MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6911919791 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.13357847

BLOOD IS THICKER THAN WATER: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES OF SIBLINGS OF CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS

2024· article· en· W6911919791 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueFamily and Disability Support Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésClosenessSiblingSpecial needsSibling relationshipNeglectFace (sociological concept)CasualGRASP

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In the complex world of families, the relationships between siblings are like a strong thread that holds everything together. However, when they discover that one of their siblings has unique needs or disabilities, it can significantly affect these bonds (Catungal, Cruz, & Abadam 2021). These disabilities can include autism, down syndrome, hearing and visual impairments, etc. Having a child with disabilities can introduce challenges to a family's life, especially for siblings who often end up providing care for them over a long period of time (Chase and McGill, 2019). Often, these siblings feel invisible, their own support needs overlooked amid their sibling's challenges. This dynamic can lead to emotional neglect and further aggravate the complexities within the family structure (Hanvey, Malovic, & Ntontis 2022). The study seeks to address these issues and contribute to a better understanding of the complicated dynamics surrounding siblings in such families. The connections between siblings are marked by a sense of closeness and strong emotional depth (Hughes C., McHarg G., & White N., 2018) but not all the time this connection between them will last. Especially if one has a lifelong disability, their sibling relationship will face distinctive and intricate difficulties as they grow up. From an early age, non-disabled siblings begin to grasp their positions and responsibilities within the family dynamic. Some have already come to terms with the idea that if their parents are no longer able to take care of their disabled sibling, it falls upon them to shoulder this duty. They are completely at ease with this notion, asserting that their disabled sibling has played a pivotal role in fostering closeness within the family. They regard them as the emotional core of the family. However, it's worth noting that not all non-disabled siblings hold the same sentiment towards their disabled counterparts as they grow older. This occurs because some of them experience a sense of neglect and exclusion, observing that their parents' focus is predominantly on their disabled sibling, which results them in gradually detaching themselves from their own family (Avieli, Band-Winterstein, & Bergman, 2019). It is essential to gain awareness of the opinions and experiences of non-disabled siblings since doing so helps one better comprehend how their life course has shaped them as an individual and how their roles within the family affect them. To gain insights into how an individual perceives themselves in relation to their sibling with a disability, it is beneficial to explore theories from various fields that explain emotional and behavioral development within a family context. This research centers around these objectives: first, to explore the challenges and opportunities of siblings in families of children with disabilities; second, to investigate coping mechanisms used by these siblings to maintain family bonds; and lastly, to identify and share valuable lessons and insights from the experiences of these siblings. Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory examines a child's growth within the framework of the relationships that constitute their environment. The theory identifies various layers in this environment, each influencing a child's development. The interplay between a child's evolving biology, immediate family and community surroundings, and the broader societal context propels and guides their development. Consequently, this theory offers deeper insights into an individual's life experiences, particularly those of individuals raised alongside disabled siblings. In the Life Course Theory, life experiences are interconnected and shaped by various factors such as family dynamics which these factors collectively contribute to shaping an individual into the person they are today. That’s why, knowing the side point of the non-disabled siblings about their experiences in growing up with their disabled siblings is important as this helps us to understand them more. Furthermore, these two theories will guide us in explaining the behavioral and emotional issues of the non-disabled siblings within the family (Russell, 2024). While much attention has been given to understanding the experiences of families with children who have disabilities, there's a noticeable research gap when it comes to the lived experiences of individuals growing up together with their brother or sister particularly children with disabilities (Hanvey, I. et al., 2022). We want to dig deep into the complex world of sibling relationships to uncover what's been failed to notice. According to UNICEF (2018), PhilHealth states that roughly one out of every seven Filipino kids, which amounts to about 5.1 million children, are living with disabilities. However, we currently lack the data about how many of them have brothers or sisters nor the insights they have living with them. The significance of this study lies in the exploration of the bond between the non-disabled and disabled siblings within a family. This will examine how deep their relationship is as we are going to delve into their experiences. The direct beneficiaries of our study include siblings of children with special needs, parents/guardians, educators, healthcare professionals, and policy makers. By understanding their experiences and needs, we aim to enhance support systems, foster inclusivity, and inform policy and practice. This study directly supports SDG #4 by investigating the unique educational hurdles they encounter, with the aim of fostering inclusive educational environments. By understanding and addressing these challenges, we strive to contribute to the goal of providing quality education for all. Moreover, our study contributes to SDG #10 by shedding light on the inequalities experienced within families, emphasizing the importance of support structures, and fostering empathy towards siblings navigating diverse circumstances.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,024
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,048

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0120,004
Communication savante0,0030,005
Science ouverte0,0020,010
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,084
Tête enseignante GPT0,281
Écart entre enseignants0,197 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Même sujetFamily and Disability Support Research→Travaux en français237 207→