‘A lot of social workers don’t seem to understand or realize the harm that they cause’: Disabled young people’s experiences with sexual well-being in social work practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Young disabled people are disproportionately excluded from equal control, access, and choices concerning their sexual and reproductive rights. While sexual citizenship is founded on a rights-based approach and is closely connected with social work values such as empowerment and entitlement to full participation, many social workers do not include dimensions of sexual well-being in their scope of practice. This phenomenological study explores how social workers address the intersection of sexual well-being and disability from the perspectives of young disabled people. A total of twenty-four semi-structured interviews were carried out with individuals between the ages of 17 and 24 in Ontario, Canada, who identify themselves as disabled and have had prior interactions with a social worker. Social workers adopting risk-averse approaches negatively impacted the trust between young people and their social workers. Young people expressed their discontent with sexual well-being being deprioritized in practice, as participants considered dimensions of sexual well-being to be closely related to their physical, mental, and emotional health. Participants overwhelmingly reported that social workers should discuss sexual well-being with service users using sex-positive perspectives. The findings highlight the importance of holistic and comprehensive social work practices, including sexual well-being and sex-positive perspectives.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".