Abstract
Back ground:
The child with mental retardation has special needs in addition to the regular
needs of all children, and parents can find themselves over whelmed by various
medical, care giving, financial and educational responsibilities. Government of
India, “The National Policy on Mental Handicap”, has emphasized the importance
of home-based care with parents as partners in the care process. Aim: To understand the positive and
negative effects on parents of Mentally Retarded children by using National
Institute for the Mentally Handicapped Disability Impact Scale (NIMH-DIS). Material and methods:Two intelligence
tests [Vineland Social Maturity Scale (VSMS) and Developmental Screening Test
(DST)] have been selected.Study sample is selected by purposive sampling method
and categorized into three groups. Results:
Parents of Mentally retarded children are impacted more by lifting &
carrying the child (percentage of obtained score = 41.7), toileting (percentage
ofobtained score = 40.6) and bathing (percentage of obtained score = 40).
Maximum negative impact is on physical care (percentage of NIMH-DIS score =
35.5), followed by financial (percentage of NIMH-DIS score = 33.9) and loss of
support (percentage of NIMH-DIS score = 33). Conclusion: It is not necessary for every parent having a Mental
Retardation child to have negative impact but in some this can bring a positive
impact, like acceptance of the situation realistically and standing right
behind the Mental Retardation child to provide support.
Key words:
Mental Retardation, (NIMH-DIS), SDSSQ and Intelligent Quotients.
Introduction
The
birth of a baby is singularly, the most important joyous occasion in the life
of any parent. Many parents hold out a lot of hopes for the future of their
children, but when faced with the scenario of a child with special needs or
intellectual handicap, they go through a whole lot of emotions including
disappointment, resentment, a sense of guilt and a fear for the future of the
child. Raising such a child requires emotional strength and flexibility. The
child with mental retardation has special needs in addition to the regular
needs of all children, and parents can find themselves over whelmed by various
medical, care giving, financial and educational responsibilities. It does not
imply that birth of a mentally retarded child has a negative impact on all
parents as in some it has been observed to have a positive influence on their
personality, bringing out a hitherto hidden mental strength in rising to the
occasion and forming a firm support base for their child.This adaptation
mechanism on behalf of the parents is inturn dependent on several personal and
social factors including the psychological makeup of the parents, their
education, attitudes, religious beliefs, social support system and monetary
aspects.
American
Association of Mental Deficiency (ASMD), has defined mental retardation as a
“significantly sub average general intellectual functioning, resulting or
associated with concurrent impairment in adaptive behavior and ismanifested
during the developmental period”[1]. In Indian scenario, nearly 2 % of the
population is constituted by persons with mental retardation [2], and its
prevalence varies from 0.22-32.7 per thousand populations [2,3].
The
present study was undertaken with a view to understand all the factors that
have a positive or negative impact on parents of mentally retarded children so
that the same can be applied to bring about a behavior modification and promote
better coping strategies among parents with stress.
Material
Methods
Study design:Single
stage cross sectional study.
Study setting: PediatricOutpatient
department at Maharajah’s Institute of Medical Sciences, Vizianagaram
Study population: Study
sample was selected by purposive sampling method and categorized into three
groups (Mild, Moderate and Severe), based on the children’s Intelligent
Quotient levels.
1. Mild:
contains both parents (both mother and father) of 30 mild mentally
retardedchildren.
2. Moderate:
contains both parents (both mother and father) of 30 moderately mentally
retardedchildren.
3. Severe:
It contains both parents (both mother and father) of 30 severe to profound
mentally retardedchildren.
The
total study sample size is 90 and study period is 12 months
·
Parents of children
aged 5-15years.
·
Parents of children
with IQ below70.
·
Children having both
the parents aretaken.
·
Parents who gave their
consent forstudy.
·
Children having
severe/chronic physical illness.
·
Parents suffering any
physical or mentalillness and single parents.
·
Patients who refuse to
giveconsent.
Study tools: Study
tools included self-designed semi-structured questionnaire and National
Institute for the Mentally Handicapped Disability Impact Scale. The data
pertaining to their sociodemographic details and clinical variables was
collected using the self designed semi-structured questionnaire and was
analyzed.
A. Socio-demographic
profiles ofparents
B. Impact
of mental retardation on parents of MRchildren
C. Impact
of mental retardation on parents of MR children - based on parent’s gender
D. Impact
of mental retardation on parents of MR children - based on severity of mental
retardation
Major variables studied here were parent’s age, sex,
type of family, education, income, religion and occupation of parents. In the
present study, 65.6% of parents belongedto rural areas.Majority of the parents
(81%) belonged to nuclear type of family structure
Table 1: Socio-demographic profiles
Self-designed
semi-structured questionnaire |
Number of parents |
% |
N |
|
Fathers
occupation |
Unemployed
/ house Wife |
3 |
3.3 |
90 |
Formers
/ Self-employed |
54 |
60.0 |
||
Employed
in some Firm |
33 |
36.7 |
||
Mothers
occupation |
Unemployed
/ house Wife |
69 |
76.7 |
90 |
Formers
/ Self-employed |
18 |
20.0 |
||
Employed
in some Firm |
3 |
3.3 |
||
Parents
income |
less
than 10000 |
35 |
19.4 |
180 |
10000-19999 |
31 |
17.2 |
||
20000-29999 |
86 |
47.8 |
||
30000
or above |
28 |
15.6 |
||
Infections
during Pregnancy |
Absent |
87 |
96.7 |
90 |
Present |
3 |
3.3 |
||
Attempt
to induce Abortion |
Absent |
79 |
87.8 |
90 |
Present |
11 |
12.2 |
||
History
of repetitive Abortion |
Absent |
80 |
88.9 |
90 |
Present |
10 |
11.1 |
||
Fathers
age at child birth |
Below
20 years |
3 |
3.3 |
90 |
21-35
years |
70 |
77.8 |
||
Above
35 years |
17 |
18.9 |
||
Mothers
age at child birth |
Below
20 years |
20 |
22.2 |
90 |
21-35
years |
65 |
72.2 |
||
Above
35 years |
5 |
5.6 |
||
Nature
of delivery |
Natural |
71 |
78.9 |
90 |
Cesarean |
17 |
18.9 |
||
Forceps |
2 |
2.2 |
||
Complications
during Birth |
Absent |
28 |
31.1 |
90 |
Present |
62 |
68.9 |
||
Complications
after birth |
Present |
14 |
15.6 |
90 |
Absent |
76 |
84.4 |
||
MR
diagnosis age |
Below
5 years |
102 |
56.7 |
180 |
5-10
years |
48 |
26.7 |
||
10-15
years |
30 |
16.7 |
||
MR
child sex |
Male |
119 |
66.1 |
180 |
Female |
61 |
33.9 |
||
MR
child birth order |
First |
77 |
42.8 |
180 |
Between |
63 |
35.0 |
||
Last |
40 |
22.2 |
||
MR
child education |
Not
going to school |
81 |
45.0 |
180 |
Preprimary |
58 |
32.2 |
||
Primary |
32 |
17.8 |
||
Higher
than primary |
9 |
5.0 |
Table 1: Self-designed semi-structured
questionnaire, information was collected regarding father’s and mother’s
occupation along with parentsincome and their ages at the time of child birth.
A past history of abortions, infections during pregnancy and mode of delivery
were also documented. Most of the disable children are male 66.1% (119)
diagnosed below 5 yrs 56.7% (102) with 1st order 42.8% (77), not
going to school 45.0%(81).
NIMH-DIS
had been administrated, results of which are as follows:
Table-2: Shows the
scoring percentages of different variables in physical care domain
Variable in physical
care domain |
Number of parents |
Smx |
Sobt |
% |
||
No difficulty |
Some difficulty |
Lot of difficulty |
||||
Bathing |
78 |
60 |
42 |
360 |
144 |
40.0 |
Feeding |
83 |
65 |
32 |
360 |
129 |
35.8 |
Dressing |
86 |
56 |
38 |
360 |
132 |
36.7 |
Toileting |
80 |
54 |
46 |
360 |
146 |
40.6 |
Brushing |
95 |
67 |
18 |
360 |
103 |
28.6 |
Grooming |
101 |
67 |
12 |
360 |
91 |
25.3 |
Lifting
& carrying the child |
82 |
46 |
52 |
360 |
150 |
41.7 |
Medicating |
86 |
60 |
34 |
360 |
128 |
35.6 |
Total impact |
|
|
|
2880.0 |
1023.0 |
35.5 |
Table 2: Shows the scoring percentages of different
variables in physical care domain. Parents of Mentally retarded children are
impacted more by lifting & carrying the child (percentage of obtained score
= 41.7), toileting (percentage ofobtained score = 40.6) and bathing (percentage
of obtained score = 40). Overall percentage of scoring for physical care domain
is 35.5.
Impact
of MR on fathers and mothers are compared using NIMH-DIS, and the hypothetical
z-test has been employed for comparing the scoring proportions. Results of
which are reported in Table 3.
Table
3: Impact of MR on fathers and mothers are compared using NIMH-DIS
Domain |
Gender |
Smax |
Sobt |
% |
Z |
p |
Physical
care |
Male |
1440 |
482 |
33.5 |
-2.243 |
0.025 |
Female |
1440 |
541 |
37.6 |
|||
Health
issues |
Male |
900 |
199 |
22.1 |
-2.4152 |
0.015 |
Female |
900 |
243 |
27 |
|||
Career Adjustment |
Male |
720 |
166 |
23.1 |
6.1047 |
<0.05 |
Female |
720 |
79 |
11 |
|||
Lossof Support |
Male |
900 |
295 |
32.8 |
-0.1805 |
0.857 |
Female |
900 |
299 |
33.2 |
|||
Financial Problem |
Male |
900 |
311 |
34.6 |
0.6274 |
0.529 |
Female |
900 |
299 |
33.2 |
|||
Social Restriction |
Male |
540 |
122 |
22.6 |
-0.079 |
0.936 |
Female |
540 |
123 |
22.8 |
|||
Embarrassment
/ ridicule |
Male |
720 |
128 |
17.8 |
0.099 |
0.921 |
Female |
720 |
127 |
17.6 |
|||
Relationship |
Male |
1080 |
307 |
28.4 |
1.099 |
0.276 |
Female |
1080 |
284 |
26.3 |
|||
Sibling
effect |
Male |
1260 |
295 |
23.4 |
-0.764 |
0.447 |
Female |
1260 |
311 |
24.7 |
|||
Specific Thoughts |
Male |
720 |
240 |
33.3 |
3.8149 |
<0.05 |
Female |
720 |
174 |
24.2 |
|||
Total
negative Impact |
Male |
9180 |
2545 |
27.7 |
1.064 |
0.289 |
Female |
9180 |
2480 |
27.0 |
|||
Positive Impact |
Male |
900 |
456 |
50.7 |
-0.297 |
0.764 |
Female |
900 |
463 |
51.4 |
Table 3:
With MR children Mothers are experiencing more difficulties than fathers with
respect to physical care and health issues. Fathers are experiencing more
trouble in career adjustments and specific thoughts. There is not much
difference in the overall positive and negative impact scores among both
parents.
D.
Impact of mental retardation on parents of Mentally retarded children - based
on severity of mental retardation
Domain |
Mild |
Moderate |
Severe |
|||
Smax |
Sobt |
Smax |
Sobt |
Smax |
Sobt |
|
Physical
care |
960 |
87 |
960 |
324 |
960 |
612 |
Health |
600 |
98 |
600 |
190 |
600 |
154 |
Career |
480 |
68 |
480 |
95 |
480 |
82 |
Support |
600 |
187 |
600 |
209 |
600 |
198 |
Financial |
600 |
185 |
600 |
213 |
600 |
212 |
Social |
360 |
76 |
360 |
84 |
360 |
85 |
Embarrassment/Ridicule |
480 |
81 |
480 |
84 |
480 |
68 |
Relationships |
720 |
186 |
720 |
203 |
720 |
202 |
Sibling
effect |
840 |
154 |
840 |
168 |
840 |
284 |
Specific
thoughts |
480 |
117 |
480 |
141 |
480 |
153 |
Total
negative impact |
6120 |
1239 |
6120 |
1711 |
6120 |
2050 |
Total
positive impact |
600 |
296 |
600 |
318 |
600 |
305 |
Table 4, shows results related to impact on parents
of MR children based on its severity (mild, moderate and severe) and their
relation Z-test has been used
Table-5: Showing
the impact of MR on parents with respect to severity of disability
Domain |
Mild vs. Moderate |
Moderatevs. Severe |
Mild vs. Severe |
|||
z |
P |
z |
p |
z |
P |
|
Physical
care |
-13.18 |
<
0.05 |
-13.14 |
<
0.05 |
-24.90 |
<
0.05 |
Health |
-6.246 |
<
0.05 |
2.297 |
<
0.05 |
-3.997 |
<
0.05 |
Career |
-2.310 |
0.021 |
1.078 |
0.280 |
-1.237 |
0.215 |
Support |
-1.326 |
0.184 |
0.659 |
0.509 |
-0.668 |
0.503 |
Financial |
-1.173 |
0.084 |
0.072 |
0.944 |
-1.657 |
0.097 |
Social |
-0.710 |
0.478 |
-0.095 |
0.928 |
-0.805 |
0.418 |
Embarrassment/Ridicule |
-0.675 |
0.503 |
1.627 |
0.103 |
-1.717 |
0.085 |
Relationships |
-1.026 |
0.303 |
0.042 |
0.968 |
-0.984 |
0.327 |
Sibling
effect |
-0.885 |
0.373 |
-6.378 |
<
0.05 |
-7.237 |
<
0.05 |
Specific
thoughts |
-1.747 |
0.080 |
-0.840 |
0.401 |
-2.584 |
<
0.05 |
Total
negative impact |
-8.649 |
<
0.05 |
-3.870 |
<
0.05 |
-12.487 |
<
0.05 |
Total
positive impact |
-1.282 |
0.201 |
0.763 |
0.447 |
-0.520 |
0.603 |
Parents of moderate and severe mentally retarded
children registered greater problems compared to those of mild mentally
retarded children, for all 11 domains in NIMH-DIS. However, the difference in
impact with respect to varying degree of severity is found to be minimal for
most of the domains, except for career, sibling effect and specific thoughts.
Total negative impact on mentally retarded children parents is with direct
relation to the severity of mental retardation. Whereas, the positive impact
levels with respect to degree of severity was insignificant.
Present
study was conducted on parents of 90 mentally retarded children.
NIMH-DIS
was used to assess the impact on them.
1. The
impact in the parents of mentally retarded children is related to their
socio-demographiccharacteristics.
2. Thepresentstudyhasindicatedmorepositiveimpactintheparentsofmentally
retarded children compared to that of the negative impact.
3. Severity
of MR is an important contributing factor to both the positive and negative
impact in the parents of mentally retarded children. Intensity of negative
impact in the parents unlike the positive impact is proportional to the
severity of mentalretardation.
Parents response to
different domains in NIMH
Physical care:
The present study revealed that 52.2% of the parents were facing difficulty
(either some / lot of difficulty) with respect to physical care requirements of
mentally retarded children. This observation compares favorably with the study
by Brust [3], who has found that the mothers of MR children require an average
time of 12 hours 6 minutes for satisfying the physical care requirements.
Health:
It can be seen that 36.7% of parents in the present study were suffering with
some health issues. Most of them were facing mental worries in view of having
MR child. This observation is consistent with the study carried out at the
Regional Rehabilitation Center (RRHC) by Gathwala and Guptha [4] which showed
that 60% of families were severely burdened with respect to physical health of
family members, which included physical/psychological illness and depression of
the family members Career: In the present study, 74.4% of parents didn’t have
any impact on their career adjustments to support mentally retarded children,
and the percentage of parents, who are facing some difficulty and lot of
difficulties in their career is less. Similar observation has been reported by
few authors in the past [5,7].
Loss of support:
Statistics depicting distribution of loss of support with respect to different
relations, indicates that ~ 50% of the parents felt that they are facing
difficulty in getting support from relations. The study compares favorably with
the observations made by other authors [8], who has found
ignorance of families with mentally retarded children as the sign of social
isolation of thosefamilies.
Financial problems:
In the present study, 53.9% of parents (parents voted for both “some” and “lot
of difficulty”) were facing severe financial problems which is in par with the
earlier report by Seiquira & associates [9]. Gathwala and Guptaalso
reported that 25% of the families were severely burdened by the financial
needs[4].
Social restriction:
Statistics of social restriction domain, evidences that 31.7% of parents (voted
for both “sometimes” and “most of the times”) in the present study are
constrained to social movement in view of having mentally retarded children.
This observation is consistent with the previous reports by Farber
Embarrassment/ridicule:
The current study resulted that more than 26.7% of the parents were facing
embarrassment (parents voted for both “some” and “lot of” embarrassment)[10].
These results were also supported by the studies done by Dattaand Nancy [11,12].
Relationship:
Only 45.6% are thinking negatively that the presence of mentally retarded
children affects their relationship with spouse / family / in-laws / relatives/
friends / neighbours.
Sibling effect:
More than 60.5% of the parents in the present study were happy about their
sibling’s life style and carrier. This is comparable to Gohel study, who
reported that higher percentage of parents felt that they were giving less time
to their siblings [13].
Specific thoughts: More
than 55% of the parents in the present study had never thought of having another child, as they
feel that they were unprepared to take responsibilities of another child in
view of the existing struggle in rearing the MR child. Nearly 60% of the
parents who sometimes thought of separating the MR child from the family, so
that this child doesn’t affect the rest of family members. Majumdarfound that
the parents of mentally retarded children were more vulnerable to stress than
parents of normal children, which is in par with the present study [14]
Present
study has shown more positive impact (percentage of NIMH-DIS score = 51.1) in
the parents of mentally retarded children compared to that of the total
negative impact (percentage of NIMH-DIS score = 27.5) in the same study group.
This finding relates to the observation in Flahertystudy, showing parents
tendency to shift from negative impact (family problem) to positive impact
(family competence) with time [16].
Present
study suggests that the parents are facing adverse problems in the allocation
of funds [i.e., financial domain (2ndhighest NIMH-DIS score)] in the
care and training of their mentally retarded children as well as in other
necessary domestic requirements. Negative impact on the parents of the
intellectually disabled children in the form of financial crisis was well
reported by Datta, whichisconsistent with the present study [11].
Gender based impact of
mental retardation on parents: From above
discussion, it is apparent that the overall positive and negative impact
scoring between mothers and fathers is not significant, with few differences
noted. Key finding of these observationsare summarized as follows:
1. Mothers
of mentally retarded children are experiencing more difficulties than fathers
in physical care and healthdomains.
2. Fathers
of mentally retarded children are experiencing more trouble in career and
specific thoughtsdomain.
3. No
significance is found between the parents for following domains: loss of
support, financial, social restriction, embarrassment / ridicule,
relationships, sibling effect and positiveeffects.
Several
authors have found similar findings, which are explained below:
Rastogifound
more negative attitude in case of mothers of mentally retarded children
compared to fathers [17]. Fathers are concerned mainly about family budget and
the cost of providing help for the MR child. These finding are in par with the
Burrfinding, which revealed that the fathers of mentally retarded children tend
to keep their feelings inside, and use more harmful types of strategies [18].
Above
findings are comparable with the study by Hellerand Upadhyaya, which reported
no significant association between fathers and mothers with respect to
financial aspects (financial domain)[19,20].
Disability impact among
varying degree of severity
From
table 4 and 5, it is evident that the intensity of various domains in NIMH-DIS
by the parents of mentally retarded children has direct linkages with the level
of retardation of their child. Key finding of which are summarized as follows:
1. The
parents of moderate and severe mentally retarded children registered greater
problems compared to those of mild mentally retarded children, for all 11
domains ofNIMH-DIS.
2. Total
negative impact scoring with respect to varying severity of MR is significant,
with NIMH-DIS scoring being high for severe mentally retarded children compared
to those of the mild and the moderate mentally retarded children.
3. Positive
impact scoring is not significant with respect to varying severity of MR.
The
present results are at par with the results of Magra & colleagues (1999),
who have stated that mothers face many challenges such as poor health to care
for their loved ones with degree ofMR. The parents with mild MR child tend to
help themselves with a keep going tendency. Similar results and reasons are identified
by Seiquirain relation to severe mentally retardedchildren [9].
Strength of the
present study
1. The
comprehensive assessment of the impact of having a mentally retarded child
onparents
2. Comparing
the impact between mothers andfathers
3. Comparing
the impact based on the severity of mentalretardation
Limitations
1. This
is a one stage cross sectional study no follow-ups weredone
2. Lack
of a comparisongroup
3. Sample
size issmall
4. The
study is conducted in a Government hospital, therefore results cannot be generalized.
The
current study is a cross-sectional study, intended to explore both the positive
and negative impact on the parents of mentally retarded children with respect
to parent’s gender and severity of mental retardation by using the NIMH- DIS.
In
this study, 180 parents (comprising 90 families with their fathers and mothers)
with mentally retarded children were selected. Tools used were: specially
designed socio-demographic data, clinical data sheet and NIMH-DIS (11 domains
assessing specific parameters).
Results
have shown than most of the respondents were Hindus hailing from rural
background with nuclear families, more than 40% being illiterate with family
income of < Rs.10000 per month. Most of the female respondents (mothers)
were house wives and didn’t have any history of infections during and after the
pregnancy. Most children were born out of normal vaginal delivery and very few
by caesariansection.
Percentage
of positive impact (51.1%) on the parents of mentally retarded children is
substantially negative impact (27.4%). Most of the parents in the present study
were not considering the situation of having MR children as a burden.
The
salient features of this study are:
1. The
present study has shown that the impact levels in the parents of mentally
retarded children are related to their socio-demographic characteristics.
2. This
study has shown more positive impact in the parents of mentally retarded
children compared to that of the negative impact irrespective of the parent’sgender.
3. It
has been found from the present study that the degree of Mental Retardation
severity is an important factor in giving rise to both positive and negative
impact on the parents of mentally retarded children. Whereas, the difference of
negative impact with respect to positive impact isminimal.
In
conclusion, it can be inferred that it is not necessary for every parent having
a Mental retardation child to have negative impact but in some this can bring a
positive impact, like acceptance of the situation realistically and standing
right behind the MR child to provide support. At the same time, it is also true
that having a MR child is a source of severe stress to the family members and
it can affect them negatively in many ways. Therefore, there is every need to
make attempt for primary prevention of mentalretardation.
1. Impact
of age and gender of the MR child on their parents can be considered in future,
so that it could help in better utilization of interventions.
2. A
longitudinal study with regular follow-up may be considered in the future for
better understanding the impact levels on theparents.
3. Studies
including coping interventions may be taken up in the future, helping the
parents in developing coping strategies and to overcome the problems.
4. It
is worthwhile to conduct a comparative study between normal and MR children to
highlight the problems being suffered by the parents of MR children.
5. A
multicentric study to be conducted, so that the results can be applied over
wide range.
References
1. WORCHEL TL, WORCHEL P. The parental concept of the mentally retarded child. Am J MentDefic. 1961 May;65:782-8.[pubmed]
2.
ZUK GH. The religous factor and the role of guilt in parental
acceptance of the retarded child. Am J MentDefic. 1959 Jul;64(1):139-47.[pubmed]
3. Brust JD, Leonard BJ, Sielaff BH. Maternal time and the care of disabled children.Public Health Nurs. 1992 Sep;9(3):177-84.[pubmed]
4. Gathwala.G, Gupta. S.
family burden in Mentally Handicapped children. Indian Journal of community
medicine 2004;vol 24No.4.
5. Booth CL, Kelly
JF.Child care and employment in relation to infants' disabilities and risk
factors. American Journal of Mental Retardation. 1999;March; 104(2):117-30.[pubmed]
6. Marji Erickson
Warfield. Employment, Parenting, and Well-Being Among Mothers of Children With
Disabilities Retardation2000;Vol. 39, No. 4, pp.297–309.
7.
Warfield ME. Employment, parenting, and well-being among mothers of
children with disabilities.Ment Retard. 2001 Aug;39(4):297-309.
doi:10.1352/0047-6765(2001)039<0297:EPAWBA>2.0.CO;2[pubmed]
8. Samuel Bauman.
Parents of children with mental retardation: coping mechanisms and support
needs. Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the
University of Maryland, College Park in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2004.
9. Seiquira, E.M., Rao,
P.M., Subbu Krishna, D.K. &Prabhu G.G. Perceived burden and coping styles
of the mothers of mentally handicapped. NIMHANS journal,1990;8(1).
10. Farber, B. Effects
of a severely mentally retarded child of family integration. Monographs of the
Society for Research in Child Development, 1959;24, (2, Serial No.71).
11. Datta SS, Russel
PS, Gopalakrishna SC. Burden among the
caregivers of children with intellectual disability: Associated risk factors.
JIntellect Disab2002;6:337-50.
12.
Nancy, G. Attitudes of parents towards their mentally retarded
children: A rural area examination (master thesis). Department of
Psychology University of Zululand 2002;1-68. Available
from:http://uzspace.uzulu.ac.za/handle/10530/220.
13. Gohel M., Mukherjee
S., Choudhary S.K. Psychosocial impact on the Parents of mentally retarded
children in Anand District, health line, 2011;Vol.2,p.62-66.
14.
Majumdar M, Da Silva Pereira Y, Fernandes J. Stress and anxiety in
parents of mentally retarded children. Indian J Psychiatry. 2005
Jul;47(3):144-7. doi: 10.4103/0019-5545.55937.[pubmed]
15. Kazak AE and Marvin
RS. Stress and social networks in
families with a handicapped child. Fam Relat
1985; 33:67-77.
16. Flaherty, E.M.,
& Glidden, L.M. Positive adjustment in parents rearing children with Down
syndrome. Early Education and Development, 2000;11,407-422.
17. Rastogi CK.
Attitude of parents towards their mentally retarded children. Indian J
Psychiatry. 1981 Jul;23(3):206-9.[pubmed]
18. Burr, W.R., Klein,
S.R., Burr, R.G., Doxey, C., Harker, B., Holman, T.B., Martin, P.H., McClure,
R.L., Parrish, S.W., Stuart, D.A., Taylor, A.C., & White, M.S. (1994).
Reexamining family stress. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,Inc.
19. Heller, T., Hsieh,
K., Rowitz, L. Maternal and Paternal care giving of persons with mental
retardation across the life span. Family relations, 1997;46 (4),407-115.
20. Upadhyaya, G.R. and Havalappanavar, N.B. Stress in Parents of the Mentally Challenged, Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology 2008; 24,53-59.
How to cite this article?
Sunitha V, Murthy Y.V. Siva. A study of the disability impact among parents of mentally challenged children. Int J
Pediatr Res. 2018;5(10):497-505. doi:10.17511/ijpr.2018.10.04.