Advertisement

Sexuality and Disability

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 91–109 | Cite as

The Myth of Asexuality: A Survey of Social and Empirical Evidence

  • Maureen S. Milligan
  • Aldred H. Neufeldt
Article

Abstract

Self-advocacy groups and individual authors have increasingly expressed concern that persons with disabilities (PWD) are sexually disenfranchised by a society that inaccurately perceives them as asexual beings. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the social and empirical foundations for the contention that PWD are indeed viewed as asexual and examine whether there is cause for ongoing concern and intervention. This review includes a consideration of the implications for both clinical practice and future research as well. It is concluded that despite significant gains in our biological and psychosocial understanding of sexuality in the context of disability, there remains much to be accomplished to effect needed change in the areas of professional practice, research, societal attitudes, and most importantly, in the lives of PWD.

disability sexuality review intimate relationships 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Neufeldt AH: Appearances of disability, discrimination and the transformation of rehabilitation service practices. In Cross-cultural Rehabilitation: An International Perspective, R.L. Leavitt (ed). Toronto, W.B. Saunders, 1999, pp. 25–36.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Caruso, SM, Baum RB, Hopkins D, Lauer M, Russell S, Meranto E, Stisser K: The development of a regional association to address the sexuality needs of individuals with disabilities. Sex Disability 15:285–291, 1997.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gill CJ: Dating and relationship issues. Sex Disability 14:183–189, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hahn H: The social component of sexuality and disability: Some problems and proposals. Sex Disability 4:220–233, 1981.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Norden MF: The Cinema of Isolation: A History of Physical Disability in the Movies. New Brunswick, NJ, Rutgers University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tilley CM:Sexuality in women with physical disabilities: A social justice or health issue? Sex Disability 14:139–151, 1996.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Felce D, Perry, J: Quality of life: The scope of the term and its breadth of measurement. In Quality of Life for People with Disabilities (2nd ed), R Brown (ed). Cheltenham, UK, Stanley Thornes, 1997, pp. 56–71.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Medlar TM: Sexual counseling and traumatic brain injury. Sex Disability 11:57–71, 1993.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nosek MA, Rintala DH, Young ME, Howland CA, Foley CC, Rossi D, Chanpong G: Sexual functioning among women with physical disabilities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 77:107–115, 1996.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yoshida KK: Intimate and marital relationships: An insider's perspective. Sex Disability 12:179–189, 1994.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    DeLoach CP: Attitudes toward disability: Impact on sexual development and forging of intimate relationships. J Appl Rehabil Counseling 25(1):18–25, 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Whitehouse MA, McCabe MP: Sex education programs for people with intellectual disability: How effective are they? Educ Training Ment Retard Dev Disabilities 32(2):229–240, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wolfe PS: The influence of personal values on issues of sexuality and disability. Sex Disability 15:69–90, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Trieschmann RB: Spinal Cord Injuries: Psychological, Social, and Vocational Rehabilitation (2nd ed), New York, Demos, 1988.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Burlink K, Tarvydas VM, Maki DR: Human sexuality and disability: A holistic interpretation of rehabilitation counseling. J Appl Rehabil Counseling 25:10–16, 1994.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Farrow J: Sexuality counseling with clients who have spinal cord injuries. Rehabil Counseling Bull 33:251–259, 1990.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Webster J: Lost time: Sex after SCI. Spinal Columns 11(3):25–26, Winter 1997. (Available from Canadian Paraplegic Association [Alberta], #305, 11010–101 Street, Edmonton, AB T5H 4B9)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Corbet B: Bully pit: Freak love. New Mobility [online], February, 1998. (Available: http:// www.newmobility.com/query/magazine)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stohl E: Sexuality and disability: Uncovering the real life obstacles. SCI Psychosoc Process 2/3:73–74, 1996.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kroll K, Klein EL: Enabling Romance: A Guide to Love, Sex, and Relationships for the Disabled (and the people who care about them), Bethesda, MD, Woodbine House, 1995.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mona LR, Gardos PS, Brown RC: Sexual self views of women with disabilities: The relationship among age-of-onset, nature of disability and sexual self-esteem. Sex Disability 12:261–277, 1994.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Romeo AJ, Wanless R, Arenas S: A profile of psychosexual functioning in males following spinal cord injury. Sex Disability 11:269–276, 1993.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rousso H: Sexuality and a positive sense of self. In Women with Physical Disabilities: Achieving and Maintaining Health and Well-Being, D Krososki, M Nosek, M Turk (eds). Baltimore, Paul H. Brookes, 1996, pp. 109–116.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rousso H: Special considerations in counseling clients with cerebral palsy. Sex Disability 11:99–108, 1993.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    DeCock HJ: Life with a spinal cord injury: Is it the pits? Spinal Columns 11(2):30, 1996. (Available from Canadian Paraplegic Association (Alberta), _305, 11010–101 Street, Edmonton, AB T5H 4B9).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dobbs J: The road to intimacy. New Mobility [online], October, 1997. (Available: http:// www.newmobility.com/query/magazine)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    The dating game. Caliper L11(4):28–29, Spring, 1998. (Available from Canadian Paraplegic Association, 1101 Prince of Wales Drive, Suite 230, Ottawa, Ontario K2C 3W7).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sexual turning points. New Mobility [online], June, 1997. (Available: http://www.new mobility.com/query/magazine)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    In search of a new aesthetic. New Mobility [online], November, 1998. (Available: http:// www.newmobility.com/query/magazine)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hahn H: Can disability be beautiful? In Perspectives on Disability, M Nagler (ed). Palo Alto, Ca, Health Markets Research, 1990, pp. 310–319.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brolley DY, Anderson SC: Advertising and attitudes. In Perspectives on Disability, M Nagler (ed). Palo Alto, Ca, Health Markets Research, 1990, pp. 147–150.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Schwartz HD: Further thoughts on a “sociology of acceptance” for disabled people. Soc Policy 19(2):36–39, 1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sheridan C: A Physical Challenge for the Media: The Effects of Portrayals of Wheelchair Users [online]. Available at http://www.youknow.com/disability/portrayals.html) 1996.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Green S, Renzi M (Producers), Sayles J (Director): Passion Fish [Film], 1992.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Von Trier L (Director): Breaking the Waves [Film], Denmark, October Films, 1996.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Berkman AH, Weissman R, Frielich, MH: Sexual adjustment of spinal cord injured veterans living in the community. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 59:29–33, 1978.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cole S: Foreward. In Ducharme SH, Gill, KM: Sexuality after Spinal Cord Injury, Baltimore, Paul H. Brookes, 1997.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Willmuth ME: Sexuality after spinal cord injury: A critical review. Clin Psychol Rev 7:389–412, 1987.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Nosek MA, Howland CA, Young, ME, Georgiou D, Rintala DH, Foley CC, Bennett JL, Smith Q: Wellness models and sexuality among women with physical disabilities. J Appl Rehabil Counseling 25(1):50–58, 1994.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Robillard K, Fichten CS: Attributions about sexuality and romantic involvement of physically disabled college students: An empirical study. Sex Disability 6:197–212, 1983.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Vargo FA: Adaptation to disability by the wives of spinal cord males: A phenomenological approach. J Appl Rehabil Counseling 15(1):28–32, 1984.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ducharme S, Gill KM: Sexual values, training and professional roles. In The Psychological and Social Impact of Disability (3rd ed), RP Marinelli, AE Dell Orto (eds). New York, Springer, 1991, pp. 201–209.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wada MA, Brodwin MG: Attitudes of society toward sexual functioning of male individuals with spinal cord injury. Psychol 12(4):18–22, 1975.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Anderson RJ, Antonak RF: The influence of attitudes and contact on reactions to persons with physical and speech difficulties. Rehabil Counselling Bull 35:240–247, 1992.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gething L: Judgements by health professions of personal characteristics of people with a visible physical disability. Soc Sci Med 34:809–815, 1992.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Wright BA: Physical Disability: A Psychosocial Approach (2nd ed). New York: Harper & Row, 1983.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Olkin R, Howson LJ: Attitudes toward and images of physical disability. J Soc Behav Pers 9(5):81–96, 1994.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Phillips M: Damaged goods: Oral narratives of the experience of disability in American culture. Soc Sci Med 30:849–857, 1990.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Strohmer DC, Grand SA, Purcell MJ: Attitudes toward persons with a disability: An examination of demographic factors, social context, and specific disability. Rehabil Psychol 29:131–145, 1984.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Fichten CS, Goodrick G, Amsel R, McKenzie SW: Reactions toward dating peers with visual impairments. Rehabil Psychol 36:163–178, 1991.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gordon ED, Minnes PM, Holden RR: The structure of attitudes toward persons with a disability, when specific disability and context are considered. Rehabil Psychol 35:79–90, 1990.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Fichten CS: Self, other, and situation-referent automatic thoughts: Interaction between people who have a physical disability and those who do not. Cognitive Ther Res 10:571–588, 1986.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Fichten CS, Amsel R: Trait attributions about college students with a physical disability: Circumplex analyses and methodological issues. J Appl Soc Psychol 16:410–427, 1986.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Fichten CS, Robillard K, Judd D, Amsel R: College students with physical disabilities: Myths and realities. Rehabil Psychol 34:243–257, 1989.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Fichten CS, Robillard K, Tagalakis V, Amsel R: Causal interaction between college students with various disabilities and their nondisabled peers: The internal dialogue. Rehabil Psychol 36:3–20, 1991.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Haring M, Meyerson L: Attitudes of college students toward sexual behavior of disabled persons. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 60:257–260, 1979.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Scotti JR, Slack BS, Bowman MA, Morris TL: College students' attitudes concerning the sexuality of persons with mental retardation: Development of the Perceptions of Sexuality Scale. Sex Disability 14:249–263, 1996.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Yuker HE: Variables that influence attitudes toward people with disabilities: Conclusions from the data. J Soc Behav Pers 9(5):3–22, 1994.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Bozzacco V: Long-term psychosocial effects of spinal cord injury. Rehabil Nurs 18:82–87, 1993.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Carlson CE: Conceptual style and life satisfaction following spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 60:346–352, 1979.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Krause JS: Life satisfaction after spinal cord injury: A descriptive study. Rehabil Psychol 37:61–70, 1992.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Mackelprang RW, Hepworth DH: Sexual adjustment following spinal cord injury: Empirical findings and clinical implications. Arete 15(1):1–13, 1990.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Miller S, Morgan M: Marriage matters: For people with disabilities too. Sex Disability 3:203–211, 1980.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Pearson V, Klook A: Sexual behavior following paraplegia: An exploratory study in Hong Kong. Disability Handicap Soc 4:285–295, 1989.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Povolny MA, Kaplan SP, Marme M, Roldan G: Perceptions of adjustment issues following a spinal cord injury: A case study. J Appl Rehabil Counseling 24(3):31–34, 1993.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ray C, West J: Social, sexual and personal implications of paraplegia. Paraplegia 22:75–86, 1984.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Rintala DH, Howland CA, Nosek MA, Bennett JL, Young ME, Foley CC, Rossi CD, Chanpong G: Dating issues for women with physical disabilities. Sex Disability 15:219–242, 1997.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Tepper MS: Sexual education in spinal cord rehabilitation: Current trends and recommendations. Sex Disability 10:15–31, 1992.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Brown JS, Giesy B: Marital status of persons with spinal cord injury. Soc Sci Med 23:313–322, 1986.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    DeVivo MJ, Fine PR: Spinal cord injury: Its short-term impact on marital status. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 66:501–504, 1985.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    DeVivo MJ, Hawkins LN, Richards JS, Go BK: Outcomes of post-spinal cord injury marriages. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 76:130–138, 1995.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    DeVivo MJ, Richards, JS: Community reintegration and quality of life following spinal cord injury. Paraplegia 30:108–112, 1992.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    DeLoach C, Greer BG: Adjustment to Severe Disability: A Metamorphosis. New York, McGraw-Hill Books, 1981.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Lemon MA: Sexual counseling and spinal cord injury. Sex Disability 11:73–97, 1993.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Oliver M, Zarb G, Silver J, Moore M, Salisbury V: Walking Into Darkness: The Experience of Spinal Cord Injury. London, MacMillan Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Vash CL: The Psychology of Disability. New York, Demos, 1981.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Kettl P, Zarefoss S, Jocoby K, Garman C, Hulse C, Rowley F, Corey R, Sredy M, Bixler E, Tyson K: Female sexuality after spinal cord injury. Sex Disability 9:287–295, 1991.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Richards E, Tepper M, Whipple B, Komisaruk BR: Women with complete spinal cord injury: A phenomenological study of sexuality and relationship experiences. Sex Disability 15:271–283, 1997.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    White MJ, Rintala DH, Hart KA, Fuhrer MJ: Sexual activities, concerns and interests of women with spinal cord injury living in the community. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 72:372–378, 1993.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    White, MJ, Rintala DH, Hart KA, Young ME, Fuhrer MJ: Sexual activities, concerns and interests of men with spinal cord injury. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 71:225–231, 1992.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Kreuter M, Sullivan M, Siosteen A: Sexual adjustment and quality of relationships in spinal paraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 77:541–547, 1996.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Crewe NM, Athelstan GT, Krumberger J: Spinal cord injury: A comparison of preinjury and postinjury marriages. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 60:252–256, 1979.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Crewe NM, Krause JS: Marital relationships and spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 69:435–438, 1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    El Ghatit AZ, Hanson RW: Marriage and divorce after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 57:470–472, 1976.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Milligan MS, Neufeldt AH: Postinjury marriage to men with spinal cord injury: Women's perspectives on making a commitment. Sex Disability 16:117–132, 1998.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Simmons S, Ball SE: Marital adjustment and self-actualization in couples married before and after spinal cord injury. J Marriage Fam 46:943–945, 1984.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Siosteen A, Lundqvist C, Blomstrand C, Sullivan L, Sullivan M: Sexual ability, activity, attitudes and satisfaction as part of adjustment in spinal cord-injured patients. Paraplegia 28:285–295, 1990.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Walters AS, Williamson GM: Sexual satisfaction predicts quality of life: A study of adult amputees. Sex Disability 16:103–115, 1998.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Neumann RJ: The forgotten other: Women partners of spinal cord injured men, a preliminary report. Sex Disability 2:287–292, 1979.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Hurd GA, Cantin M (Producers), Jiminez N, Steinberg M (Directors): The Waterdance [Film]. No Frills Film Production, 1992.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Gardos PS, Mona LR: The use of computers and on-line services in conducting sexuality research with people who have physical disabilities. Sex Disability 12:251–259, 1994.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Hewson CM, Laurent D, Vogel CM: Proper methodologies for psychological and sociological studies conducted via the Internet. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 28:186–191, 1996.Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Schmidt WC: World-wide web survey research: Benefits, potential problems, and solutions. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 29:274–279, 1997.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    David A, Gur S, Rozin R: Survival in marriage in the paraplegic couple: Psychological study. Paraplegia 15:198–201, 1977–78.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Donohue J, Gebhard P: The Kinsey Institute/Indiana University Report on sexuality and spinal cord injury. Sex Disability 13:7–85, 1995.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Ducharme S: From the editor. Sex Disability 15:125–126, 1997.Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Tepper MS: Providing comprehensive sexual health care in spinal cord injury rehabilitation: Implementation and evaluation of a new curriculum for health care professionals. Sex Disability 15:131–165, 1997.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Shurka E, Siller J, Dvonch P: Coping behavior and personal responsibility as factors in the perception of disabled persons to the nondisabled. Rehabil Psychol 27:225–233, 1982.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Fine M, Asch A: Disability beyond stigma: Social interaction, discrimination, and activism. J Soc Issues 44:3–21, 1988.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Kerr N, Bodman DA: Disability research methods: An argument for the use of Galileian modes of thought in disability research. J Soc Behav Pers 9(5):99–122, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Program in Clinical PsychologyUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations