Parents in the parasport pathway: Parental experiences of facilitating their child’s engagement in competitive disability sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research examining the role of parenting in mainstream sporting environments is well developed but little attention has been focused upon parents of young athletes with disabilities. Parents are often a silent workforce in enabling the engagement of young people in competitive sport. In the case of young athletes with parasport aspirations, parenting brings with it added complexity, both practically and psychologically. Thus, it is necessary to understand the experiences of these parents so appropriate support mechanisms can be developed. As a result, this research asked, “what are parents experiences of supporting their disabled child through their parasport journeys?” Using in-depth reflexive thematic analysis underpinned by phenomenology, interviews with eleven parents of elite youth para-athletes who were based in the United Kingdom were carried out.Our analysis indicated parents of young para-athletes share values relating to equality and inclusion, and that social exclusion in mainstream education environments directed these young people toward sport. Parents discussed the complex and multifarious roles they undertook to support their child’s sport engagement, indicating several challenges including limited local disability-specific sport opportunity and funding difficulties. They also highlighted key benefits for the child (e.g., “fitting in,” social belonging and independence) as well as for them (e.g., parental support, worrying less). Findings are discussed in relation to existing literature, and key recommendations in relation to policy and practice are made.Lay summary: Eleven parents of disabled young athletes were interviewed about their experiences of supporting their child in their parasport journeys. Parents discussed their dissatisfaction with mainstream physical education and school sport and their concerns about their child’s social belonging. Sport was seen as a route toward supporting social inclusion but engaging in youth sport as a parent of a disabled child brought challenges and benefits.IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICEThe wider cultural, societal and environmental barriers to sport engagement for disabled youth, and the meaningfulness of social interactions within youth parasport should be considered when developing theoretical models to understand youth sport systems.It may be useful for youth sports programs at all levels to consult with parents of disabled athletes to develop appropriate mechanisms of support and education which reflect the complexity of the disability landscape.Schools and local community sports clubs should reconsider their offerings and develop more opportunities to engage disabled youth in sport, making access to information about these opportunities readily available to parents and young people.Talent identification pathways for disabled youth would benefit from better clarification and clearer signposting processes leading from community to elite sport.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".