Politico-Epistemic Tensions Regarding Personal Assistance and Care for People with Disabilities: An Integrative Literature Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. We made the suggested modifications in the manuscript.
Best regards,
Corresponding Author.
Reviewer 2 Report
This is a well done review of the literature on a topic that is of great importance to the fulfillment of the CRPD. I was a bit shocked and disappointed that they only found 31 articles. That is not a criticism of the authors, but rather of the research community for not paying enough attention to this issue. Maybe the publication of this article could help contribute to changing that.
The results are presented in a straightforward manner and the discussion addresses the major issues around personal assistance.
My only issue with the paper -- and this might be unfair because the authors can only review the literature that is out there -- is the fact that it is slanted toward the Global North. Personal assistance in the Global South is quite complicated. In my work I have often come across people who do not want personal assistants because of the stigma involved. Also, in rural areas the only non-familial personal assistants that are available are generally members of a close-knit community. There is no anonymity, and people with disabilities are often uncomfortable with bringing someone into their household who is involved with intimate details of their life because it will lead to a lack of privacy. Setting up an employer/employee relationship with someone in the community is already known to them and is perceived as a peer can also be difficult.
So notions of privacy and stigma are very much in play, which are two things that are not mentioned in this review. Unfortunately, my knowledge of this comes from working with governments and agencies in the Global South who are trying to set up such programs -- and have no research citations. So it comes from a fair number of anecdotal sources, but anecdotal nonetheless.
Given this is a review of published research meeting various criteria, it may be hard to work these issues into the article. But would it be possible to raise them as possible issues, maybe as areas for future research? I think it will make the article even more relevant to many people.
But I'm OK with publication as is.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions. We made the suggested modifications in the manuscript.
Best regards,
Corresponding Author.
