Institutional care, despite the discursive shift in the field towards deinstitutionalization, remains a reality for many people with intellectual disabilities.
In the theoretical part of this master's thesis, we first briefly outlined the history of "madness," as the construction of otherness over time has significantly influenced today's perception and treatment of people with intellectual disabilities.
Following the Industrial Revolution, the need for a capable workforce further deepened the divide between the non-disabled and the disabled, legitimizing care in total institutions. Even today, institutions represent anti-household and anti-social spaces where residents learn helplessness and fail to acquire the skills necessary for living in society. Isolation and learned helplessness prevent individuals from taking on socially valued roles, which are key to shaping a positive identity and resilience.
In the 20th century, a new, more social understanding of disability emerged. These processes aim to restore control over one's own life to users, empower them for independent living, and enable them to live in the community.
In the research part, we focused on a qualitative analysis of life in an institution versus community-based living. Using the method of participant observation, we evaluated the individual's level of influence over shaping their care package, the distribution of power in life decisions, and the degree of transinstitutionalization in community living arrangements. We also observed how and in what ways individuals are integrated into environment. Based on the interpretation of the research analysis, I conclude that the principles of deinstitutionalization are more evident in residential units than in institutions. Likewise, residents of community living units are more integrated into environment.
|
