Critically Examining the Person-Environment Relationship and Implications of Intersectionality for Participation in Children's Rehabilitation Services.
Meaghan Reitzel, Lori Letts, Briano Di Rezze and 1 others
PMID 36188778WHAT IT FOUND
This perspective argues that clinicians should look at a child's whole identity and environment together, not just single traits like age or ethnicity.
This helps spot hidden barriers to therapy participation. It suggests using family-centered care to co-create solutions and advocate for system changes.
Key findings
01Examining personal factors like age or ethnicity in isolation risks missing how systemic inequities and environmental contexts combine to limit a child's participation in therapy.
02Clinicians are encouraged to use a family-centered, solution-focused approach to understand barriers and co-create individualized solutions with parents.
03The paper proposes that clinicians act as critical allies, using their position to advocate for system-level changes that remove inequitable barriers to rehabilitation access.
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
This is a conceptual paper with no empirical data, so it does not prove that using an intersectional lens improves patient outcomes. The authors acknowledge that 'critical allyship' creates a paradox for clinicians who must follow institutional rules while advocating against them, and they offer no clear resolution to this tension. The paper relies heavily on the ICF framework, which the authors admit does not inherently facilitate critical examination of power and inequity without this added theoretical lens.
Declared interests
The authors declare no commercial or financial conflicts of interest. Publication funding was provided by a scholarship from the McMaster University School of Rehabilitation Science.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat this as evidence that intersectional approaches have been tested and proven to improve clinical outcomes. This is a theoretical argument for a new way of thinking, not a report of a successful intervention.