Service Delivery

BIOMED-MEROPE project: service provision for adults with intellectual disability: a European comparison.

Holt et al. (2000) · Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR 2000
★ The Verdict

Fragmented care is still the norm for adults with ID and mental-health needs—integrate your teams and screen every client.

✓ Read this if BCBAs working with adults with ID in community or residential settings.
✗ Skip if Clinicians who serve only children or clients without dual diagnoses.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Dawson et al. (2000) looked at how five European countries serve adults with intellectual disability and mental-health needs. They compared policies, funding, and day-to-day programs in a narrative review. The goal was to see where services break down and what each country could learn from the others.

02

What they found

Every country showed the same picture: services were split into pieces. Mental-health teams and ID teams rarely talked. Adults fell through cracks. National policy often existed on paper but not in practice.

03

How this fits with other research

K-Reid et al. (2005) later counted the damage in one Swedish county. Half of adults with ID had undiagnosed mental-health problems, echoing the gaps G et al. first mapped.

Cannella et al. (2006) gave the fix. They ran an integrated service that linked ID and mental-health staff. Clients got better on every measure, proving the fragmentation can be solved.

Hithersay et al. (2014) sounded a warning. They hunted for carer-led health programs and found none that actually work for adults with ID. The need for specialist, integrated care remains.

04

Why it matters

If you serve adults with ID, treat mental-health needs as standard, not extra. Build one shared plan that both ID and mental-health staff sign. Use I et al.’s model: joint assessments, shared notes, and crisis lines that know the client. Start by adding a mental-health screener to your intake packet today.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Add a brief mental-health screener to your intake and invite a community psychiatrist to your next team meeting.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
narrative review
Population
intellectual disability
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

The aim of the present paper is to describe and compare services for adults with intellectual disability (ID) and mental health needs in five European countries: Austria, England, Greece, Ireland and Spain. A framework and structure for collecting information about service provision was designed. This information was collected through a mixture of interviews with service providers, questionnaires and a review of the research literature within each country. Information was collected on historical context, policy, legislation, assessment, treatment and the structure of services for people with ID and mental health problems. Overall, the needs of those with additional mental health needs have not been specifically addressed at a national level with perhaps the exception of England and Ireland, although there are still gaps in services in these nations. Normalization has been adopted in each of the five countries, and there are moves toward deinstitutionalization, integration and inclusion. Families and self-advocacy groups have grown. The pace of this change varies between and even within countries. The main findings of the study include: unclear policy, trends for legislative changes, increased prevalence of mental health problems, inadequate generic service provision, a need for specialist mental health services, a need for improved interconnections of services, and a need for training developments. Policy and legislation in the five European countries under consideration tend to separate the disability aspects of people with ID from their mental health needs. Consequently, the service needs of this group remain largely invisible. This might be a direct reflection of policy clarity and legislation, or could be the result of a failure to implement existing guidelines. This has a detrimental effect on the lives of people with ID, and their families and carers.

Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2000 · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2788.2000.00312.x