TPC-Journal-V3-Issue3

107 The Professional Counselor \Volume 3, Issue 3 support services in postsecondary settings (Barazandeh, 2005; Brinckerhoff, Shaw, & McGuire, 1992; Dowrick, Anderson, Heyer, & Acosta, 2005; Dutta, Kundu, & Schiro-Geist , 2009; Johnson, 2006; Swanson & Hoskyn, 1998; West et al., 1993). Examples of such accommodations include transportation, separate locations for test taking, access to private study rooms, and extended time on exams. With the reauthorization of the IDEA in 1997 (PL 94-142), there was an increase of higher expectations upon quality preparation to postsecondary education and employment for persons with intellectual disabilities. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) sought to provide reasonable accommodations to ensure equal access to learning and work environments (Jacob & Hartshorne, 2007). The vocational rehabilitation system exists to provide assistance to individuals with disabilities seeking employment. This can be a good support system for those interested in higher education, but only supports eligible consumers (Gilmore & Bose, 2005). While these recent pieces of legislation have been incredibly beneficial and have encouraged individuals and professionals alike to actively engage in advocacy, they do not specifically address the access or right to counseling as an appropriate accommodation. As students transition to postsecondary education, fear of the unknown affects not only those transitioning, but the people around them (e.g., professors, administrators or counselors) as they experience a change in roles. Parents, for instance, may want to protect their child from the risks of the larger world, and limit them by choosing self-contained and protected programs (Stodden & Whelley, 2004). This approach may deprive students of the opportunity for further education. With optional counseling specifically designed for those individuals with disabilities transitioning into the next phase of life, this may be reassuring not only for the student, but also for the student’s primary support system. One counseling model to implement in such situations is the illness intrusiveness model. Illness Intrusiveness Model: Theoretical Framework The illness intrusiveness model was developed based on the idea that illness-induced interference, in addition to interests and valued activities, compromises one’s psychological well-being—ultimately contributing to emotional distress. It is derived from a variety of sources such as functional losses, treatment side effects, disease and treatment-related lifestyle disruptions, and disease-related anatomical changes (Devins, 2010). The model postulates that when there is a decrease in positively reinforcing outcomes from valued activities and limited personal control (e.g., mood level) to obtain positive outcomes and avoid negative ones, significant adaptive changes and coping demands occur (Devins, 2010). By examining the five factors of disease—that is (1) treatment requirements, (2) personal control, (3) nature of life outcomes, (4) psychological factors, and (5) social factors—one can inspect the level of participation in valued activities, also known as illness intrusiveness. Illness intrusiveness may serve or act as a mediating variable by which unbiased circumstances of disease and treatment influence psychosocial well-being and emotional distress. Specifically, illness intrusiveness is based not only on the experience of the person, but also the psychological characteristics based on objective and subjective concepts (Roessler, 2004). This model posits that social and psychological factors have a direct effect on life outcomes. Time spent transitioning into college is heavily influenced by social factors, which can create positive or negative experiences in the individual. If the social factors weigh heavily on the individual’s psychological factors in a maladaptive way, the person’s coping abilities and adaptation skills may be compromised and lead to undesirable outcomes. The model also encompasses the idea of locus of control, presented as personal control of self-efficacy (similar to what was described earlier in this article), the idea being that low levels of personal control result in learned helplessness (Roessler, 2004). Furthermore, the theoretical framework hypothesizes