (21.3%) had a disabling physical health condition, especially those with a pervasive developmental disorder (42.6%). These findings illustrate both the complexity of the problems of deaf and hard of hearing children and adolescents referred to specialist mental health services, and the need for preventive interventions aimed at early recognition.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2012 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2012.02.012