BLOOD IS THICKER THAN WATER: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES OF SIBLINGS OF CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL NEEDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".