Austerity and families with disabled children: a European survey.
Karen A Horridge, Rosie Dew, Alain Chatelin and 5 others
PMID 30028502WHAT IT FOUND
Across Europe, families with disabled children and professionals reported services were worse than 3 years ago and needs were less well met than 10 years ago.
Families in countries with spending cuts reported harder access to welfare support.
Key findings
0191% of families reported worsening quality of services compared with 3 years ago, with no reported difference between countries with and without spending cuts.
02Families reported that their disabled child's health, education, and social care needs were less well met than 10 years ago, except families in severe poverty reported a slight but not significant improvement in education support.
03Professionals in countries with spending cuts reported worse working conditions more often (61%) than professionals in countries without spending cuts (49%).
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
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
The survey used voluntary, non-probability sampling, so the people who responded may not represent all families or professionals. Only people with internet access could respond. Response rates varied by country because local organizations chose how widely to share the links. The survey could not capture disabled children living in institutions or receiving no care. It was not an epidemiological survey, and the authors state findings must be interpreted with caution. Countries were classified by national debt and deficit thresholds, not by direct evidence of cuts to each service. The surveys were translated with machine translation and then checked by volunteers and contacts, which may affect wording.
Declared interests
The supplied publication types note non-U.S. government research support; the article text does not list author conflicts or a specific funder.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as proof that spending cuts caused worse care. It is a voluntary online survey of service experiences, not a controlled study, and it did not measure treatment results.