Women with intellectual disability at risk of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes.
Pregnant clients with ID face triple the risk of pre-eclampsia and low-birth-weight babies, so intensify antenatal monitoring.
01Research in Context
What this study did
McLennan et al. (2008) tracked women with intellectual disability who were receiving antenatal care.
The team compared their pregnancy and birth records to see if medical problems happened more often.
What they found
Mothers with ID had three times the odds of pre-eclampsia, low-birth-weight babies, and neonatal unit admissions.
These risks stayed high even when other health issues were taken into account.
How this fits with other research
Hatton et al. (2004) already showed that people with ID carry higher rates of epilepsy, skin disorders, and fractures. The new data add pregnancy complications to that same list of health gaps.
Olsen et al. (2021) later found that adult women with ID report poorer overall health. D et al.’s birth data help explain part of that gap: serious pregnancy problems may start the downward health trend earlier in life.
Zeng et al. (2025) followed mothers with ID for 15 years and found their stress peaks when their children are toddlers. Combining the two studies suggests a tough sequence: risky pregnancy, sick baby, then chronic caregiver stress.
Why it matters
If you serve women with ID, flag any pregnancy early and insist on tighter obstetric monitoring. Schedule extra blood-pressure checks, nutrition reviews, and neonatal unit tours. Your prompt referral can cut the triple risk of pre-eclampsia and low birth weight, giving both mother and baby a healthier start.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a pregnancy checklist to intake forms for women with ID and call the OB clinic to request high-risk prenatal visits.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: An increasing number of women with intellectual disability (ID) have children. Cross-sectional, clinical population data suggest that these women face an increased risk of delivering preterm and/or low birthweight babies. The aim of this study was to explore the prevalence of poor pregnancy and birth outcomes in women with ID and/or self-reported learning difficulties in an antenatal population. METHODS: A total of 878 pregnant women attending their first antenatal clinic visit were 'screened' for ID. Pregnancy and birth outcomes data were extracted from medical records post-partum. These data included pregnancy-related health conditions, including pre-eclampsia and gestational diabetes, and birth outcomes, including gestational age, birthweight, Apgar score and admission to neonatal intensive care and/or special care nursery. RESULTS: A total of 57 (6.5%) pregnant women with ID and/or self-reported learning difficulties were identified. These women experienced an unusually high rate of pre-eclampsia (odds ratio = 2.85). Their children more often had low birthweights (odds ratio = 3.08), and they were more frequently admitted to neonatal intensive care or special care nursery (odds ratio = 2.51). CONCLUSION: Further research is needed to understand the reasons for the adverse findings of this study and identify potentially changeable factors contributing to adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes for women with ID and/or self-reported learning difficulties and their children. To ensure quality antenatal care, health professionals may need to consider innovations such as extended consultation times, communication aids and audio-taping consultations.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2008 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2008.01061.x