Authors : Geralyn Jane P. Velez, RPm

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 7 - July

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/54z9ya8b

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/yp7d43sd

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25jul572

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : This study aims to understand the lived experiences of married individuals with physical disabilities, focusing on how disability influences their emotional, relational, and social lives. Using a qualitative research design, Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA), the study intendsto reveal the deeper meanings that individuals assign to their experiences within the context of marriage. Ten participants, aged 42 to 65, residing in the EMBO barangays of Taguig City, Philippines, were purposively selected to reflect a range of marital experiences shaped by physical disability. Data were gathered through in-depth, face-to-face interviews, encouraging participants with an open and empathetic setting to express their experiences. Findings reveal that physical disabilities significantly impact daily functioning, role distribution, emotional intimacy, and self-perception within the marital dynamic. Participants detailed how physical limitations, social stigma, and economic challenges influence their sense of independence, their responsibilities within the household, and the nature of their interactions with their spouses. Despite these difficulties, many demonstrated resilience, adaptability, and strong commitment to their partners. Caregiving emerged as a central theme, often reshaping the dynamics of the relationship and influencing emotional well-being for both partners. The study highlights the significance of comprehensive and diverse support systems that recognize not only the physical needs of individuals with disabilities but also their emotional and relational realities. Recommendations include relationship-focused counseling, caregiver support programs, inclusive financial policies, and improved accessibility measures. These interventions aim to strengthen relational resilience and promote social inclusion, ultimately enhancing the living conditions of couples with physical impairments along with family caregivers. By exploring the connection between disability and intimate relationships, reinforcing the call for more holistic and responsive health measures that accommodate the multifaceted experiences of this population.

Keywords : Marriage, Disability, Resilience, Social Stigma, Coping Mechanisms.

References :

1. Anderson, S., & Clark, M. (2012). Physical activity as a facilitator of psychological well-being among adults with disabilities. Journal of Physical Activity & Health, 9(8), 1175–1183.https://www.researchgate.net/public ation/49650009_Physical_ activity_for_children_and _adults_with_disabilities_An_issue_of_amplified_importance
2. Deal, M. (2018). Disabled people’s emotional labour in the workplace. Disability & Society, 33(7), 1065–1080.https://www. researchgate.net/publication/248912878_Workers_with_disabilities_and_the_challenges_of_emotional_labour
3. Devkota, H. R., Kett, M., & Groce, N. (2019). Disability, stigma and development: A study of the impact of disability on family life in the global South. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(22), 4318.https:// opendocs.ids.ac. uk/ndownloader/files/48080908
4. Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. A. M. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 458–476). SAGE Publications Ltd.https://psycnet.apa.org/record /2011-21802-024
5. Honey, A., Kariuki, M., Emerson, E., & Llewellyn, G. (2014). Employment status transitions among young adults with and without disabilities. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 49(2), 151–170.https://onlinelibrary. wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/j. 1839-4655.2014.tb0030 6.x
6. Jones, M. (2024). Chronic illness, identity, and relationship stress: The hidden emotional toll of physical health challenges. Journal of Health Psychology, 29(1), 98–112. https://pubmed.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/28215656/
7. Kafer, A. (2019). Feminist, queer, crip. Duke University Press. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10. 1057/fr.2015.66
8. Krause, N., & Broderick, C. B. (2006). Caregiver role strain and psychological well-being. The Gerontologist, 46(4), 557–567. https://pubmed. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12745388/
9. Kuyini, A. B., & Mangope, B. (2011). Disability and entrepreneurship: Factors facilitating self-employment for people with disabilities in Botswana. Disability & Society, 26(3), 381–394.https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/306341337 _Entrepreneurship_and_self-employment_for_people_with_disabilities
10. Li, Y., & Jiang, J. (2021). Gender role attitudes and marital quality among disabled individuals and their spouses in China. Disability and Health Journal, 14(2), 100980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2020.100980
11. Lindsay Smith, G., Banting, L., Eime, R., O’Sullivan, G., & van Uffelen, J. G. Z. (2017). The association between social support and physical activity in older adults: A systematic review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 14, 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0509-8
12. Link, B. G., & Hatzenbuehler, M. L. (2016). Stigma as an unrecognized determinant of population health: Research and policy implications. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 41(4), 653–673. https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-3620869
13. Lloyd, C., Tse, S., & Deane, F. (2012). Community participation and mental health recovery: A systematic review. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 58(6), 518–531.https://www.researchgate.net/publicat ion/43453008_Community _participation_and_social _inclusion_How_practitioners_can_make_a_difference
14. Marks, L. D. (2019). Sacred matters: Religion and spirituality in families. Routledge.https://www. researchgate.net/ publication/287258772_Sacred_mat ters_Religion_and_spirituality_in_families
15. Mizunoya, S., Mitra, S., & Yamasaki, I. (2016). Disability and school attendance in developing countries: New data and evidence. World Development, 87, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.w orlddev.2016.05.005
16. Pietkiewicz, I., & Smith, J. A. (2014). A practical guide to using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis in qualitative research psychology. Psychological Journal, 20(1), 7–14.
17. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263767248_A_practical_guide_to_using_Interpretative_Phenomenological_Analysis_in_qualitative_research_psychology
18. Schneider, J. P., & Mori, L. (2020). Intimate betrayal: Understanding infidelity through the lens of trauma and attachment. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 46(3), 545–561. https://doi.org/10.1111/jmft.12395
19. Shakespeare, T. (2014). Disability rights and wrongs revisited (2nd ed.). Routledge.https://www.routle dge.com/Disability-Rights-and-Wrongs-Revisited/ Sh akespeare/p/book/9780415527613?srsltid=AfmBOoqvWOdjRnYaulYvCuIqgnqEP8-eN7o XX w9Ilc523 jkuDWE8d70b
20. Shakespeare, T., Watson, N., & Brunner, R. (2019). Disabled people’s employment: A review of research and policy. Social Policy and Administration, 53(5), 701–715. http://thedigitalcommons.org/docs/shakespe are_social-model-of-disability.pdf
21. Smith, J. A., & Matthews, M. (2014). Chronic pain and relational disruption: Intimacy, frustration, and communication breakdowns. Pain Medicine, 15(2), 267–275. https://doi.org/10.1111/pme.12294
22. Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. London: SAGE Publications. Retrieved from ResearchGate: https://www.research gate.net/publication/221670349_In terpretative_Phen omenological_Analysis_Theory_Method_and_Research torrossa.com+10researchgate.net+10
23. Umberson, D., & Thomeer, M. B. (2020). Family matters: Research on family ties and health, 2010 to 2020. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 404–419.
24. United Nations. (2019). Disability and development report: Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabi lities/publication-disability-sdgs.html
25. United Nations. (n.d.). Goal 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages. United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/health/
26. United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). https://www. un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf And for information regarding implementation challenges at the community level, you may refer to:
27. United Nations. (2019). Disability and Development Report: Realizing the Sustainable Development Goals by, for and with persons with disabilities. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/publication-disability-sdgs.html
28. UN Women. (2017). Making the SDGs count for women and girls with disabilities. https://www. unwomen.org/en/news/in-focus/women-and-the-sdgs/ sdg-5-gender-equality
29. Van Manen, M. (2014). Phenomenology of practice: Meaning-giving methods in phenomenological research and writing. Routledge. https://doi.org /10.4324/9781315422657