Prevalence of Mental Disorders in Parents with Intellectual Disabilities: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
aDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK
bDepartment of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK
cDepartment of Health Studies, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
dDepartment of Mental Health and Addiction - ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, Milan, Italy
eNIHR Health and Social Care Workforce Research Unit, Policy Institute, King’s College London, UK
fSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
gInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Kings College London, UK
*Corresponding author: Sonya Rudra Address: Division of Psychiatry, University College London. London, United Kingdom, Email: s.rudra@ucl.ac.ukABSTRACT
Background
Research indicates that increasing numbers of people with intellectual disabilities (ID) are becoming parents. Parents with ID face multiple contextual factors that elevate mental health risks during the perinatal period. Mental disorders in this period can significantly impact parents, their children, and the wider support network.
Aim
This systematic review summarises the prevalence of mental disorders in parents with ID during pregnancy, post-partum, and parenthood, comparing rates with the general population and non-parents with ID.
Methods
Studies included individuals with clinically diagnosed ID who had experienced pregnancy or parenthood and reported prevalence of specific mental disorders. Searches of MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, EMBASE, and grey literature were conducted to May 2025. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Findings were synthesised narratively, with meta-analysis where possible.
Results
Ten studies involving 42,207 individuals aged 18–58 years were included. Two studies focused on the perinatal period, the rest on parents with children aged 0–21 years. Across studies, approximately half of parents with ID experienced a psychiatric disorder. Depression was most common, affecting 38% (95% CI: 26– 50%) mothers, anxiety 26% (95% CI: 26-26%), and psychosis 9% (95% CI: 3–14%). Rates are higher than in the general population and non-parent individuals with ID.
Conclusion
This review is the first to document elevated mental disorders among parents with ID. Findings highlight the need for tailored screening and support in reproductive healthcare, addressing stigma, and guiding further research to inform targeted interventions.
PROSPERO registration number 1020203
What this paper adds?
This review is the first to systematically synthesise evidence demonstrating elevated risks of mental disorders among parents with intellectual disabilities (ID), showing that around half of parents experience a psychiatric disorder, with depression affecting 38% of mothers, anxiety 26%, and psychosis 9% — rates higher than in the general population and non-parent individuals with ID. It highlights the substantial mental health burden faced by this group and identifies major gaps in the literature, including limited research on fathers, postpartum mental health, studies based on larger samples and studies from low- and middle-income countries. In doing so, this paper provides a foundation for future research and highlights the need for targeted, evidence-based interventions and tailored mental health screening and support for parents with ID, particularly during the perinatal period.
Highlights
- There are high rates of mental disorders in parents with intellectual disabilities
- Half of parents with intellectual disabilities have psychiatric disorders
- Research gaps exist on postpartum health and fathers with intellectual disabilities
- There is urgent need for tailored mental healthcare in reproductive health services
Article notes
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Dr Sonya Rudra, Doctoral Research Fellow is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) for this research project [NIHR304688]. CAW is funded by the NIHR on an Advanced Fellowship [NIHR302950]. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of the NIHR, NHS or the UK Department of Health and Social Care.
1.INTRODUCTION
1.1.Defining Intellectual Disability
Intellectual Disability (ID) is a lifelong disorder that affects around 1% of the worldwide population (Maulik et al., 2011). In both the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) the core diagnostic criteria for ID (also referred to as “intellectual developmental disorder” in the DSM-5 and “disorders of intellectual development” in the ICD-11 are: deficits in intellectual functioning; deficits in adaptive functioning and; onset during the developmental period (American Psychiatric Association, 2013; World Health Organization, 2022). These criteria place less of an emphasis on IQ scores compared to earlier diagnostic manuals (American Psychiatric Association, 1994; World Health Organization, 2004).
1.2.Parenthood Trends in Intellectual Disability
Research suggests that it is likely more people with ID are becoming parents (Turney et al., 2018). This rise in parents can be attributed to a move to more community-based care providing opportunities to develop relationships, coupled with changing attitudes, a reduction in forced sterilization, as well as policy and legislative changes recognising the rights of people with disabilities to parent and to have a family life (Human Rights Act 1998; Equality Act, 2010).
1.3.Contextual Risks for Perinatal Mental Disorders in Intellectual Disability
Contextual factors are important in understanding perinatal mental disorders. Prevalence estimates suggest that depression and anxiety are at least as common, if not more so, in the perinatal period compared to other life stages, affecting approximately one in five women globally (Stevenson et al., 2023). In general, people with ID face significant health and social disparities including higher rates of poverty, poor physical and mental health, and exposure to violence compared to those without ID (Bowen & Swift, 2019; Emerson, 2007; Krahn et al., 2006; Roebuck, 2021). These factors culminate in higher rates of avoidable mortality in those with ID compared to the general population (White et al., 2023).
Mothers with ID therefore face a double burden increasing their mental health risk during the perinatal period. Research has suggested that they are more likely to be unemployed, struggle financially, and reside in deprived neighbourhoods compared to mothers without ID (Brown et al., 2022; Fairthorne et al., 2020; Tarasoff et al., 2020). They also tend to be younger (Parish et al., 2015) and have a higher likelihood of being single parents (Mitra et al., 2015), which are both risk factors for isolated parenting experiences and victimization. Women with ID may also suffer high rates of trauma, such as child welfare involvement, intimate partner violence, sexual assault, and caregiver abuse (Bowen & Swift, 2019; Powell et al., 2024), often experiencing these life events with smaller support networks and without appropriately tailored support (Mueller et al., 2019)
1.4.Pregnancy and Postnatal Outcomes in Women with Intellectual Disability
A recent systematic review examining pregnancy and postnatal outcomes of women with ID found that women with ID were at an overall higher risk of adverse obstetric and pregnancy outcomes, such as gestational hypertension, and postpartum haemorrhage compared to women without ID (Lo et al., 2025). Similarly, infants of women with ID had higher rates of premature birth, perinatal mortality, and experienced longer hospital stays when compared to their counterparts born to women without ID (Lo et al., 2025).
Pregnancy outcomes are worse still for mothers with comorbid ID and mental illness (Brown et al., 2016). A complex cycle exists in which adverse experiences and poor physical outcomes increase the risk of maternal mental health issues (Anderson & Cacola, 2017).
1.5.Impact of Maternal Mental Disorders in Intellectual Disability
Mental disorders in parents with ID can have a significant impact on the parent, their children, and the wider network. For women, it can impact their ability to effectively parent, interact with their children and enjoy motherhood (Ehlers-Flint, 2002). Mental disorders in this group are frequently cited as a contributory factor in the permanent removal of children from their families (Booth et al., 2005). For children, they can become more susceptible to adverse neuro-behavioural outcomes (such as attention deficits, anxiety disorders and autism) than those children whose parents have ID without mental illness (McGaw et al., 2007). For services, during pregnancy and after childbirth, women with ID have higher rates of emergency department visits and hospital admissions for psychiatric reasons including schizophrenia/psychosis, postpartum depression, and bipolar affective disorder (Brown et al., 2017).
1.6.Limitations in Research on Mental Disorders in Parents with Intellectual Disability
A number of studies have used administrative health data to show that parents with “intellectual and developmental disabilities” (IDD) have higher rates of some mental disorders (Brown et al., 2016). However, there is often no separate analysis for parents with ID only. Parents with ID may have different health needs than individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism without ID. In many countries, as in England, these groups are not eligible for ID services if they do not have comorbid ID. It is therefore imperative for clinicians and professionals working with people with ID to have an awareness of the needs of the population with ID specifically to provide personalised and tailored care.
In some studies which focus on ID, samples are identified by clinical suspicion or self-report rather than formal diagnosis (Munshi et al., 2025). This can introduce bias into the sample, including the inclusion of participants who have “learning difficulties” referring to limitations in scholastic skills rather than a clinical ID diagnosis.
Research focusing on fathers, particularly those with ID, is scarce. Nonetheless, evidence indicates that fathers can experience significant mental health difficulties linked to service exclusion and the compounded stresses of parenthood (Symonds et al., 2021). In the general population, perinatal depression affects 8–26% of fathers, markedly higher than the approximate 5% annual prevalence among men overall (Bruno et al., 2020). This highlights the need to examine whether paternal depression rates in the male ID population follow a similar trend.
1.7.Study Objectives
This research will synthesize the existing evidence on mental disorders in parents with ID. The primary objective is to systematically review the literature for evidence of the prevalence of any mental disorders in parents with ID during pregnancy, post-partum, and parenthood. We also aim to comment on whether parents with ID have a higher prevalence of mental disorders compared to the general population and non-parents with ID.
2.METHODOLOGY
2.1.Eligibility and Outcomes
We included quantitative studies of parents with clinically defined ID (DSM/ICD or equivalent), and partners of pregnant people, without restrictions on country or setting. We excluded selfl7lreport–only ID, algorithmic/composite ID definitions, borderline intellectual functioning, and Intimate Partner Violence/childl7lprotection cohorts. Primary outcomes were prevalence of clinically diagnosed or screened mental disorders during pregnancy, postpartum, or parenthood. Reviews, case studies and opinion pieces were excluded.
2.2.Search Strategy
We searched MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, and EMBASE via OVID from inception to May 2025, plus grey literature (PsycEXTRA, PsyArXiv, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses). The search strategy was developed with a specialist librarian, peerl7lreviewed (PRESS) (McGowan et al., 2016) and validated against known studies. Searches were also done on reference lists from key reviews and to identify corresponding papers from relevant conference abstracts. Duplicates were removed using the Falconer (2018) method, imported into Rayyan for screening and citation tracking completed in Scopus and Web of Science. Database search alerts were set in order to identify any new publications prior to starting the data extraction in July 2025. The search strategy is available in Supplementary material (S1).
2.3.Selection Process
Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts (initial 20% doublel7lscreened with full agreement) and then full texts against eligibility criteria; nonl7lEnglish abstracts were translated; disagreements were resolved by discussion or a third reviewer.
2.4.Data Collection
Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics, ID definitions, outcomes, and comparator details using a piloted form; authors were contacted for missing data.
2.5.Risk of Bias Assessment
The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT; Hong et al. (2018)), was used to assess the risk of bias within studies. This tool evaluates qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies using two universal screening questions and five design-specific criteria, rated as “Yes,” “No,” or “Can’t tell,” to ensure transparent appraisal across study types. The studies were rated by two researchers independently. In order to aid comparisons across studies, a final judgement was given by each assessor depending on whether the study met the criteria on all 5 questions (low risk of bias), 4 questions (moderate risk of bias), or ≤3 questions (high risk of bias). Any missing or unclear data was judged to reduce the overall risk of bias of the paper. Ratings were combined and any disagreements resolved through discussion between the two researchers, involving a third researcher if required.
2.6.Data Synthesis
Results are presented in an initial narrative analysis, based on population characteristics, study design and outcomes. Where three or more studies present prevalence data for a specific mental disorder, StataNow MP 19.5 was used to pool studies using random-effects meta-analyses. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic, representing percentage variation between sample estimates due to heterogeneity.
In a further narrative analysis, the prevalence rates (N, %) of mental disorders were compared to prevalence rates of the same conditions reported in non-parents with ID or in the general population, derived from the same papers or from the wider literature.
Subgroup analyses were planned to compare studies using clinical diagnoses versus screening tools, and studies focused on pregnancy versus postpartum. Publication bias was to be assessed using funnel plots and Egger’s regression tests if ≥10 studies were available. Sensitivity analyses excluding high-risk studies were also planned. These analyses were not conducted due to insufficient data.
3.RESULTS
3.1.Study Selection
The search yielded 12,957 records; after deduplication, 8,322 were screened, 48 full texts assessed, and ten studies met inclusion criteria. See Supplementary material (S2) for articles excluded. The study selection process is illustrated in Figure 1: PRISMA Diagram.
3.2.Study Characteristics
The search identified a combination of cross-sectional studies (Gaskin & James, 2006; Sterling, 1998; Tymchuk, 1993; Tymchuk, 1994; Walton-Allen, 1993), cohort studies (Lindblad et al., 2024; Shea et al., 2024), retrospective observational studies (McGaw et al., 2010; McGaw et al., 2007) and a qualitative study with quantitative component (Heifetz et al., 2019). Two thesis papers were identified and included in the analysis. All studies identified were from high-income countries: USA (Shea et al., 2024; Sterling, 1998; Tymchuk, 1993; Tymchuk, 1994), UK (Gaskin & James, 2006; McGaw et al., 2010; McGaw et al., 2007), Sweden (Lindblad et al., 2024) and Canada (Heifetz et al., 2019; Walton-Allen, 1993). Table 1 shows the characteristics of the included studies.
The studies included a total of 42,207 individuals (excluding any overlapping participants) aged between 18 and 58 years. ID had been diagnosed based on DSM-IV criteria (Lindblad et al., 2024; McGaw et al., 2010; Sterling, 1998); ICD-9 or ICD-10 criteria (McGaw et al., 2010; Shea et al., 2024); American Association on Mental Retardation 1992 Manual (McGaw et al., 2010; McGaw et al., 2007); American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Guidance 2011 (Heifetz et al., 2019); and cognitive testing using Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale or Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (Gaskin & James, 2006; Tymchuk, 1993; Tymchuk, 1994; Walton-Allen, 1993) - The method of diagnosing ID focusing on cognitive testing is in line with ICD-10 and DSM-III, which were in use when these studies were published. There were no studies identified including participants with genetic syndromes.
The majority of studies included mothers only. Three studies included fathers: Lindblad et al. (2024) included 16 fathers and 15 mothers; McGaw et al. (2010) included four fathers and 97 mothers; McGaw et al. (2007) included 19 couples in which at least one had ID as well as an additional 11 females. In McGaw et al. (2007) it was unclear how many of the fathers had ID - The mean IQ presented for males was above what is expected for an ID diagnoses (70 ± 5 points on standardised tests), whilst female mean IQ was compatible with ID diagnosis (Males: M=77.1, SD=8.72, range=62-90; Females: M=70.02, SD=6.97, range=53-80). Therefore, the results for females rather than for males were extracted from this study.
The studies identified provided sample prevalences for psychiatric disorders overall (Lindblad et al., 2024; McGaw et al., 2010; McGaw et al., 2007), as well as specific prevalences for depression (Heifetz et al., 2019; McGaw et al., 2007; Shea et al., 2024; Sterling, 1998; Tymchuk, 1994; Walton-Allen, 1993), anxiety (Lindblad et al., 2024; McGaw et al., 2007; Shea et al., 2024), psychosis/psychotic disorder/schizophrenia (Lindblad et al., 2024; McGaw et al., 2007; Shea et al., 2024), mania/bipolar affective disorder (McGaw et al., 2007; Shea et al., 2024), Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) (McGaw et al., 2007; Shea et al., 2024), Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) (Shea et al., 2024) and alcohol/drug use disorders (Shea et al., 2024). The majority of studies used screening tools to assess the presence of mental disorders apart from three which used clinical diagnoses (Lindblad et al., 2024; McGaw et al., 2010; Shea et al., 2024). The prevalence of a mental disorder in the sample was given in nine out of eleven of the studies. In the other two (Gaskin & James, 2006; Tymchuk, 1993), mean scores on screening scales were given without details of the clinical cut-off for a probable diagnosis. Therefore, these studies were not included in the meta-analysis but included in a narrative synthesis.
None of the identified studies mentioned exclusively analysing diagnoses made during pregnancy, although mental health conditions were assessed one year before and after delivery in Shea et al. (2024). The only study to administer screening tools to mothers within 12 months post-partum was Gaskin and James (2006). The remaining studies used screening tools and diagnoses with women with children aged between 0-21 years.
3.3.Risk of Bias
There were concerns regarding the risk of bias for all studies, with over half assessed as “high risk of bias” (Gaskin & James, 2006; Heifetz et al., 2019; McGaw et al., 2007; Sterling, 1998; Tymchuk, 1993; Walton-Allen, 1993) and four as “moderate risk of bias” (Lindblad et al., 2024; McGaw et al., 2010; Shea et al., 2024; Tymchuk, 1994). In general studies were at high risk of bias due to their restrictive sampling approaches, small non-random samples and missing numbers for participants that did not respond/consent to take part. Detailed breakdown of MMAT results and judgement justifications are available in supplementary materials (S3).
3.4.Prevalence of Mental Disorders in Parents with ID
3.4.1.Results of Meta-Analyses
For parents with ID, the prevalence of any psychiatric disorder was 46% (95% CI 38–53) with I2 0.0%, p=0.391 (Figure 2). Depression showed significant heterogeneity across eras (I2=86.7%, p<0.001); however in pre-2000 studies, pooled prevalence of depression was 53% (95% CI: 41–65%) with moderate heterogeneity (I²=52.8%, p=0.120) and post-2000 was 38% (95% CI: 26–50%), with moderate heterogeneity (I²=53.5%, p=0.117) (Figure 3). Pooled anxiety was 26% (95% CI:26– 26%) with no variation attributable to heterogeneity (I2=0.0%, p=0.888). For psychosis, the pooled prevalence was 9% (95% CI:3–14%) with moderate variation attributable to heterogeneity (I2=61.6%, p=0.074). Data for bipolar disorder, OCD, PTSD, and substance use were sparse. (Forest plots for depression, anxiety, and psychosis available in supplementary material S4a-c.)
3.4.2.Screening Tool Findings
Across smaller studies using Centre Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), Glasgow Depression Scale (GDS) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), many mothers scored above thresholds for possible clinical depression (Heifetz et al., 2019; Sterling, 1998; Tymchuk, 1994), whilst lack of validated cutl7loffs in other studies (Gaskin & James, 2006; Tymchuk, 1993) limited their interpretability.
3.4.3.Comparative Studies
A large US administrative cohort found substantially higher adjusted odds ratios among birthing people with ID versus those without IDD: anxiety disorders 2.49 (2.40-2.58); depressive disorders 3.01 (2.91-3.10); bipolar disorder 3.79 (3.64-3.95); PTSD 3.38 (3.17-3.60); OCD 2.38 (1.95-2.91); schizophrenia 7.93 (7.30-8.62); alcohol use disorders 2.02 (1.87-2.18); and drug use disorders 1.42 (1.36-1.49) (Shea et al., 2024). Two small 1990s studies (Tymchuk, 1993; Tymchuk, 1994) reported significantly higher scores in mothers with ID versus mothers without ID on screening for schizophrenic disorder, affective disorder, adjustment disorder, anxiety disorder and depression. In contrast, a small Swedish register study (Lindblad et al., 2024) comparing parents with ID to nonl7lparents with ID found no significant differences. These findings are summarised in Table 2.
3.4.4.Comparisons with Wider Literature
Across the studies of parents with ID, 46% were found to have psychiatric disorders, in comparison to rates of psychiatric disorders in those with mild ID (“mild” being the level of ID most commonly impacting the ID parent sample) of 29.1% (Mazza et al., 2020), compared to 16% of the adult general population (Cooper et al., 2007). 38% of mothers with ID experience depression, compared to 9.4% of people with mild ID (Maïano et al., 2018), up to 22.0% of females with ID (Carey et al., 2017), and 5.7% of the general adult population (World Health Organization, 2025). 26% of parents with ID experienced anxiety, compared to 5.5% across the lifespan in people with ID (Maïano et al., 2018; Mazza et al., 2020; Oeseburg et al., 2011), and 4.05% of the general population (Javaid et al., 2023). 9% of parents with ID experienced psychosis, compared to 5.6% in people with mild ID (Aman et al., 2016), and 0.3%-0.7% in the general population (Rahman & Lauriello, 2016).
McGaw et al. (2007) reported 7% mania/hypomania in mothers with ID and Shea et al. (2024) reported 23.3% bipolar disorder in mothers with ID, compared to 2.9% in mothers without ID. These estimates differ, likely due to the different study designs, populations included, and methods used. In comparison the lifetime prevalence of bipolar disorder (types one and two combined) is 3.6%-6.2% in autistic adults with ID (Varcin et al., 2022), and 2.6% in the general population (Clemente et al., 2015).
McGaw et al. (2007) and Shea et al. (2024) also presented different results for OCD in mothers with ID (13% and 0.7% respectively), compared to 0.1% of mothers without ID. In comparison, the point prevalence of OCD in females with mild ID has been reported up to 1.5% (Cooper et al., 2007).
The one study to report on PTSD and substance use disorders in mothers with ID reported 8.8% PTSD in mothers with ID compared to 1.2% in mothers without ID (Shea et al., 2024). In comparison, Daveney et al. (2019) reported a higher prevalence of PTSD in adults with ID of 10.0% (95% CI: 0.4%-19.5%). Shea et al. (2024) also reported 4.3% and 12.8% of mothers with ID with alcohol and drug use disorders respectively, compared to 1.2% and 5.4% of mothers without ID. In comparison, a lower point prevalence of 1.0% alcohol/substance use disorder in females with mild ID has been reported (Cooper et al., 2007).
4.DISCUSSION
4.1.Key Findings
Across studies included in this review, approximately half of parents with ID— including mothers and fathers—were found to experience a psychiatric disorder. Depression was the most frequently studied outcome, with 38% of mothers experiencing depressive symptoms in studies conducted post-2000. Anxiety and psychosis were less common but still affected a substantial proportion of parents, with prevalence rates of 26% and 9%, respectively. These findings indicate a considerable mental health burden within this population.
This review shows that parents with ID have a higher prevalence of mental disorders than both the general population and individuals with ID who are not parents. This aligns with previous research; for example, a review of mental health outcomes across the reproductive life course among women with disabilities also found heightened risks of poor mental health among those with IDD (Deierlein et al., 2024). While that review employed a broader definition of ID—including self-report and other assessment methods—and restricted inclusion to studies with comparison groups, its conclusions are consistent with the present findings, further highlighting the disproportionate vulnerability of parents with ID to adverse mental health outcomes.
4.2.Strengths and Limitations
Definitions of ID varied across studies, reflecting shifts in diagnostic practice, and requiring a formal diagnosis may have excluded undiagnosed parents. Outcomes were also assessed inconsistently between studies (diagnostic codes vs. screening tools), and many studies were small or high risk of bias. Nonetheless, this is the first systematic review to offer pooled estimates to demonstrate elevated risks of mental disorders among parents with ID, thus advancing our understanding of mental health outcomes in this population and identifying key gaps in the literature that require further investigation.
4.3.Evidence Gaps and Future Research
There is an overall lack of literature examining mental disorders in parents with ID, with initial identification of nearly 13,000 records yielding only ten records suitable for the review. This included studies that were rated as high risk of bias, two doctoral theses and two studies that did not provide data in a form that could be meta-analysed. This sparsity of literature overall meant we were unable to perform subgroup analyses. Larger studies are required using population-based data to ensure a greater representativeness of findings.
Only two studies gave data for mania/bipolar affective disorder and OCD (McGaw et al., 2007; Shea et al., 2024) and one study gave data for PTSD and alcohol/drug use disorders (Shea et al., 2024). Given the conflicting results between these two studies, concerns regarding risk of bias and significant heterogeneity, more studies are required to aid accurate interpretation of the prevalence of these disorders in this population.
The review highlighted a particularly concerning gap in the knowledge base on mental disorders in mothers with ID within the context of pregnancy and post-partum, with the majority of studies including a mixture of women with children from ages 0-21 years. Whilst the postpartum period is traditionally defined as the first six weeks following childbirth (Lopez-Gonzalez & Kopparapu, 2022), many contemporary guidelines recognize that maternal recovery extends beyond this period, hence specialist services may stay involved for up to one year postpartum (Saldanha et al., 2023). Furthermore, no studies focused on mental disorders in women with ID who had experienced pregnancies that did not result in live births. It is important that studies focus on these periods where women are particularly vulnerable.
The review also indicates a lack of literature pertaining to mental disorders in fathers with ID. Qualitative studies including fathers with ID have highlighted that fathers also face mental health challenges which can impact their abilities to parent and support their partners (Symonds et al., 2021). Therefore, quantitative studies should include fathers, in order for services to learn how to provide them with necessary tailored support.
There was a gap in literature comparing outcomes for parents with ID compared to non-parents with ID. Only Lindblad (2024) compared parents with ID to non-parents with ID. Further research comparing these groups will allow clinicians to understand what additional risks are posed to those with ID who are parents over and above the risks attributed to ID in itself.
Although the review did not restrict studies based on language or country, all studies identified were from high-income countries (USA, UK, Sweden, and Canada). However, considering that 80% of the global population with disabilities resides in low- and middle-income countries, it is important that there is research focusing on the mental health needs of women with ID in these countries where healthcare systems and services may be organised differently (World Health Organization, 2011).
5.CONCLUSION
Findings from this review suggest that mothers with ID experience disproportionately high rates of mental disorders, particularly when compared with mothers without ID. Routine reproductive healthcare encounters present critical opportunities for prevention and intervention, during which all women should be engaged in discussions about mental health, offered appropriate screening, and provided with individualised, person-centred care. These opportunities are especially salient for women with ID, who continue to encounter barriers within healthcare systems, including stigma and discrimination, which exacerbate existing health inequities. Further research is warranted to elucidate mental health outcomes during reproductive health periods among women with ID and to inform the development of targeted, evidence-based interventions.
Supporting information
Data Availability
Data availability is not applicable to this article as no new data were created in this study.