Confronting Epistemic Injustice and Inequity in IDD Research: The Value of Theorizing Beyond Dominant Culture's Perspective.

Emmanuel and colleagues wrote a position paper, not an experiment.

They looked at how power imbalances push out the voices of people with IDD.

The team asked: whose knowledge gets treated as "real science" and whose gets ignored?

The paper says most IDD research still favors white, Western, non-disabled views.

Consent forms, interview scripts, and even authorship lists often silence participants.

This creates "epistemic injustice"—a fancy term for ignoring knowledge because of who holds it.

Three 2023 papers—T et al., E et al., and Robinson—make almost the same point.

All four papers appeared the same year, calling the field racist and exclusionary.

Bogenschutz et al. (2024) and Jackson et al. (2025) pick up the baton with concrete next steps.

They list six research goals and systemic supports so people with IDD become co-researchers, not subjects.

If you write protocols, consent forms, or present results, pause.

Ask: did we quote participants as authors? Are our surveys in plain language?

Small edits—adding an easy-read summary, paying an advisory board—shift power.

Start Monday by showing your next flyer to someone with IDD before you print it.