A Response to Wehmeyer (1999) and a Challenge to the Field Regarding Self-Determination

This article provides a response to an article by Wehmeyer that appeared in the Spring 1999 issue of this journal. Self-determination presents a tremendous opportunity for all persons, and this promise enhances the challenge to prevent self-determination from becoming an empty cliché. To ensure a durable and substantive role for self-determination, the following critical components are needed: (a) a description of self-determination that is conceptually compelling and operational; (b) a sensitive, valid, and reliable method of assessing or measuring the self-determination experienced by an individual; and (c) documentation that efforts to improve self-determination are as-sociated with improvements in the quality of life experienced by persons with disabili-ties and their families. Wehmeyer and colleagues have contributed greatly to the first of these components. The remaining two components must be the focus of further in-quiry, research, and policy analysis. etermining the course of one’s own life is a cherished value in ~ ~ our culture. Powers, Singer, and Sowers (1996) conceptualized self-determination as a crucial component of the development of a competent person. Without meaningful opportunities to make choices, people are bereft of an im-portant, appropriate means for creating a rich personal lifestyle. Sadly, such oppor-tunities to express preferences and make choices have been found at particular risk for persons with developmental dis-abilities, especially persons with severe communication disorders or severe-profound mental retardation (Wehmeyer & Metzler, 1995). Low levels of self-determination may exist among persons with developmental disabilities for a number of reasons, including communi-cation barriers, learning barriers, poverty, paternalistic service delivery systems, over-protection, and prejudice, as noted i