Ableism in Occupational Therapy: A Critical Qualitative Analysis of Disabled Practitioners' Experiences in the Profession.
Jenna L Heffron, Kimberly J The, Aster Harrison
Disabled OTs described being presumed incompetent, pressured to hide their disability, and forced through burdensome accommodation processes.
They also reported that their lived experience made them more client-centered and better at advocating for access.
Key findings
1Ableism was the most salient theme, organized across four levels: ideological, institutional, interpersonal, and internalized.
2All nine participants who had formal accommodations found the process of securing them complicated and taxing.
3Participants described how their disability experience changed their practice, with key approaches including radical client-centeredness, peer support, environmental accessibility, and advocacy.
Still to come
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
All 12 participants were women, so the experiences of disabled male OTs are not represented. OT students conducted some of the interviews under supervision, which the authors note may have affected data quality. OT assistants were not included in the sample. Results were not member-checked with participants due to time and funding constraints. Participants were not specifically asked how other marginalized identities (queerness, racialization) intersected with their experiences as disabled OTs. The sample is small (12) and drawn from a single recruitment pool, so the themes reflect these participants' experiences rather than a generalizable picture of the profession.
Declared interests
The study was supported by the Ithaca College Department of Occupational Therapy and the Ithaca College Center for Faculty Excellence Summer Grant for Faculty Scholarly Work. No industry funding or conflicts of interest were declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat the participants' recommendations as tested interventions. They are the views of 12 disabled OTs about what would help them, not evidence that any specific change improves outcomes. This is a qualitative study of 12 people, not a trial.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →