Prevalence, morbidity and service need among South Asian and white adults with intellectual disability in Leicestershire, UK.
South Asian adults with ID in the UK receive fewer specialist services than white peers despite equal need.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Researchers compared South Asian and white adults with intellectual disability in Leicestershire, UK. They looked at who used psychiatric, residential and respite services. They also asked about unmet needs.
What they found
South Asian adults got far fewer specialist services than white adults. Both groups had similar health problems. South Asian families reported more unmet needs.
How this fits with other research
Lambrechts et al. (2009) found the same gap in children. South Asian kids in London special schools used CAMHS and respite care less than white peers. The pattern starts young and continues into adulthood.
Tsakanikos et al. (2010) adds a twist. Their South London sample shows South Asian adults enter services younger and more often for schizophrenia. This could reflect different referral paths, not just lower use.
Malik et al. (2017) interviewed British South Asian women with ID. Despite poor access, those who did get social care valued it highly. The problem is not refusal; it is the door being hard to open.
Why it matters
Check your caseload for South Asian clients. Ask directly about respite, mental health and housing help. If families say no thanks, probe why. Language, trust or cultural fit may be the real barrier. Offer translated leaflets, link workers or same-ethnicity carers groups. Close the gap one referral at a time.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Review your adult caselist and book a needs-assessment appointment for any South Asian client you have not seen in three months.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous reports have suggested that South Asian and white UK populations have different prevalences of intellectual disability (ID), related psychological morbidity and service use. The aim of the present study was to compare these rates among South Asian and white adults in Leicestershire, UK. METHOD: This cross-sectional study is comprised of two parts. The analysis of prevalence is based on data from all South Asian and white adults known to the Leicestershire Learning Disabilities Register in 1991, with population denominators being drawn from the 1991 census. The other analyses use data collected from the most recent semi-structured home interviews, carried out between 1987 and 1998, with 206 South Asian and 2334 white adults. RESULTS: The prevalence of ID in adults in Leicestershire is 3.20 per 1000 in South Asians and 3.62 per 1000 in whites. Among adults with ID, South Asians have similar prevalences of disabilities to whites and significantly lower skill levels. South Asians show similar levels of psychological morbidity, but make significantly lower use than whites of psychiatric services, residential care and respite care. South Asians use community services as extensively as whites, but feel that they have a substantially greater unmet need, especially with regard to social services. CONCLUSION: South Asian and white populations have similar prevalences of ID and related psychological morbidity. Culturally appropriate services for South Asian adults may need to focus on skill development and community care.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2002 · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2788.2002.00391.x