Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

education services. Despite <strong>the</strong>se similarities,
each young man and <strong>the</strong>ir parents responded
differently to <strong>the</strong> age of majority and transfer
of rights issues. One family, Kevin’s, secured a
house, obtained agency support, and were adamant
that no legal guardian be appointed.
Ano<strong>the</strong>r family, Jack’s, chose a different path.
By family choice, <strong>the</strong> young man had no
agency services and lived with his parents, who
were also his legal guardians.
For Kevin, Mary his mo<strong>the</strong>r shared <strong>the</strong> majority
of information from <strong>the</strong> parental point
of view. Although Kevin’s fa<strong>the</strong>r was involved
in his son’s life, Mary stated “Oh, I can speak
for him.” Mary was initially contacted by <strong>the</strong>
district’s transition coordinator about <strong>the</strong>
study, <strong>the</strong>n introduced to <strong>the</strong> author. Mary
was immediately agreeable to participate in
<strong>the</strong> study and gave <strong>the</strong> author <strong>the</strong> names and
phone numbers of people to contact to set up
times to meet with Kevin. A total of six individuals,
in addition to Kevin, were interviewed
who included: Mary (his mom), his dad, and
<strong>the</strong> school Transition Coordinator. Kevin had
a case manager through <strong>the</strong> Department of
Mental Health - Services for People with Developmental
Disabilities (DMH) whose job
was to make sure Kevin had <strong>the</strong> supports he
needed. The case manager, Tyler (Kevin’s
personal care assistant funded by DMH), and
Simon (Kevin’s job coach who’s position was
funded in part by <strong>the</strong> school and vocational
rehabilitation) were also study participants.
In Jack’s situation, <strong>the</strong> fa<strong>the</strong>r granted <strong>the</strong>
family participation in <strong>the</strong> study, however,
made it clear that both he and his wife would
attend interviews toge<strong>the</strong>r. In all, four individuals,
in addition to Jack were interviewed: his
mom, dad, employer, and <strong>the</strong> school transition
coordinator.
The transition coordinator for <strong>the</strong> district
was contacted by <strong>the</strong> author, following <strong>the</strong>
advice of <strong>the</strong> district director of special education,
and given <strong>the</strong> participant criteria, who
<strong>the</strong>n helped identify participants. As a point
of reference, <strong>the</strong> transition coordinator
worked with <strong>the</strong> participants for a three year
period, and had <strong>the</strong> responsibilities of being a
teacher and work study coordinator. This individual
was also responsible for arranging
presentations throughout <strong>the</strong> school year on
various topics, including social security, and
living arrangement options.
Data Collection
282 / Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-September 2008
Several methods and data sources were utilized
to collect, elaborate and verify information.
Main data collection methods were <strong>the</strong>
use of open-ended and semi-structured interviews
with participants (via telephone or in
person) and on-site observations. Documents
and records (e.g., Individualized Education
Programs, evaluation reports, and student
performance data provided by <strong>the</strong> transition
coordinator) were also reviewed.
Based on <strong>the</strong> recommendation of <strong>the</strong> transition
coordinator, <strong>the</strong> author conducted <strong>the</strong>
first interviews with <strong>the</strong> parents by telephone.
Initial phone calls to parents lasted no more
than 30 minutes, during which <strong>the</strong> purpose of
<strong>the</strong> study was reiterated and arrangements for
fur<strong>the</strong>r interaction were made. A request for
background information was also made such
that <strong>the</strong> author could review documents related
to health, school, employment and nonrelated
school activities (e.g., recreation/leisure,
social activities). It was also shared by <strong>the</strong>
author why <strong>the</strong>ir adult child was selected for
participation. Subsequent interviews lasted between
30 minutes to 2 hours, and were tape
recorded and transcribed for data analysis
purposes by ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> author or an assistant.
Sample questions posed to parents, and o<strong>the</strong>r
participants, included: (a) what type of curriculum
was emphasized at <strong>the</strong> school (e.g., life
skills, academics, self-determination skills)?;
(b) when did <strong>the</strong>y first learn about guardianship
with regard to <strong>the</strong>ir son?; (c) what experiences
did <strong>the</strong>y have that related to guardianship?;
and (d) what type of transition
information was provided by <strong>the</strong> schools, in
particular to self-determination, guardianship,
and guardianship alternatives? Throughout
<strong>the</strong> study, questions were modified, and
responses were clarified regarding <strong>the</strong> above
noted topics.
On-site observations occurred approximately
two to seven times a month (ranging
from one to three hours per observation) over
a ten month period that began in late August
(<strong>the</strong> beginning of a school calendar) and
ended in early July. Observations occurred at
<strong>the</strong> young adults’ home, school, place of employment,
and various community settings <strong>the</strong>
young adults frequented (e.g., mall, community
recreation center, fast food restaurant).