Repeated sexual assault among people with disabilities: A comparative analysis by disability type.
Repeated sexual assault is 2-3 times more common in people with intellectual or mental disabilities—screen every client, every session.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Pu et al. (2026) compared sexual assault rates across disability types. They looked at people with intellectual disabilities, mental disabilities, and no disabilities.
The study used national survey data. It counted how often each group faced repeated sexual assault.
What they found
People with intellectual or mental disabilities suffer repeated sexual assault 2-3 times more often. The risk stays high across all settings.
The finding held for both men and women. Living situation did not erase the extra risk.
How this fits with other research
Earlier case series saw the same pattern. Fox et al. (2001) found sexual abuse issues in 14% of child in-patients with ID. Carter et al. (1995) showed abused adults with learning disabilities displayed more sexualized behaviors. Christy et al. now gives the hard numbers behind those clinic stories.
Godoy-Giménez et al. (2024) adds a setting twist. They showed residential care itself doubles caregiver victimization for adults with ID. Christy et al. confirms the 2-3× risk exists everywhere, while Marta et al. points to one place where it spikes even higher.
Cook et al. (2021) scoping review warned the trauma-IDD evidence was 'sparse and fragmented.' Christy et al. fills a big gap with clear population-level data.
Why it matters
If you work with adults or children who have intellectual or mental disabilities, treat repeated sexual assault as a baseline risk, not a rare event. Add abuse questions to every intake, every reassessment, and every team meeting. Pair your behavior plan with a safety plan that includes private-time monitoring, trusted-adult rotation, and direct instruction on consent and reporting. Document any new sexualized behavior as a possible red flag and refer for medical and psychological follow-up.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add two abuse-screening questions to your intake form and review them at each reassessment.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Sexual violence disproportionately affects people with disabilities. Repeated sexual assault, a core marker of system failure, is an understudied topic in disability research. The current study quantified inequalities in sexual revictimization between people with and without disabilities and between disability types. We linked Taiwan's 2019-2022 National Sexual Assault Database with the National Disability Registry to compare revictimization by disability status and type and to identify correlates. Negative binomial models yielded incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with adjustment for age, sex, place of residence, income, perpetrator relationship, and follow-up time. Among 30,124 individuals with sexual assault experience, 3116 (10.3 %) experienced multiple assaults; 22.8 % of these experienced 3 or more assaults. People with disabilities were more likely to experience multiple assaults than were people without disabilities (IRR = 2.42, P < .001). Among people with disabilities (n = 3633), those with an intellectual disability (IRR = 1.83, P < .001) or a mental disability (IRR = 2.32, P < .001) were the most likely to experience revictimization. Perpetrator relationship had an influence; compared with noncohabiting partners, the following perpetrators were associated with a greater risk of multiple assault: online acquaintances (IRR = 1.94, P < .001); fathers (IRR = 1.64, P < .001), and strangers (IRR = 1.68, P < .001). Online acquaintances were a risk factor among people with disabilities (IRR = 1.74, P < .001). Our findings highlight substantial, disability-specific disparities in repeated sexual assault. Prevention and response should prioritize assisting survivors with intellectual and mental disabilities.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2026 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2026.105225