Correction: What’s Good About Inclusion? An Ethical Analysis of the Ideal of Social Inclusion for People with Profound Intellectual and Multiple Disabilities
Simon van der Weele, Femmianne Bredewold
Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsDisability Education and Employment · Disability Rights and Representation · Ethics in medical practice
Health Care Analysis
10.1007/s10728-023-00470-y
In the sentence beginning of the second paragraph of the section ‘People with Profound and/or Multiple Disabilities’in this article, the text was inadvertently omitted should have read ’ Nakken and Vlaskamp [48,, p. 85] speak of two ‘key defining characteristics’ of people with PIMD: first, ‘profound intellectual disabilities’, and second, ‘profound neuromotor dysfunctions’. This means that people with PIMD have little to no apparent understanding of verbal language and little to no ability to care for themselves [47, 48]. They also tend to have various medical conditions requiring regularly administered medication. Resultingly, people with PIMD have pervasive care needs, needing support for carrying out essentially every ordinary activity [51, 52]. In addition, due to their inability to communicate verbally, getting to know the needs and wants of people with PIMD tends to be exceedingly difficult [28, 40, 49, 61, 63]’.
The original article has been corrected.