Journal article
Kelly Moes, Kim Cousins, Phoebe Adams, Gwyneth Peaty, Katie Ellis
Including Disability, [in press]
Including Disability, [in press]
Cite
Cite
APA
Click to copy
Moes, K., Cousins, K., Adams, P., Peaty, G., & Ellis, K. Digital Control as Institutional Abuse: Evidence from the Australian Disability Royal Commission on Technology Restrictions for People with Intellectual Disability. Including Disability, [in press].
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
Moes, Kelly, Kim Cousins, Phoebe Adams, Gwyneth Peaty, and Katie Ellis. “Digital Control as Institutional Abuse: Evidence from the Australian Disability Royal Commission on Technology Restrictions for People with Intellectual Disability.” Including Disability [in press] (n.d.).
MLA
Click to copy
Moes, Kelly, et al. “Digital Control as Institutional Abuse: Evidence from the Australian Disability Royal Commission on Technology Restrictions for People with Intellectual Disability.” Including Disability, vol. [in press].
BibTeX Click to copy
@article{kelly-a,
title = {Digital Control as Institutional Abuse: Evidence from the Australian Disability Royal Commission on Technology Restrictions for People with Intellectual Disability},
journal = {Including Disability},
volume = {[in press]},
author = {Moes, Kelly and Cousins, Kim and Adams, Phoebe and Peaty, Gwyneth and Ellis, Katie}
}
Abstract:
This paper examines digital control as a form of institutional abuse affecting the digital citizenship and human rights of people with intellectual disability in Australia, including equitable access to digital services, adequate provision of assistive/alternative technology, access to appropriate digital literacy opportunities, and online safety.
Our analysis of submissions to the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability (Disability Royal Commission) highlights significant patterns of digital control across residential, family, employment and educational settings, and restrictions to individual autonomy. These practices impact individual autonomy and control, and place digital access as contingent rather than a human right. These issues of digital control indicate systemic abuse and violations of rights enshrined in the United Nations Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, particularly those concerning autonomy and participation.
This paper concludes with discussion on implications and recommendations for policy makers as well as stakeholders with lived experience of intellectual disability. A codesign approach is also outlined in the later part of this paper as a way of starting the conversation on finding a solution to digital control and abuse of people with intellectual disability.
This paper examines digital control as a form of institutional abuse affecting the digital citizenship and human rights of people with intellectual disability in Australia, including equitable access to digital services, adequate provision of assistive/alternative technology, access to appropriate digital literacy opportunities, and online safety.
Our analysis of submissions to the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability (Disability Royal Commission) highlights significant patterns of digital control across residential, family, employment and educational settings, and restrictions to individual autonomy. These practices impact individual autonomy and control, and place digital access as contingent rather than a human right. These issues of digital control indicate systemic abuse and violations of rights enshrined in the United Nations Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, particularly those concerning autonomy and participation.
This paper concludes with discussion on implications and recommendations for policy makers as well as stakeholders with lived experience of intellectual disability. A codesign approach is also outlined in the later part of this paper as a way of starting the conversation on finding a solution to digital control and abuse of people with intellectual disability.