Discordance in informed consent response on the basis of demographic factors: brief report.

McConkey et al. (2010) mailed a short survey to every conservator of adults with profound intellectual disability living in large state homes.

They asked who the conservator was, their race, and whether they would sign off on a common muscle-relaxing shot.

The team then checked if the adult’s own race or sex changed the yes rate.

Conservator race, ethnicity, and family role shaped consent, not the resident’s own traits.

White conservators said yes more often; Hispanic and Black conservators said no more often.

The adult’s race, sex, or level of disability made no difference.

Tsakanikos et al. (2010) saw the same year that minority adults with ID in London were sent to psychiatry younger and more often than White peers.

Wang et al. (2021) later found Black and Latinx adults with IDD cite “distrust” and “don’t know where to go” as top care barriers.

Together the three studies form a line: minority families meet the system with caution at consent, referral, and first access.

Arana et al. (2019) flips the picture: Hispanic and Black women with ID actually get breast screens more than White peers.

The gap is not always “less care”; sometimes it is different care, driven by different fears or knowledge.

If you serve adults with severe ID, check who holds consent power and their cultural lens.

Offer plain-language handouts, use trusted translators, and hold pre-meetings so families can ask questions before the big yes-or-no moment.

Small outreach steps can turn a “no” into an informed “yes” and keep needed care from stalling.