Predictors of access to sex education for children with intellectual disabilities in public schools.
Students who talk the least get sex-ed the least—so scan your caseload and add explicit sex-ed goals for non-speaking learners.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Stuttard et al. (2014) looked at who gets sex-ed in public schools. They tracked students with intellectual disability. The team asked teachers and parents who was in the class.
They split the kids into mild, moderate, and profound ID groups. Then they counted how many received any sex-ed lessons.
What they found
Kids with moderate or profound ID got sex-ed at only one-third the rate of kids with mild ID. Expressive talking skill was the only factor that mattered.
IQ scores, gender, and race did not predict access. If a child could speak clearly, they were far more likely to be included.
How this fits with other research
Marsack et al. (2017) found that teens with mild ID take more risks. Those same mild-ID teens are the ones most likely to get sex-ed. The pattern looks backwards: the group that needs safety knowledge most receives it least.
Yen et al. (2012) saw a similar gap in flu shots. Only 23 % of youth with ID got vaccinated. Both studies show preventive services skip the most vulnerable.
Xenitidis et al. (2010) adds a twist. Adults with ID who show sexualised behaviour actually know more about sex, not less. Lucy’s data suggest they may have gained that knowledge after school, because they were barred from classes as students.
Why it matters
Check every IEP for sex-ed goals. If a student uses AAC or has limited speech, write a goal and push for inclusion. One simple fix: ask the health teacher to add picture-based materials. Fair access starts with you.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Open each client’s IEP—if sex-ed is blank and expressive language is under 50 words, add an objective: ‘Student will label private body parts using AAC across three sessions.’
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Data from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 ( SRI International, 2002 ) were analyzed to identify variables that predicted whether individuals with intellectual disability (ID) received sex education in public schools across the United States. Results suggested that individuals receiving special education services without ID were only slightly more likely to receive sex education than students with mild ID (47.5% and 44.1%, respectively), but the percentage of students with moderate to profound ID that received sex education was significantly lower (16.18%). Analysis of teacher opinions and perceptions of the likelihood of the students benefiting from sex education found that most teachers indicated that students without ID or with mild ID would benefit (60% and 68%, respectively), but the percentage dropped to 25% for students with moderate to profound ID. Finally, across all students, the only significant demographic variable that predicted receipt of sex education was more expressive communication skills. Results are discussed in terms of ensuring equal access to sex education for students with ID in public schools.
Intellectual and developmental disabilities, 2014 · doi:10.1352/1934-9556-52.2.85