This article explains and supports the policy statement on assistive technology devices and services approved by the Board of Directors of CEC-MRDD in the Spring of 1996. The position statement acknowledges the potential of devices and services to enhance the quality of life and result in greater independence in family and community settings for persons with mental retardation and developmental disabilities of all ages. Recommendations offered by the Board include greater emphasis on identification of appropriate assistive technology devices and services subsequent to examination of factors across multiple domains of influence. This requires a team process which is both family and culturally sensitive. Service plans and alternative funding systems should be used whenever possible to pay for these devices and services. The Board notes that there is a need for the development of creative funding systems to support payment for devices and services when existing systems are inadequate, and that greater commitment to documentation of the impact of devices and services is needed. Clarification of each of these issues is provided.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllaireJ. H., GressardR. P., BlackmanJ. A., & HostlerS. L. (1991). Children with severe speech impairments: Caregiver survey of AAC use. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 248–255.
2.
AlthenG. (1988). American ways: A guide for foreigners in the United States. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
3.
AngeloD. H. (1995). AAC in the family and home. In GlennenS. L. & DeCosteD. C. (Eds.), Handbook of augmentative and alternative communication (pp. 523–541). San Diego, CA: Singular.
4.
AngeloD. H., JonesS. D., & KokoskaS. M. (1995). A family perspective on augmentative and alterna-tive communication: Families of young children. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 193–201.
5.
AngeloJ. (in press). Low technology interface de-vices. In LaneS. J. (Ed.), Assistive technology for the rehabilitation professional. Philadelphia: F. A. Davis.
6.
Apparatek, Inc. (n.d). Lease financing of assistive tech-nology. Northbrook, IL: Author.
7.
BarreraI. (1993). Effective and appropriate instruc-tion for all children: The challenge of cultural/linguistic diversity and young children with spe-cial needs. Topics in Early Childhood Special Educa-tion, 13, 461–487.
8.
BataviaA. I., & HammerG. S. (1990). Toward the development of consumer-based criteria for the evaluation of assistive devices. Journal of Rehabilita-tion Research and Development, 27, 425–436.
9.
BeaverK. A., & MannW. C. (1994). Provider skills for delivering computer access services: An as-sistive technology team approach. Technology and Disability, 3, 109–116.
10.
BehrmannM. M. (1995). Assistive technology train-ing. In FlippoK. F., IngeK. J., & BarcusJ. M. (Eds.), Assistive technology. A resource for school, work, and community (pp. 211–222). Baltimore: Brookes.
11.
BeukelmanD. R., & MirendaP. (1992). Augmenta-tive and alternative communication: Management of severe communication disorders in children and adults. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
12.
BeukelmanD. R., YorkstonK. M., & DowdenP. A. (1985). Communication augmentation. A casebook of clinical management. San Diego: College-Hill.
13.
BlackstoneS. (1993). For consumers. Culture in the community. Augmentative Communication News, 6(2), 1–3.
14.
BrothersonM. J., & GoldsteinB. (1992). Time as a resource and constraint for parents of young children with disabilities: Implication for early in-tervention services. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 12, 508–527.
15.
BrothersonM. J., CookC. C., & ParetteH. P. (1996). A home-centered approach to assistive technology provision for young children with disa-bilities. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Dis-abilities, 11(2), 86–95.
16.
CaldwellT. H., SirvisB., TodaroA. W., & Accou-loumreD. S. (1991). Special health care in the school. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
17.
CEC-MRDD Board of Directors. (1996). Position statement regarding assistive technology devices and services.MRDD Express, 6(3), 9.
18.
ChurchG., & GlennenS. (Eds.). (1992). The as-sistive technology handbook. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.
19.
Co-NET (Cooperative Assistive Technology Data-base Dissemination Network). (1995). Hyper-ABLEDATA database, CO-NET CD-ROM version (8th ed.)Madison, WI: Trace Research and Develop-ment Center.
20.
CooperC. S., & AllredK. W. (1992). A comparison of mothers' versus fathers' needs for support in caring for a young child with special needs.Infant-Toddler Intervention. The Transdisciplinary Journal, 2, 205–221.
21.
CulpD. M. (1987). Outcome measurement: The impact of communication augmentation.Seminars in Speech and Language, 9, 169–184.
22.
DillardD. (1989). National study on abandonment of technology. 1989 Annual Report on the National Reha-bilitation Hospital's Rehabilitation Engineering Cen-ter's Evaluation of Assistive Technology (Cooperative Agreement No. H133E0016).Washington, DC: National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
23.
EndersA., & HallM. (Eds.). (1990). Evaluating the technology. In Assistive technology sourcebook (pp. 102–121). Washington, DC: RESNA Press.
24.
FuhrerM. J. (1995). Conference report: An agenda for medical rehabilitation outcomes research.American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilita-tion, 74, 243–248.
25.
GalvinJ. C. (n.d., a). Evaluation of assistive technology.Washington, DC: REquest Rehabilitation Engi-neering Center, National Rehabilitation Hospital.
26.
GalvinJ. C. (n.d., b). User evaluation of assistive technology.Washington, DC: REquest Rehabilitation Engineering Center, National Rehabilitation Hos-pital.
27.
GlennenS. (1992). Augmentative and alternative communication. In ChurchG. & GlennenS. (Eds.), The handbook of assistive technology (pp. 93–122). San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.
28.
HansonM. J. (1992). Families with Anglo-European roots. In LynchE. W. & HansonM. J. (Eds.), Devel-oping cross-cultural competence. A guide for working with young children and their families (pp. 65–87). Baltimore: Brookes.
29.
HansonM. J., LynchE. W., & WaymanK. I. (1990). Honoring the cultural diversity of families when gathering data.Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 10, 112–131.
30.
HarrisP. (1988). Sometimes pediatric home care doesn't work.American Journal of Nursing, 88, 851–854.
31.
HarryB. (1995, November). Leaning forward or bend-ing over backwards: Cultural reciprocity in working with families.Presentation to the 11th Annual Interna-tional Early Childhood Conference on Children with Special Needs, Orlando, FL.
32.
HarryB., Grenot-ScheyerM., Smith-LewisM., ParkH. S., XinF., & SchwartzI. (1995). Devel-oping culturally inclusive services for persons with severe disabilities.Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 20, 99–109.
33.
HaywardB. J., & ElliottB. G. (1992). National evalu-ation of state grants for technology-related assistance for individuals with disabilities programs. Final report. Perspectives of consumers: Findings from focus groups (Vol. II). Research Triangle Park: Research Trian-gle Institute.
34.
HaywardB. J., TashjianM. D., WineJ. S., & CurtinT. R. (1992). National evaluation of state grants for technology-related assistance for individuals with disa-bilities programs. Final report. Evaluation findings and recommendations (Vol. I). Research Triangle Park: Research Triangle Institute.
35.
Holder-BrownL., & ParetteH. P. (1992). Children with disabilities who use assistive technology: Ethi-cal considerations.Young Children, 47, 73–77.
36.
HourcadeJ. J., BrimerR. W., & ParetteH. P. (1996). “Let us not talk falsely now, for the hour is getting late…”: An acknowledgment of Realpo-litik.Physical Disabilities: Education and Related Ser-vices, 15(1), 7–11.
37.
HutingerP. L. (1994). State of practice: How as-sistive technologies are used in educational pro-grams of children with multiple disabilities. Final report for the U. S. D.E. Project, Effective use of technology to meet educational goals of children with disabilities (No. 180R10020). Macomb, IL: West-ern Illinois University.
38.
HutingerP. L. (1996). Computer applications in programs for young children with disabilities: Re-curring themes.Focus on Autism and Other Develop-mental Disabilities, 11, 105–114.
39.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990, P. L. 101-476. (October 30, 1990). 20U. S. C. 1400 et seq.: U. S. Statutes at Large, 104, 1103–1151.
40.
IngeK. J., & ShepherdJ. (1995). Assistive technol-ogy applications and strategies for school system personnel. In FlippoK. F., IngeK. J., & Bar-cusJ. M. (Eds.), Assistive technology. A resource for school, work, and community (pp. 133–166). Baltimore: Brookes.
41.
IngeK. J., FlippoK. F., & BarcusJ. M. (1995). Staff development for assistive technology personnel. In FlippoK. F., IngeK. J., & BarcusJ. M. (Eds.), Assistive technology. A resource for school, work, and community (pp. 223–243). Baltimore: Brookes.
42.
JohnsonJ. M., BaumgartD., HelmstetterE., & CurryC. A. (1996). Augmenting communication in natural contexts. Baltimore: Brookes.
43.
JudgeS. L., & ParetteH. P. (in press). Assistive technology decision-making strategies. In JudgeS. L. & ParetteH. P. (Eds.), Assistive technology for young children with disabilities: A guide to providing family-centered services. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
44.
Judith Fein National Institute on Disability and Re-habilitation Research. (1996). A history of legisla-tive support for assistive technology.Journal of Spe-cial Education Technology, 13, 1–3.
45.
KleinC. E., WalkerD. W., & FosterI. R. (1996). Accessing alternative assistive technology funding sources.Case in Point, 9(1), 33–40.
46.
LangtonA. J. (1990). Delivering assistive technol-ogy services: Challenges and realities. In LangtonA. T., ParkerR. W., TrachtmanL. W., & Au-gustineV. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Southeast Regional Symposium on Assistive Technology (pp. 1–9). Columbia, SC: Center for Rehabilitation Technology Services.
47.
LifchezR., LeiserL., PendletonH. M., & DavisC. (1983). Technology for the living environment. In ReddenM. R. & SternV. W. (Eds.), Technology for independent living (pp. 83–92). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
48.
LuborskyM. R. (1993). Sociocultural factors shap-ing technology usage.Fulfilling the promise. Tech-nology and Disability, 2, 71–78.
49.
MaleM. (1997). Technology for inclusion (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
50.
MannW. C., & LaneJ. P. (1995). Assistive technology for persons with disabilities. The role of occupational therapy (2nd ed.). Rockville, MD: American Occu-pational Therapy Association.
51.
McGregorG., & PachuskiP. (1996). Assistive tech-nology in schools: Are teachers ready, able, and supported?Journal of Special Education Technology, 13, 4–15.
52.
MillerN., & AbudarhamS. (1984). Management of communication problems in bilingual chil-dren. In MillerN. (Ed.), Bilingualism and language disability: Assessment and remediation (pp. 177–198). San Diego: College-Hill.
53.
MistreetS., & LaneS. J. (1995). Using assistive technology for play and learning: Children from birth to 10 years of age. In MannW. C. & LaneJ. P. (Eds.), Assistive technology for persons with disa-bilities (pp. 129–164). Bethesda, MD: American Occupational Therapy Association.
NaltyL., & KochanyL. (1991, Winter). Enabling technology for persons with mental retardation.Spectrum, 1–2,4.
56.
ParetteH. P. (1991a). Professionals working with peo-ple with disabilities: Technology training implications for teacher educators.(ERIC Document Reproduc-tion Service No. ED 333 679).
57.
ParetteH. P. (1991b). The importance of technol-ogy in the education and training of persons with mental retardation.Education and Training in Men-tal Retardation, 26, 165–178.
58.
ParetteH. P. (1994, October). Family functioning and augmentative and alternative communication de-vice prescriptive practices.Paper presented to the 10th Annual International Early Childhood Con-ference on Children with Special Needs, St. Louis, Missouri.
59.
ParetteH. P. (1995a, November). Assistive technology prescription for students with severe disabilities: Effects on family functioning.Paper presented to the 1995 TASH Conference, San Francisco, CA.
60.
ParetteH. P. (1995b). Augmentative and alterna-tive communication (AAC) assessment and pre-scriptive practices for young children with disabili-ties: Preliminary examination of state practices.Technology and Disability, 4, 215–231.
61.
ParetteH. P. (1996, October). Students who use aug-mentative and alternative communication (AAC) de-vices: Implications for working with families across cul-tures.Paper presented to the Fifth International Conference on Mental Retardation and Develop-mental Disabilities, Austin, TX.
62.
ParetteH. P. (1997, January). Family, vendor, and related service personnel perceptions of culturally sensi-tive augmentative and alternative communication ser-vice delivery.Paper presented to the Symposium on Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Exceptional Learners, New Orleans, LA.
63.
ParetteH. P. (in press-a). Cultural issues and family-centered assistive technology decision-making. In JudgeS. L. & ParetteH. P. (Eds.), Assistive technology for young children with disabilities: A guide to providing family-centered services. Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
64.
ParetteH. P. (in press-b). Assistive technology effective practices for students with mental retardation and developmental disabilities. In HiltonA. & RinglabenR. (Eds.), Best and promising practices in developmental disabilities. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
65.
ParetteH. P., & AngeloD. H. (1996). Augmenta-tive and alternative communication impact on families: Trends and future directions.Journal of Special Education, 30(1), 77–98.
66.
ParetteH. P., BrothersonM. J., HogeD. R., & Hos-tetlerS. A. (1996, December). Family-centered aug-mentative and alternative communication issues: Impli-cations across cultures.Paper presented at the Inter-national Early Childhood Conference on Children with Special Needs, Phoenix, AZ.
67.
ParetteH. P., MurdickN. L., & GartinB. (1996). Mini-grant to the rescue! Using community re-sources to obtain assistive technology devices for children with disabilities.Teaching Exceptional Chil-dren, 28(2), 20–23.
68.
ParetteH. P., & VanBiervlietA. (1990). A prospec-tive inquiry of the technology needs and practices of school-age children with disabilities.Journal of Special Education Technology, 10, 198–206.
69.
ParetteH. P., & VanBiervlietA. (1992). Tentative findings of a study of the technology needs and use patterns of persons with mental retardation.Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 36, 7–27.
70.
ParetteH. P., HofmannA., & VanBiervlietA. (1994). The professional's role in obtaining as-sistive technology for infants and toddlers with disabilities.Teaching Exceptional Children, 26, 22–28.
71.
ParetteH. P., HourcadeJ. J., & VanBiervlietA. (1993). Selection of appropriate technology for children with disabilities.Teaching Exceptional Chil-dren, 25(3), 18–22.
72.
ParkerS. Buckle, TruesdaleA., RiggioM., Col-linsM., & BoardmanB. (1990). Barriers to use of assistive technology with children: A survey.Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 84, 532–533.
73.
PfrommerM. C. (1984). Utilization of technology: Consumer perspective. In: Discovery ’84: Technology for disabled persons. Conference papers (pp. 237–242). Menomonie, WI: Stout Vocational Rehabilitation Center.
74.
PfrommerM. C. (1984). Utilization of technology: Consumer perspective. In: Discovery ’84: Technology for disabled persons. Conference papers (pp. 237–242). Menomonie, WI: Stout Vocational Rehabilitation Center.
75.
ReebK. G. (1987). Private insurance reimbursement for rehabilitation equipment.Washington, DC: Electron-ics Industries Foundation.
76.
RobinsonN. (1997). Working with families. In McCormickL., LoebD. F., & SchiefelbuschR. L. (Eds.), Supporting children with communication diffi-culties in inclusive settings (pp. 109–148). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
77.
RothsteinL. F. (1995). Special education law (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
78.
SchererM. J. (1993). Living in the state of stuck. How technology impacts the lives of people with disabilities. Cambridge: Brookline.
79.
SchererM. J., & McKeeB. G. (1989). But will the assistive technology device be used? In PresperinJ. J. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 12th Annual Confer-ence of the Rehabilitation Engineering Society of North America (pp. 356–357). Washingtin, DC: RESNA Press.
80.
SmithR., BengeM., & HallM. (1994). Technology for self-care. In ChristiansonC. (Ed.), Ways of liv-ing: Self-care strategies for special needs (pp. 379–422). Rockville, MD: American Occupational Therapy Association.
81.
SnellM., & BrowderD. (1986). Community-refer-enced instruction: Research and issues.Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 11, 1–11.
82.
SontagJ. C., & SchachtR. (1993). Family diversity and patterns of service utilization in early inter-vention.Journal of Early Intervention, 17, 431–444.
83.
SotoG. (1994). A cultural perspective on aug-mentative and alternative communication.Ameri-can Speech-Language-Hearing Association Special In-terest Division, 12, 3(2), 6.
84.
SotoG., HuerM. B., & TaylorO. (in press). Multi-cultural issues in augmentative and alternative communication. In LloydL. L., FullerD. R., & ArvidsonH. H. (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
85.
Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988, P. L. 100-407. (August 19, 1988). 29U.S.C. 2201 et seq.: U. S. Statutes at Large, 102, 1044–1065.
86.
TrivelliL. U. (1994). The impact of human and multicultural diversity on assistive technology out-reach and services.NARIC Quarterly, 4(3), 1, 6–7, 8,14–16.
87.
WallaceJ. F. (1995). Creative financing of assistive technology. In FlippoK. F., IngeK. J., & Bar-cusJ. M. (Eds.), Assistive technology. A resource for school, work, and community (pp. 245–260). Baltimore: Brookes.
88.
WilliamsB., BriggsN., & WilliamsR. (1979). Se-lecting, adapting, and understanding toys and re-action. In WehmanP. (Ed.), Recreation program-ming for developmentally disabled persons (pp. 15–36). Baltimore: University Park Press.
89.
ZolaI. (1982). Involving consumers in the rehabili-tation process: Easier said than done. In ReddenM. R. & SternV. W. (Eds.), Technology for independent living (pp. 112–120). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
