Household task participation of children and adolescents with cerebral palsy, Down syndrome and typical development.
Kids with CP and DS keep helping at home but need more prompts and finish less cleanly than peers.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team watched kids do everyday chores at home. They compared three groups: kids with cerebral palsy, kids with Down syndrome, and kids with no disability.
Each child got the same checklist of jobs like setting the table or folding laundry. Raters noted how much help the child needed and how well the job was done.
What they found
Kids with CP or DS stayed willing to help, but they needed more prompts and did not finish tasks as cleanly. Typical peers worked faster and needed little or no help.
Independence scores were lower for both disability groups. The gap stayed wide even when the child tried hard.
How this fits with other research
van Wely et al. (2020) tracked the same kids for 13 years. Teens who needed lots of help at home became adults who still needed lots of help. Early low scores predicted later low scores.
Kerem-Günel et al. (2023) looked at wider daily life. They found self-care skills matter most for little kids, while mobility training matters most for teens. The 2014 chore data lines up: younger CP kids struggled with fine jobs like buttoning, while older ones struggled with carrying items across the house.
Adams et al. (2024) asked parents of kids with DCD about home life. Those parents reported the same story: kids want to join, but motor limits and extra weight shrink what they can actually do. All three studies paint one picture — motor disability plus extra pounds equals less participation.
Why it matters
You can start fixing this now. Break chores into tiny steps, teach each step with hand-over-hand guidance, then fade prompts fast. Add light weights or adaptive grips so the child can hold the dustpan or spray bottle. Track prompt level each week — your data sheet becomes the proof that independence is growing. Share the sheet with parents so they repeat the same prompt level at home. Small wins today stack into bigger adult independence tomorrow.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one daily chore, cut it into three steps, and record prompt level each trial.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
This cross-sectional study compared patterns of household task participation (e.g., performance, assistance and independence) of youth with cerebral palsy (CP), Down syndrome (DS) and typical development (TD). Parents of 75 children and adolescents were interviewed to report on their youths' active engagement in daily self-care and family-care tasks, using the children helping out: responsibilities, expectations and supports (CHORES) questionnaire. Groups were equivalent in age (mean=9.3 years; SD=2.2 years), sex (male=39; female=36), respondent education, presence of maid, and number of siblings at home, but differed on child cognitive function and family socioeconomic status, with the DS and the CP groups scoring lower than the TD group but not different from each other. ANOVA revealed group differences on CHORES performance of self-care tasks (p=0.004), on total participation score (p=0.04) and on assistance scores (p<0.02). Post hoc comparisons showed that TD group scored higher than CP and DS groups on performance and assistance in self-care tasks and total assistance; TD and CP groups were similar on total performance and assistance in family-care tasks. The groups also differed on independence indices; the TD index was greater than the CP and DS, and the CP index was greater than the DS. Parents from the three groups did not differ on ratings of importance regarding their children's household participation (p=0.416). In spite of observed differences, children and adolescents with CP and DS are actively engaged in daily self-care and family-care tasks; their participation at home is not prevented by the presence of their disabilities.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2014 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2013.11.021