Category: Sin categoría

Drug use and addictions represent a global public health challenge. However, there is a significant gap in statistical data when it comes to the population with disabilities, a group often excluded from traditional surveys. We used data from the 2023 Clinical Database of Primary Care (BDCAP) to approach this issue. Overall, the study reveals that people with the disabilities analyzed present a higher prevalence of pathological use than the general population, with the sole exception of intellectual disability in aggregate terms. By type of disability we have:

• Social Disability (Inadequate social skills): This is the group with the highest risk in aggregate consumption. They stand out particularly in chronic alcohol abuse, where the risk is four times higher than that of the general population. Paradoxically, they have the lowest frequency in acute alcohol abuse, possibly due to the lack of social interaction associated with this type of consumption.

• Intellectual Disability: Presents a “statistical paradox.” Although their aggregate risk is lower (mainly due to lower tobacco consumption), they rank first in acute abuse of alcohol and illicit drugs. It is hypothesized that the high rates of drug abuse in this group could be linked to the prescription of psychotropic drugs that generate dependence.

• Hearing Disability (Deafness): Presents the second highest risk in aggregate consumption, standing out significantly in acute alcohol and tobacco abuse.

• Visual Disability (Blindness): Shows a slightly higher risk than the general population. Their profile of illicit drug use is similar to that of the rest of the population, which could be explained by the age distribution within this group.

The full paper has been published in the journal Psiara of the Official College of Psychology of Catalonia. Read article.

This research investigates the employment challenges faced by individuals with disabilities in Spain, with a specific focus on gender-based disparities. Despite a higher poverty rate among women with disabilities, they receive disproportionately less government assistance compared to their male counterparts. The study draws on data from the 2020 Disability, Personal Autonomy, and Dependency Situations Survey, employing classification and regression trees (CART) to analyze key demographic characteristics associated with employment status, active job seeking, and labor inactivity among this population. The CART model identifies specific terminal nodes that capture profiles of individuals who are employed, with fewer nodes highlighting those actively seeking work. These nodes reveal distinct demographic patterns and employment outcomes, offering insights into the factors that contribute to labor market inclusion or exclusion for people with disabilities. Importantly, gender-specific nodes provide nuanced profiles, indicating that women and men with disabilities face different barriers and opportunities in the labor market. This highlights the need for gender-sensitive approaches to policy and support mechanisms. In addition to gender, factors such as age, health status, and the nature of the disability play significant roles in shaping employment outcomes. The research emphasizes the importance of tailored interventions that address the diverse needs of subgroups within the disability community. By identifying distinct patterns in employment activity and job-seeking behavior, the findings call for targeted policies aimed at improving labor market access and support for individuals with disabilities, particularly for women who face compounded disadvantages.  Read full article

Article published in the journal Psiara analyzing the different surveys conducted on discrimination among people with disabilities.

**What is discrimination?**

It is defined as the situation in which a person cannot exercise their human or legal rights on an equal basis with others due to an unjustified distinction established in policies, laws, or treatment. It can be direct, indirect, or intersectional (a combination of various forms of discrimination).

**Mechanisms influencing the perception of discrimination.**

1. **Objective discrimination:** When there is no evident cause to justify it.

2. **Stereotype threat:** The fear of being discriminated against prevents attempting or achieving goals.

3. **Coping style:** An avoidant style fosters erroneous perceptions, while positive strategies improve outcomes.

4. **Overestimation of prejudice:** Can generate a constant state of alertness and distress.

**Key data from surveys in Spain.**

* **CERMI (2002):** 64% of people with disabilities stated they had suffered discrimination.

* **EDAD (2008):** 12.52% of men and 10.25% of women reported discrimination. Young people and those with mental or nervous system disabilities were the most likely to perceive it (Huete, A).

* **CIS (2013):** 18% of people with disabilities reported having been discriminated against. The general population identified “psychic disability” as one of the most frequent causes.

* **CEMUDIS (2018-2020):** 66.17% of the women with disabilities surveyed had felt discriminated against.

**Analysis of the EDAD 2008 Survey.**

Our analysis using logistic regression identified factors influencing the perception of discrimination:

* Being a woman and belonging to an NGO increases the risk.

* Living in municipalities of 10,000-50,000 inhabitants, having a university education, and being older reduces the risk.

* **Type of disability:** Disabilities such as deafness (pre- and post-lingual), skin conditions, total blindness, mild intellectual disability, mental illness, and osteoarticular deficiencies of the head present a very high risk of perceived discrimination. In contrast, conditions such as profound intellectual disability, dementia (possibly due to difficulties in perceiving or communicating it), or mild hearing/vision problems showed a lower perception.

**Conclusion.**

Perceived discrimination is not homogeneous and is influenced by multiple variables. Future research should delve deeper into the differences according to the type of disability in order to design more specific and effective social interventions.

(automatic translation with AI)