2013-06-20
Comparing Education, Employment, Social Support and Well-being among Youth with Disabilities and Their Peers in South Africa
Publication
Publication
Youth with disabilities face many challenges in life which are thought to have a negative impact on their well-being. Evidence, however, suggests that individuals differ in their resilience to deal with adverse life-events and protect their well-being. These differences may be explained by an individual's resources such as education, employment, and social support. Studies on how youth with disabilities perceive their well-being and resources important to their well-being are, however, lacking. In this study we therefore compared education, employment, social support, and well-being between youth with disabilities (n = 120) and their peers (n = 117) in South Africa. In addition, we investigated the relationship between background characteristics, having a disability, access to resources, and well-being. The unemployment rate among youth with disabilities is higher, they are less educated, receive less social support and report poorer states of well-being. Our study showed that having a disability, social support, and employment were associated with the well-being of youth in South Africa. While having a disability predicted well-being in youth, the effect was mediated by employment and social support, indicating that those two resources influence wellbeing through both a direct and buffer effect. Therefore, employment and social support may mitigate the negative consequences of a disability and have a substantial role in improving or maintaining well-being.
Additional Metadata | |
---|---|
, , , , , | |
doi.org/10.1007/s11482-013-9247-5, hdl.handle.net/1765/40639 | |
Applied Research in Quality of Life | |
Organisation | Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM) |
Cramm, J., Lorenzo, T., & Nieboer, A. (2013). Comparing Education, Employment, Social Support and Well-being among Youth with Disabilities and Their Peers in South Africa. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 1–8. doi:10.1007/s11482-013-9247-5 |