Experience of conference participation

After reading a call for papers for a seminar organised by the BSA ‘New Variants on the undeserving poor: current perceptions and experiences of disability and illness’ to be held in Coventry University on 24^th May, I submitted an abstract for consideration.  The abstract was based on research I had carried out for the final assignment of a third year undergraduate module, Disability and Society.  My abstract was accepted, and I was asked to be one of the speakers. 

The title of my presentation was: To what degree has the concept of social exclusion been applied to the education of children with disabilities in Northern Ireland?  The paper discussed the change in the education system in Northern Ireland from segregation to inclusion, and detailed arguments both for and against the existence of ‘special schools’.   It argued that while the current policy of inclusion has resulted in more children with disabilities attending mainstream schools, the underlying structure remains unchanged and is failing many of our children. A report by the Education and Training Inspectorate in 2010-11 found that 18% of primary schools and 38% of post-primary schools failed to meet the required standards of arrangements to identify, assess and meet the needs of Special Educational Needs (SEN) pupils.  There are fears that the assessment procedures for the new SEN system which is due to be introduced this year will lead to further inconsistences between schools.  Another cause for concern is the change from ‘Statements’ to ‘Coordinated Support Plans’ (CSP’s).  It is estimated that up to 50% of children who would have previously had the legal protection of a Statement will not now meet the much more stringent criteria needed for a CSP, and therefore also lose the right to appeal if any recommended support provision fails to materialise.  However, my paper concluded by highlighting the fact that children with disabilities themselves are rarely, if ever, included in the decision making surrounding their support provision, and until their voices are heard, SEN will remain a sub-system of education, and their social exclusion will continue. 

I was unsure of my ability to deliver a paper at such an event, but with encouragement from School staff and great support from Dr Byrne, (not to mention an offer from the School to cover my travel expenses), I decided that it was too good an opportunity to miss.

The seminar was attended by people with a wide range of interests, and this was reflected by the other speakers: Paul Grant, a lecturer from Wolverhampton University, Jamie Beddard, an actor with disabilities, Dr Sarah Woodin from Leeds University, and Debbie Jolly, a representative of Disabled People Against the Cuts (DEPAC).

I informed the organisers of the event that this would be my first time presenting a paper, and from the start they were extremely understanding, promising a supporting atmosphere.  From the moment I arrived at the venue I was made to feel comfortable, everyone was very welcoming, and interested in what I had to say.  I learnt a lot, met some fantastic people, and came away feeling very positive about the whole experience, and really glad that I had been given the opportunity to attend.  I would encourage any Post Graduate student – Taught or Research – to submit papers if they hear a call for any in an area they are interested in.  Yes, the thought of standing up and talking in front of academics is a daunting one, but the rewards make it worth putting yourself out there.

Elizabeth Martin

Elizabeth is currently studying on the MA Sociology programme.

The Grief Study

Mark McCann, John Moriarty and Aideen Maguire are working on a project exploring the effects of bereavement on mental health. You can follow their progress on blogs.qub.ac.uk/griefstudy.

The Grief Study aims to estimate the prevalence of poor mental health outcomes among people who have suffered bereavement. To do this, we will combine data from the Northern Ireland Longitudinal Study, the Northern Ireland Mortality Study and the Electronic Prescribing Database. The Northern Ireland Longitudinal Study (NILS) is a random anonymised sample of 28% of the Northern Ireland population whose responses to the 2001 UK Census have been held and linked to GP registration information. Like all of us, a proportion of this sample will have lost someone close to them since the beginning of the study. It is possible to identify those who have lost someone living at the same address as them, and to compare their mental health outcomes to the rest of the population.

Our proxy measure for poor mental health is prescription of anti-depressant or anxiolytic drugs in the post-bereavement period. This Distinct Linkage Project (DLP) allows for comparison of mental health outcomes between bereaved and non-bereaved individuals and for extensive analysis of particular populations of interest. The following five research questions illustrate the scope of the project and the particular bereaved groups whose experiences we want to better understand.

1.  Does bereavement lead to an increased risk of poor mental health?
2.  Does the likelihood of poor mental health following bereavement vary according to the cause of death?
3.  To what extent do individual, household, and area characteristics mitigate or compound the risk of poor mental health following bereavement?
4.  Does the ‘risk profile’, in terms of the magnitude of risk conferred by individual, household and area characteristics, differ between those bereaved following an expected death, sudden death, violent death or suicide?
5.  To what extent does bereavement confer an increased risk of mortality, particularly when accompanied by poor mental health?

Question 1: Does bereavement lead to an increased risk of poor mental health?

Evidence suggests that bereavement is a major life event and considered a major stressor. Losing a loved one can hasten one’s own death, but we don’t know to what extent this is preceded by suffering which is significantly greater than that of the general population at large. By comparing the additional likelihood of being prescribed anti-depressant or anxiolytic drugs following a bereavement, we can attempt to measure how much suffering bereavement causes.

Question 2: To what extent do individual, household, and area characteristics mitigate or compound the risk of poor mental health following bereavement?

Grief reactions won’t be the same for everyone. By comparing bereaved individuals who have poor mental health outcomes with other bereaved individuals, we can develop a profile of individual characteristics and social factors which dispose someone to a more intense grief reaction. For example, we will be looking at whether grief reaction is more or less severe depending on sex, age, area deprivation and whether the bereaved individual provided care to the deceased.

Question 3: Does the likelihood of poor mental health following bereavement vary according to the cause of death?

The circumstances of an individual’s bereavement and the nature of the death of their loved one has potentially huge impact on their ability to cope. For example, there is widespread public concern over how a person copes after the sudden death of a young or middle-aged member of their family, particularly where the person has died by suicide. This concern reflects an appreciation for how the circumstances of death can potentially confer severe risk on a bereaved person.

Question 4: Does the ‘risk profile’, in terms of the magnitude of risk conferred by individual, household and area characteristics, differ between those bereaved following an expected death, sudden death, violent death or suicide?

This is an exploratory question to which studies to date give no satisfactory answer. If question 2 asks whether different some categories of person are differently affected by bereavement and question 3 asks whether some categories of death cause people to be differently affected, question 4 asks whether those particular deaths have a greater effect on everyone or only on particular categories of person. For example, we look at whether the extra mental ill-health suffered after a suicide is more pronounced for women or for men; whether better education protects against suffering following particular types of death, but not others.

Question 5: To what extent does bereavement confer an increased risk of mortality, particularly when accompanied by poor mental health?

Mortality is the more commonly studied outcome from bereavement, and several studies indicate that a bereaved person will die sooner than someone of the same age and physical health. However, none of these studies have had the measures available to examine why a bereaved person is at risk of dying and whether this risk is due to mental health deterioration.

We’re grateful to the Grief Study’s Knowledge Exchange Working Group for their input to date on these questions. If you would like more information about any of these research questions, please leave a comment, send us a tweet (John_ICCR ; Aideen_ICCR ; Mark_ICCR) or email j.moriarty [AT] qub.ac.uk. If you have information or insight which you think could be of value to the team, please share it with us.