Good morning all,
the posting below is a longish one, as it develops argument in relation to the classification rules used in competitive swimming for people with intellecual disabilities. As it involves safety and fairness, I recommend you take the time to read it, and if you have an opinion to offer, forward it to Marie Little [log in to unmask]
marie little
Dear Colleagues,
You have read in our recent issue of Intellectual Disability in
Australia of attempts to impose a classification system that involves
physical components for athletes with an intellectual disability who are
competing in international sporting events..For you information I am
forwarding an attachment sent to me by Marie Little who is requesting
feedback on the integrity of this proposal.I believe it flies in the
face of our attempts to have people with an intellectual disability
compete with only one criterion-that is the presence of a professionally
assessed intellectual disability using recognized definition and
classification protocols.
On two counts I believe the use of physical components is a dangerous
path to tread.First it begs the question of what constitutes an
intellectual disability.The second issue relates to the politics of the
International Paralympics.It took years of patient lobbying to get "our"
people admitted and there are still groups who oppose their
involvement.The present imbroglio has opened up an excellent opportunity
for the opposition to say we shouldn't have been involved in the first
place.Resorting to a physical test of eligibility is pandering to the
views of those who believe paralympics should be restricted to those
with a physical disability.
Please send your comments directly to Marie who is valiantly fighting
these issues on behalf of all people with an intellectual disability
across the world.It wasn't that the classification system was flawed-it
was the cheating of the Spaniards and the lack of enforcement of the
system by the former executive of INAS that led to the present sorry
state of affairs.
Trevor
--
Professor Trevor R.Parmenter PhD
Director
Centre for Developmental Disability Studies
P.O.Box 6
RYDE NSW 1680 Australia
Ph 61-2-8878 0500
Fax 61-2-9807 7053
Email<[log in to unmask]>
www.cdds.med.usyd.edu.au/
PILOT PROJECT FOR CLASSIFICATION OF S14 SWIMMERS
Proposal:To institute a revised classification system for swimmers with an intellectual disability.
Background
At the Paralympic Games in Atlanta in 1996, the Swimming Assembly agreed to begin preliminary research into an alternative system for intellectual disability. Due to an unfortunate incident involving one of our premier classifiers this project was not completed in time for implementation in 1998. In Sydney, the Swimming Assembly gave its full endorsement with voting by over 60 swimming nations to begin the necessary research to modify the current process to align itself to a functional system.
Already in the functional classification system swimming competition there are swimmers who have an intellectual disability in addition to their physical disability. Primarily these are swimmers who have cerebral palsy of whom 50% have an IQ of 70-75 or lower. Many of these swimmers have medalled as Paralympians, from classes S1 - S8. IPC Swimming has over 10 years experience in dealing with swimmers with an intellectual disability (in addition to a physical disability). The coordination tests that are implemented with these swimmers have been used for over 10 years and have been shown to have high internal consistency.
Swimming has based its system totally on sport. Social consideration issues such as access, and independence in daily living activities are not taken into account when allocating a class. This should be consistently applied across all disabilities to be fair.
One major consideration is the credibility of the sport. Over the past 10 years IPC Swimming has experienced an incredible growth and respect as a sport. This should continue. One of the main reasons for this success is the functional classification system. The functional classification system has been researched strongly, is continually reviewed and is acknowledged as a "fair" system by competitors, coaches/trainers and others. Events in recent times certainly reinforces the need to modify the existing criteria for eligibility of intellectual disability for IPC Swimming. As IPC Swimming has always endeavored to deliver premium competition for swimmers, it is only keeping in line with policy to improve the classification system of intellectual disability.
The current INAS-FID system is not sport specific. IPC Swimming requires the same rigor in classifying all swimmers. To ensure that this is standardized, fair and less open to interpretation, our system which has strong evidential support should be utilized. The WHO definition is not about elite sport, but is about everyday life. IQ tests are known to be of limited application and their use in an elite sport situation, such as IPC Swimming has not been validated.
Testing Format
Swimmers with an intellectual disability are tested using the IPC Swimming coordination testing procedure. These coordination tests are already implemented with swimmers with a central nervous system dysfunction. The rational behind using coordination tests is
that it would test the ability to follow commands, retain information and the ability to motor plan.
It is theorized that intellectual disability should manifest itself in deficits in these areas to be considered an impairment to swim competitively. Therefore for the swimmer to be eligible to compete at the swimming competition at IPC Swimming events ie a Paralympic Games, World Championship, etc the swimmer's intellectual disability should manifest itself in one of these physical objective measures.
Progress to Date
An Internationally authorized classification team has commenced preliminary investigations into the feasibility of utilizing a functional assessment on swimmers with an intellectual disability. From March 2001 until the present over 80 athletes have been tested. These swimmers are all currently eligible under INAS - FID criteria.
The swimmers conditions have included PKU, Downs Syndrome, Fragile X, Asperger's, Autism and general intellectual/learning disability.
The evidence to date suggests that some of these conditions definitely reflect deficits in motor planning, information retention and the ability to follow commands. The IPC Swimming coordination test is a very simple test to apply, more objective and less open to abuse than the current system implemented by INAS-FID.
SUMMARY
The evidence that has been collected until now is indicating that it will be possible to institute a revised classification system for swimmers with an intellectual disability.
________________End of message______________________
Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
are now located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|
