ABSTRACT

UK government responses to COVID-19 have intensified experiences of uncertainty for people with learning disabilities. The pandemic has eroded the support people receive, previously weakened by austerity measures. In research, COVID-19 related uncertainty has led to some reworking of methods and intensive contingency planning. This was to fulfil funding requirements and was underpinned by research teams’ commitment to continuing research with people with learning disabilities not despite, but because of the pandemic. This is in a context where people with learning disabilities have been systemically excluded from research participation. Here, we reflect on these processes in relation to a project exploring how to improve the support for older people with learning disabilities. We consider the distribution of uncertainty in relation to conducting research during this time and ask whose uncertainty is attended to in these mid- and post-pandemic methodological debates and why. We suggest pandemic ‘disruption’ has created space for critical reflection allowing methodological creativity and consideration of in between strategies of trust, intuition, and emotion. We caution against the re-constraining of this space, instead arguing for continuing flexibility and creativity, where uncertainties are shared rather than used as a tool of control or dismissal of claims to support.

摘要

英国政府对 COVID-19 的反应加剧了有学习障碍的人的不确定性经历。新冠疫情大流行削弱了人们获得的支持，而此前因紧缩措施而削弱的支持。在研究中，与 COVID-19 相关的不确定性导致了一些方法的修改和密集的应急计划。这是为了满足资金需求，并以研究团队承诺继续对有学习障碍的人进行研究为基础，尽管如此，但因为大流行。这是在有学习障碍的人被系统性地排除在研究参与之外的背景下。在这里，我们反思了与一个项目相关的这些流程，该项目探索如何改善对有学习障碍的老年人的支持。我们考虑了与在此期间进行研究相关的不确定性的分布，并询问在这些大流行中期和后的方法论辩论中关注了谁的不确定性以及原因。我们认为，大流行的“破坏”为批判性反思创造了空间，允许方法论上的创造力和在信任、直觉和情感策略之间进行考虑。我们警告不要重新限制这一空间，而是主张持续的灵活性和创造力，其中不确定性是共享的，而不是用作控制或驳回支持主张的工具。我们认为，大流行的“破坏”为批判性反思创造了空间，允许方法论上的创造力和在信任、直觉和情感策略之间进行考虑。我们警告不要重新限制这一空间，而是主张持续的灵活性和创造力，其中不确定性是共享的，而不是用作控制或驳回支持主张的工具。我们认为，大流行的“破坏”为批判性反思创造了空间，允许方法论上的创造力和在信任、直觉和情感策略之间进行考虑。我们警告不要重新限制这一空间，而是主张持续的灵活性和创造力，其中不确定性是共享的，而不是用作控制或驳回支持主张的工具。