Journal of Counseling Psychology
2004, Vol. 51, No. 1, 68 – 80
Copyright 2004 by the American Psychological Association, Inc.
0022-0167/04/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0022-0167.51.1.68
Challenge and Success: A Qualitative Study of the Career Development of
Highly Achieving Women With Physical and Sensory Disabilities
Brigid M. Noonan
Susanna M. Gallor, Nancy F. Hensler-McGinnis,
Ruth E. Fassinger, Shihwe Wang, and
Jennifer Goodman
Stetson University
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
University of Maryland
This qualitative study examined the career development experiences of 17 highly achieving women with
physical and sensory disabilities. Interviews were conducted and data were analyzed using modified
grounded theory strategies (A. L. Strauss & J. Corbin, 1998). The emergent theoretical model was
conceptualized as a system of influences organized around a core Dynamic Self, which included identity
constructs (disability, gender, racial/ethnic/cultural), personality characteristics, and belief in self. Myriad
contextual inputs included Developmental Opportunities (education, peer influences), Family Influences
(background and current), Disability Impact (ableism, stress and coping, health issues), Social Support
(disabled and nondisabled communities, role models and mentors), Career Attitudes and Behaviors (work
attitudes, success strategies, leadership/pioneering), and Sociopolitical Context (social movements,
advocacy). Implications for theory, research, practice, and policy are discussed.
(29 million vs. 24 million men; Jans & Stoddard, 1999; McNeil,
2001). Moreover, as women age, they have a greater chance of
acquiring physical disabilities than men, require more assistance,
and are less likely to live independently (Guralnik, Leveille,
Hirsch, Ferrucci, & Fried, 1997), all factors that affect vocational
behavior.
Poverty is a common occurrence for individuals with disabilities. Kruse (1998) reported that, among working-age people with
disabilities who do not work, 19% live in poverty, compared with
9% of those without disabilities. Research indicates that, even
though more disabled women than men are considered to have
achieved “successful” rehabilitation outcomes, the percentage of
women achieving competitive employment is lower than the percentage of men (Jans & Stoddard, 1999), and most WWDs remain
homemakers even though their original rehabilitation objective
was gainful employment (DeLoach, 1995).
For those disabled individuals who do work, discrimination,
architectural impediments, and attitudinal barriers keep income
levels well below those of workers without disabilities. Among
women, for example, whose inferior earnings relative to men’s are
well documented, those with disabilities earn even less (about
73%) than women without disabilities (Hale, Hayghe, & McNeil,
1998; Jans & Stoddard, 1999; Kaye & Longmore, 1997). Moreover, 73% of single WWDs who have a child under the age of 6
are living in poverty (LaPlante, Carlson, Kaye, & Bradsher, 1996).
Thus, WWDs are at particularly high risk for encountering employment and financial difficulties.
Within the women’s career development literature, external
barriers to optimal vocational outcomes include such variables as
sexual harassment; lack of mentors and role models; socioeconomic disadvantage; educational and workplace discrimination;
prejudice related to race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and
disability; and occupational stereotyping. Individual or internal
Despite the growth of the women’s career development literature over the past several decades (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1993;
Fassinger, in press; Fitzgerald, Fassinger, & Betz, 1995; Phillips &
Imhoff, 1997) and the vast literature addressing the vocational
issues of persons with disabilities, there has been very little research focused specifically on the career development of women
with disabilities (WWDs). The obstacles that disabled women face
in vocational pursuits are the primary focus of the very limited
literature in this area. Understanding how WWDs successfully
address these challenges in occupational preparation, entry, and
achievement is critical not only to the articulation of inclusive
career development theories but also to the creation of appropriate
vocational assessment tools and interventions (Fulton & Sabornie,
1994).
According to the U.S. Census (McNeil, 2001), there are approximately 54 million Americans with disabilities (approximately
20% of the population, constituting the largest minority group in
the United States), 33 million (12%) of whom have a severe
disability. Women are the majority of individuals with disabilities
Brigid M. Noonan, Department of Counselor Education, Stetson University; Susanna M. Gallor and Ruth E. Fassinger, Department of Counseling and Personnel Services, College of Education, University of Maryland; Nancy F. Hensler-McGinnis and Shihwe Wang, Department of
Psychology, College of Behavioral Sciences, University of Maryland;
Jennifer Goodman, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, College of
Education, University of Maryland.
This article is based on Brigid M. Noonan’s doctoral dissertation,
completed under the direction of Ruth E. Fassinger. We are grateful to
Sarah Seage for the graphic presentation.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Brigid
M. Noonan, Department of Counselor Education, Stetson University, 800
Celebration Avenue, Suite 105, Celebration, FL 34747-4612. E-mail:
bnoonan@stetson.edu
68
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
CHALLENGE AND SUCCESS
barriers include multiple role conflicts, skill deficits, underestimation of capabilities and poor self-efficacy expectations, low outcome expectations, and constrictive gender role socialization
(Fassinger, 2002b; McLennan, 1999; McWhirter, Torres, &
Rasheed, 1998). Swanson and Woitke (1997) and Lent, Brown,
and Hackett (2000) have described specifically how coping efficacy, dispositional affect, and outcome expectations shape the way
in which an individual perceives self and the environment in the
career development process, and thus can act as barriers in this
process. Presumably, many of the barriers that negatively affect
women’s career development also affect vocational processes for
WWDs in very specific ways.
Women with disabilities, for example, face well-documented
antidisability prejudice in the form of devaluation, invisibility,
stigmatization, and low expectations by society (Fine & Asch,
1985; Fulton & Sabornie, 1994; Gill, 1997; Hanna & Rogovsky,
1991). More specifically, WWDs often are stereotyped as dependent, childlike, helpless, and incompetent to perform work of any
kind (Gill, 1997; Hanna & Rogovsky, 1991; Traustadottir, 1992a).
Poor rehabilitation outcomes for WWDs have been linked to
traditional gender role socialization leading to an emphasis on
passivity and a sense of powerlessness (Fine & Asch, 1985; Fulton
& Sabornie, 1994); WWDs are doubly disadvantaged when gender
interacts with disability, as both restrictive gender roles and low
expectations based on disability lead to nonwork outcomes.
A number of mutually interactive impediments to the career
development of WWDs have been implicated in the literature,
including low self-esteem (Asch & Fine, 1988), antidisability
prejudice from others (“ableism”; Gill, 1997), family issues
(Hanna & Rogovsky, 1991), education (Traustadottir, 1992b), the
disability adjustment process (Hanna & Rogovsky, 1991), environmental barriers (Conyers, Koch, & Szymanski, 1998), social
support (Danek, 1992), stress (Crewe & Clarke, 1996), ethnic–
cultural issues (Alston & McCowan, 1994; Trevino & Szymanski,
1996), and whether the disability is acquired or congenital (Enright, Conyers, & Szymanski, 1996). For example, even when
WWDs overcome obstacles to achieving an education (Asch &
Fine, 1988), they still meet with limited employment opportunities
(Scott, 1993), suggesting that other factors interact with education
to determine vocational outcomes for WWDs.
Another illustration of the interactive nature of vocational problems for WWDs involves stress. While living with a disability,
many women also attempt to work productively, build intimate
relationships, nurture a family, and live as independently as possible (Nosek, Howland, Rintala, Young, & Chanpong, 1997).
Environmental barriers (e.g., nonaccommodating workplaces), interpersonal impediments (e.g., ableist attitudes), and internal obstacles (e.g., low self-esteem) all may interact to make these
activities stressful, which, in turn, may exacerbate the disability
and make it more difficult to realize career goals (Gill, 1997;
Shahnasarian, 2001). Given the need for personal assistance services by many people with disabilities, the attitudes and behaviors
of family, friends, and significant others can be highly influential
in encouraging or discouraging vocational aspirations and planning (Gill, 1997; Rousso, 1993).
Although many of these factors thought to be influential in the
vocational behavior of WWDs have been discussed anecdotally in
the literature, very few research studies have been conducted to
investigate them. The paucity of literature in this area as well as the
69
poor record of vocational rehabilitation for WWDs make clear the
need for increased attention to inhibitory as well as facilitative
factors in the career development of this population. The present
study used a qualitative approach to explore the career experiences
of 17 women with physical and sensory disabilities who have
achieved vocational success.
The study is part of the National Study of Women’s Achievement (NSWA; Fassinger, 2002b), a qualitative exploration of the
career development of more than 100 prominent, diverse women in
the United States, including African American and Caucasian
women (Richie et al., 1997), lesbians (Hollingsworth, Tomlinson,
& Fassinger, 1997), Asian American women (Prosser, Chopra, &
Fassinger, 1998), and Latinas (Gomez et al., 2001). Results of
these studies thus far have suggested predominantly nonlinear
career paths and exceptional ability to turn challenges into opportunities; extensive experiences with oppression (e.g., racism, sexism); notable perseverance in the face of challenges; intense dedication to work, especially work contributing to social change;
reliance on internal standards of judgment; a wide variety of
familial, cultural, educational, and sociopolitical influences; extensive use of supportive relationships; myriad strategies for stress
and multiple role management; and a predominance of women
who have been leaders and pioneers in their fields or workplaces
(see Gomez et al., 2001; Richie et al., 1997).
Qualitative approaches are thought to be particularly appropriate
when investigating understudied populations (Fassinger, 2001;
Hackett, 1997; Morrow & Smith, 2000), because existing theory
and measures may be questionable or inadequate. More specifically, a modified grounded theory methodology (Strauss & Corbin,
1998) was chosen for the present study because it can be used to
build theoretical models of psychological processes. Thus, we used
in-depth interviews and modified grounded theory analysis strategies to access and articulate the lived vocational experiences of
successful WWDs with the intention of creating a tentative theoretical model of their career development. The overall purpose of
this study was to contribute disability-specific information to the
larger NSWA so that a more formal grounded theory of the career
development of diverse women can be generated (the present
article; see also Fassinger, 2002b, 2003).
Method
Participants
Participants were 17 prominent, high-achieving women with physical
and sensory disabilities, representing the following nine occupational
fields: education, business, science, law/politics, arts/entertainment, social
sciences, journalism/media, social services, and activism. Fifty potential
participants were identified through letters sent to and subsequent nominations by professional and educational organizations (e.g., Society for
Disability Studies, an interdisciplinary scientific and educational organization). In selecting the final group of women to be interviewed, criterionbased sampling (Patton, 1990) was used to obtain a maximum variation of
“information rich cases” (p. 169), because a diverse sample highlights
individual uniqueness as well as captures shared experiences (Gomez et al.,
2001). Thus, in addition to accomplishments, the most important consideration for selecting the present sample was diversity—in race– ethnicity,
type of disability, age, and occupation. Geographic location also was
restricted because of logistical constraints. The women included in the
study lived in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, New York City,
NOONAN ET AL.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
70
Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, and San Francisco. Of the 21 women
originally interviewed, data from 17 were included in the analysis (four
interviews could not be transcribed because of poor quality audiotapes
resulting from particular disabilities).
Of the 17 women in the final sample, 8 reported having a partner–
spouse, and 5 reported having children (5 did not report these data). One
woman was a lesbian without a partner at the time of the interview. Two
women had paid personal assistants, and 1 woman’s partner functioned as
her personal assistant. The age range of the sample was 33– 60 years (M ⫽
46.5; 3 did not report these data). The sample was well educated; 4 had a
bachelor of arts or bachelor of science degree or graduated from a certificate program, 5 had a master of arts or master of science degree, 6 had a
doctor of philosophy degree, and 2 had a doctor of law degree. Approximately one quarter of the sample included women of color; racial– ethnic
identifications included White/European American (13), Black/African
American (2), Asian American (1), and Hispanic/Native American (1). Of
the participants, 3 reported no religious affiliation, 6 identified as Jewish,
and 1 each identified as Jewish atheist, Lutheran, Methodist, Protestant,
Baptist, and Unitarian (2 did not report these data). Income levels were
reported as follows: under $20,000 (2), $20,000 –$39,999 (2), $40,000 –
$59,999 (3), $60,000 –$79,999 (2), $80,000 –$99,999 (1), and above
$100,000 (3); 4 did not report these data. The women in this study
represented a range of disabilities: blindness (6), deafness (1), partial limb
reduction (1), spinal cord injury (3), post-polio syndrome (3), rheumatoid
arthritis (1), and mobility impairments (2). Two of the women had acquired
disabilities in their early 20s, 2 had become progressively disabled by their
teens, and the remaining 13 either had congenital disabilities or were
disabled as young children.
Instruments
The primary instrument was an in-depth, semistructured interview protocol based on those used in previous studies (Gomez et al., 2001; Richie
et al., 1997). The interview protocol included questions specific to disability and was tested and refined through a pilot study. The pilot participants
were 5 prominent women with physical and sensory disabilities located in
the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area who were acquainted with the
researchers (and thus excluded from the final sample). The interview
protocol included the following areas: (a) career path (current position;
educational and professional path leading to current position); (b) background influences (including family) and educational experiences; (c)
disability influences (both personal and career-related); (d) stress and
coping; (e) attitudes and beliefs about work, success, and failure; (f)
interpersonal influences (family of origin, spouses–partners, children,
friends, colleagues, communities, cultures); (g) personality characteristics;
(h) role models and mentors (experiences of both having and being these);
and (i) evaluation of vocational decisions and behaviors. Consistent with
the goal of qualitative research to allow participants to describe their
experiences from their own viewpoints and in their own words (Creswell,
1994; Morrow & Smith, 2000), questions were open-ended and eschewed
psychological jargon to avoid imposing researcher bias or existing constructs on participants (Gomez et al., 2001; Richie et al., 1997).
Procedure
Participants were contacted initially by letter and then by telephone or
e-mail with a description of the study and an invitation to participate. Those
who agreed to participate were sent a letter and brief information about the
interview. Participant interviews were conducted by Brigid M. Noonan and
took place at a site of the participant’s choice. Participants completed
demographic forms and a brief instrument measuring disability attitudes
(used for data triangulation purposes, see below) prior to commencing the
interview. The interview lasted 1.5–3 hr, with an average of 2 hr, and was
audiotaped for later transcription and analysis. At the conclusion of the
interview, field notes were completed by the interviewer indicating the
location and length, perceptions of rapport, and other interview characteristics (e.g., interruptions, presence of interpreters, and so forth); field notes
were used in interpreting transcripts during data analysis in an effort to
increase the trustworthiness and authenticity (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) of the
narrative data.
Data Analysis
Data analysis was conducted using a modified grounded theory approach
(Strauss & Corbin, 1998) in which a theory is generated through a series of
steps that proceed from data collection to coding of data into concepts; to
categorization of concepts into increasingly comprehensive aggregates of
categories, or constructs; to description of categories based on their properties and dimensions; and finally to the articulation of a theory in which
the emergent constructs and their interrelationships are described. The
grounded theory practice of theoretical sampling, in which data collection
(including continual interview revisions) and data analysis proceed simultaneously, was modified in this study by identifying a diverse sample at the
outset, based on a priori criteria (Patton, 1990), and administering the same
interview protocol to all participants. This decision to obtain a sample
representing selected aspects of diversity was believed to highlight the
uniqueness of the participants as well as their shared common experiences,
resulting in “information-rich” cases (Patton, 1990, p. 169); although
theoretical sampling practices prevent oversampling in achieving theoretical “saturation” during data analysis, the risk of oversampling in this study
was thought to be justified by ensuring the diversity of the sample.
Data analysis was conducted by an all-female research team consisting
of Brigid M. Noonan, a White faculty member in Stetson University’s
Department of Counselor Education, with a background in rehabilitation
counseling; two advanced graduate students in Counseling Psychology,
one Latina and one White; two undergraduate students, an Asian American
psychology major and a Jewish education major; and the faculty advisor,
a White faculty member in Counseling Psychology. Two of the team
members had hidden disabilities, one an autoimmune disorder (in remission), and one a substance abuse disorder (in recovery).
The articulation of researcher bias is a unique element in qualitative
approaches (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Morrow & Smith, 2000), and
researcher expectations and biases were discussed extensively by the team
at the outset and throughout the course of data analysis. All team members
expected an interaction between disability influences, personality characteristics, and interpersonal influences. In addition, the two faculty members
of the research team expected to find commitment to careers similar to that
in the Gomez et al. (2001) and Richie et al. (1997) studies. Three initial
4-hr training workshops on qualitative research (including strategies for
monitoring of biases) initially were conducted by the faculty advisor, in
which team members were given readings and exercises in qualitative
research and analysis (particularly grounded theory). During research team
meetings, each phase of the analysis was introduced, practiced, and completed by all team members, with teaching and close supervision provided
by the faculty advisor. Throughout this process, team members consistently
checked and monitored one another’s work, discussing decisions carefully
with the entire team to ensure accuracy of the data. This extensive use of
auditing (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) enhances data analysis dependability
and confirmability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), thus leading to more useful
results.
The first phase of data analysis involved open coding, in which transcripts were broken down into small, discrete parts (e.g., a word, phrase, or
group of sentences) labeled as concepts (all terminology is from Strauss &
Corbin, 1998). Each transcript was coded by one team member and then
recoded by a second team member; disagreements were resolved by
consensus, and final coding was reviewed by the faculty advisor. This
process resulted in approximately 1,400 distinguishable concepts. The next
phase of coding involved the creation of categories, higher order labels that
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
CHALLENGE AND SUCCESS
encompass several concepts. The research team developed sets of categories from the generated concepts of all transcripts (guided, in part, by
categories obtained in the previous Gomez et al., 2001, and Richie et al.,
1997, studies), which were further synthesized into one master category
list. This step of the analysis resulted in 59 categories, which were then
organized into 17 key categories (axial coding) in order to group together
similar categories (e.g., the categories “Mother Influences” and “Father
Influences” were grouped with several other categories into a key category
labeled “Family/Community Background, Influences”). The next analysis
step involved describing categories in terms of properties (characteristics
of a category) and dimensions (location of a property along a continuum).
For example, a property of the category “Experiences of Ableism” was
“encountered negative attitudes about disability,” and this property was
dimensionalized on a continuum from “a great deal” to “little/none,” with
each participant placed on the continuum. Properties and dimensions for
each category were generated by one team member and reviewed, discussed, and modified as necessary by the entire team. When the categories
were descriptive of at least 80% of the participants (n ⫽ 14; see Gomez et
al., 2001), saturation was achieved. This ensured that the categories were
a true reflection of the general experiences of the women in the sample, and
yet preserved the uniqueness of experiences that were less common.
The emergent theory was articulated in the next phase of analysis,
selective coding. From all of the categories, one core category was chosen
consensually to describe the essence of participants’ experiences. Each
team member then generated her own model of the relationships among the
core category and all other categories, with team discussion focused on
articulating points of convergence among categories. Confirming and disconfirming incidents from each transcript again were integrated into a final
model, judged by the team to be representative of this sample’s
experiences.
Participants had been sent a copy of their transcribed interviews at the
commencement of data analysis so that they could amend or expand the
71
information the seven returned responses provided. At the conclusion of
data analysis, participants were sent a draft of the manuscript being
prepared for publication to provide them the opportunity to verify the
accuracy of the emergent model in relation to their own experiences and to
ensure their anonymity in the published results. This “member checking”
helps to ensure the credibility of the data analysis (contributing to trustworthiness of the data; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The five returned responses
yielded no contextual changes, were editorial in nature, and incorporated
into the final manuscript.
Results
The emergent model explicating the vocational experiences of
the 17 participants in this study is presented in Figure 1. The model
is represented as a dynamic system, organized around the core
category of the Dynamic Self, which contains interconnected identity constructs (Disability, Gender, and Racial/Ethnic/Cultural
Identities), Personality Characteristics, and Belief in Self; the
encircling of the core category is perforated to indicate ongoing
developmental change and growth. In grounded theory, the core
category or central construct embodies the main narrative of the
study; it is assumed to be embedded in contextual factors and
results in actions and consequences (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). In
this model, the core Dynamic Self is embedded in several contextual inputs, which flow into the core, interact with it in mutual
impact, and flow out again as actions and consequences (indicated
by double arrows in Figure 1). The inputs in this model are
Developmental Opportunities (Educational Experiences, Peer Influences); Family Influences (Family Background, Current Family); Career Attitudes and Behaviors (Attitudes Toward Work and
Figure 1. Emergent model for the career development of women with physical and sensory disabilities. Double
arrows represent the contextual inputs of the core Dynamic Self, which flow into the core, interact with it in
mutual impact, and flow out again as actions and consequences.
NOONAN ET AL.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
72
Learning, Success Strategies, Leadership and Pioneering); Disability Impact (Antidisability Prejudice–Ableism, Stress and Coping,
Health and Personal Care); Social Support (Disabled and Nondisabled Communities, Role Models and Mentors); and Sociopolitical
Context (Social Movements, Advocacy).
The following sections describe the model in detail, using direct
quotations for illustrative purposes. Similar to previous studies
(Gomez et al., 2001; Richie et al., 1997), responses are presented
according to the following notation: (a) words and phrases such as
usually, generally, typically, tended to, the majority, most, many,
often, these women, and the women in the sample indicate the
characteristic response of 11 or more participants; (b) the words
some, several, and a number of indicate responses from 6 –10
participants; and (c) responses from 5 or fewer participants are
indicated by the words a few; more specific wording (e.g., all, only
three) also is used. In addition, although the components of the
model are presented here as distinct elements in order to simplify
description, there actually is considerable overlap among many of
the constructs.
Core Category: The Dynamic Self
Identity Constructs
Disability identity. This category captures participants’ views
of themselves as WWDs, including adjustment to and integration
of the disability into one’s overall identity. Most spoke of the
importance of accepting their disabilities as part of their identities
and typically described their disability adjustment as an ongoing
process within a social context, “Disability is both a fact and also
a societal structure” [blind investment firm chairperson], and “The
adjustment process is a lifetime project” [blind writer]. Many
participants emphasized negative social and interpersonal aspects
of adjustment. A writer/teacher with a spinal cord injury observed,
I should have picked up the pieces and made the adjustment, and not
dwell on it. The problem is that the rest of the world is dwelling on it.
Every time you go out there, you’re reacting to all this ridiculous
attitude problem, the architectural barriers, the financial discrimination, and this place won’t hire you and this company won’t insure you
and that potential lover won’t look at you. . . . So that reopens the
wound maybe twenty times a day and yet you’re supposed to have
made the adjustment. You have to work through a lot of stuff in a
continuing way.
An important distinction emerged between participants with
different disability etiologies (congenital vs. acquired). A few of
the women with congenital or early-onset disabilities stated that
they had not experienced a major adjustment process:
There is no adjustment process. I know that probably sounds strange
to somebody. There is no sense of not being whole, if this is how
you’re born. I suspect that if somebody were born with no legs at all,
they would still have a sense of themselves as being whole [university
professor with a partial limb reduction].
Similarly, 1 of 2 blind university professors noted, “It wasn’t an
adjustment, it was just growing up.”
Not all of the women in the sample identified strongly as
disabled. The blind investment firm chairperson said, “I don’t
really think of myself as disabled, and I was brought up with an
attitude that it’s how you can do it rather than ‘you are disabled and
you can do it.’ ”
Developing an integrated view of self was described as crucial
to many of these women and often was accomplished in spite of
opposing external messages. For example, a university professor
with post-polio syndrome described an event when she was asked
to divide her body during physical therapy, naming her paralyzed
side as feminine and her strong side as masculine; she noted, “I
know that when you divide anybody into parts, it’s really going to
be hard for them to have a strong integrated sense of wholeness
and being.”
Gender identity. Some of the participants strongly identified
with their gender and felt connections to other women, especially
in the women’s movement; a few were more moderate in their
identification with and connection to women. Several of the study
participants discussed the interaction between their gender identity
and their disability identity. For example, 1 woman talked about
how her disability has deepened her sense of being a woman:
I think, [of] all the things that women are more than men, I think I’m
even more so because of the disability on top of being a woman, and
I think it’s in some ways deepened my womanliness. I think nurturing’s important, I think achieving’s important, both sides of, you
know, femininity, because I think women are incredibly strong and
achieving and they are also nurturing which is wonderful about
women. And I think that’s how people with disabilities are too.
The university professor participant with post-polio syndrome
described her experiences as part of a group of women who all
identified somehow with marginalization: “. . . these were all
women that really wanted to become professionals and make
something of themselves. They were all my girlfriends, so we were
all in that together.” Another extremely important group identified
was women with disabilities. The postdoctoral fellow with a mobility impairment shared her simultaneous identification with both
her gender and her disability.
. . . the single largest factor in my adjustment process as, I mean as a
disabled woman, as a social identity, body image, everything else, has
been my connection with the community. I mean, hands-down, you
know, having, knowing other women with disabilities . . . going to
conferences, hanging out more, you know, doing the old thing with,
well your body does that, well look what my body does.
For a few of the participants, however, gender was not seen as
connected to or as salient as their disability identities, and they
identified more as disabled than as women. A federal official with
post-polio syndrome indicated that societal messages often are
consistent with this view: “I think people see disability and sex as
a separate thing. First they see the wheelchair.”
Racial/ethnic/cultural identity. The women reported identifying with and being connected to a variety of cultural groups and
communities. Several women discussed multiple identity dimensions (e.g., race– ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status [SES]) as
influential to their careers, and responses varied regarding the
extent to which their disabilities were considered more or less
salient than their other identities. The attorney with a spinal cord
injury expressed her commitment to both her racial and disabled
identities: “My friend believes there’s no such thing as a Black
community or a disability community. We have arguments about
that, but I believe there is and I’m very connected with both.”
CHALLENGE AND SUCCESS
Similarly, the blind writer said, “When one writes from one’s own
experience largely— blindness, middle-classness, femaleness,
growing up on the East Coast—I mean, all these things are what I
can draw from in terms of writing.”
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Personality Characteristics
Of all the personality characteristics identified as important by
participants, issues of introversion– extroversion and persistence
emerged as most critical to their professional development. Many
of the women referred to themselves as falling somewhere on an
introversion– extroversion continuum, with a few identifying as
extroverted from a young age and some labeling themselves as
fundamentally introverted or only moderately extroverted. A few
of the participants noted that their disabilities contributed to their
extroverted orientation, in that extroversion was perceived as
counteracting potential prejudice.
The majority of participants spoke of themselves as persistent,
determined, and tenacious, most frequently mentioned in relation
to specific internal and external barriers. Internal barriers included
low expectations for oneself, shyness, feelings of physical and
emotional vulnerability, and suicidal ideation as a result of depression. Examples of external barriers were assumptions regarding
limited potential for having a partner or family, lack of support,
and additional work challenges faced as a result of one’s disability.
Participants provided many examples of determination in their
lives. Speaking of her emotional stamina during periods of particularly frustrating physical limitations, the writer with rheumatoid
arthritis said,
Having to focus on the negative aspects of your body [is] demoralizing and there’s no other way to say that. It just is. So you constantly
have to be diligent with yourself, not to crawl inside the negative
aspects of your disability.
Belief in Self
All participants spoke of having a strong belief in self that
allowed them to maintain their self-confidence, self-reliance, and
determination to succeed— even in the face of overwhelming
challenges. All claimed having confidence in their own abilities,
whether intellectual, academic, relational, or artistic, and a few
remembered feeling confident about their talents throughout their
lifetimes: “[I] decided that I could achieve, I mean, I guess I’ve
never felt like I couldn’t achieve in anything. I’m bright” [blind
lawyer].
Several of the women charted their journeys from low levels of
self-confidence and self-reliance to a belief in themselves that
emerged gradually over time or as a result of key incidents or
persons in their lives. For example, the deaf federal employee
observed: “When I went to college, that’s when I really began to
transform; not only was I gaining academically but also the insecurity of my disability declined.” Similarly, the postdoctoral fellow with mobility impairment explained, “Being very quiet most
of my life . . . it’s not where I am now and I very much like the role
that I’m in, the resources, the knowledge that I have. It’s quite a
sense of empowerment.”
73
Contextual Inputs
Developmental Opportunities
Educational experiences. The women in the sample who had
congenital or early-onset disabilities (13) noted the schools they
had attended as salient influences on their vocational aspirations.
The majority of the women (10) attended regular schools and were
mainstreamed:
I never went to a special school, never went to a special class. I mean,
I was the only blind person in the whole two-county area, I think, so
not an option. And my parents wouldn’t really have considered it
anyway [blind lawyer].
All but 2 of the participants discussed messages received early
in their lives about vocational opportunities; most typically, participants had exposure to a very narrow range of career options.
Finally, a few of the women reported a racial– ethnic basis for
unequal opportunities and lower educational expectations.
Peer influences. Most of the participants discussed school
friends and peer groups as influential, both positively and negatively. Although a few women noted a lack of friends growing up,
a number of other women described supportive relationships with
peers. A few specified the source of this group support as being
from the disabled community. It also was not uncommon for
women in this sample to grow up with nondisabled friends: “[My
disabled sister and I] were always expected to be part of whatever
group we were in. Kids ask questions and then they get over it . . .
and they start dealing with you as another person” [blind international director].
Family Influences
Family background. Most participants discussed their family
backgrounds at length, reporting numerous influences on their
vocational development. A majority of the women noted their
families’ influence regarding education, with several of the women
describing this influence as very encouraging; a few noted that
their families (or at least one parent) were moderately encouraging,
and a few participants received little support from either parent.
In general, the mothers of participants were described as imparting positive attitudes toward their disabilities and an expectation of success. Typically, mothers gave their daughters a great
deal of financial or emotional support. A few participants, however, reported receiving little support from their mothers. Fathers’
attitudes toward disability were reported as more variable than
mothers’ attitudes. About the same number (8 and 7, respectively)
of participants reported positive and negative values modeled by
their fathers. Most of the participants had siblings, including one
instance of a sibling who was also disabled, and a few mentioned
extended family as well. Several women identified a high degree
of support from their siblings and extended family.
SES was noted by many of the women, particularly those with
congenital or early-onset disabilities, for whom family resources
were critical in accessing disability services. Thus, overall support
for education and careers appeared to increase with SES levels. A
few of the participants reported that specific cultures and communities in which they grew up had supported career exploration, but
reported receiving little or no support, and even in cases in which
NOONAN ET AL.
74
careers were supported, often there were expectations to limit
oneself to traditional roles. Moreover, a number of the participants
described social class and culture as intersecting with genderrelated messages they had received. For example, the university
professor with a partial limb reduction noted that her mother had
supported higher education,
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
as a form of upward mobility and a good place to marry well, a kind
of social and pragmatic move . . . I never, ever had a vision of what
I would do after college, like the idea of getting a Ph.D. . . . you might
as well have said, ‘Gee, have you thought about flying to Mars?’
Current families. Current family contexts (noted for both their
presence and absence) were discussed by most of the participants.
Some women said that family and relationship responsibilities had
had relatively little or no impact on their careers, although 2
indicated their commitments were shifting more toward family. A
few women had modified their careers substantially because of
family commitments. Many of the women spoke about career–
family balance in their lives, with all but 1 reporting that they were
satisfied; the 1 reporting dissatisfaction did not have a partner or
children. A number of the women had life partners at the time of
the interviews. All of them reported very high levels of support
from their partners. All of the participants with children had
experienced parenting stresses because of their disabilities. The
lawyer described her frustration with managing parenting tasks in
the context of blindness: “Dealing with transportation problems.
It’s easy when you’re by yourself, you just hop the train or walk
or whatever, but when you’ve got little kids, it gets much more
complicated.” Participants also reported, however, that parenting
had given them enlightening perspectives on their disabilities. For
example, the university professor with a partial limb reduction
noted lessons she had learned from her daughter:
When my daughter was about two, she said something . . . comparing
her arm to my arm, and basically saying, ‘Gee, I don’t have one like
yours.’ So I was sort of the model for normativity [sic] to her, rather
than the other way around.
Disability Impact
Antidisability prejudice–ableism. Every participant in the sample reported experiences of antidisability prejudice. As 1 of the
women noted, “[it represented] . . . the whole range. I mean everything that you can probably imagine—stupidity, hostility, condescension.” These experiences of prejudice comprised some of
the most influential events on the career development of the
women in this sample and included restricted educational opportunities, discrimination in hiring, biased performance evaluations,
job tracking, pay inequities, lack of support and mentoring, negative attitudes and chilly workplace climates, lack of accommodations, and general discouragement. One participant shared the
following incident regarding her early professional training:
I had applied for an internship and at the end of the interview, [the
interviewer] said, ‘Well, I’ve got to admit you know your stuff, but
. . . you have polio and no matter what I read in the reports about
polio, I still think it’s neurological, it’s brain damage . . . I can’t
entrust our clients to a brain-damaged person.’. . . I was really furious
and upset and I went to my advisor and the head of the clinical
division . . . and their response was to sort of pat me on the shoulder
and say, ‘That’s really rough, that’s not fair, maybe next year you’ll
get an internship.’ They wouldn’t go to bat for me, they wouldn’t
encourage me to fight it or anything. I was very alone.
Similarly, the deaf federal employee reported feeling that she was
easily placed in the position of a scapegoat if she did anything
wrong, noting, “I think the best way to explain my deafness is that
I felt like I was not treated as an equal; I was a second-class
citizen.”
Attitudes of others were cited frequently as impediments in the
lives of the women in this sample, with responses such as “I’m a
person, not a disability” common throughout their discourses. The
blind international director noted that “either it’s pity or it’s this
survivor guilt,” and the blind lawyer described how condescension
impedes her daily walk from her office to the courthouse:
Probably one in five or six times, somebody will just up and stop me.
I’m walking straight, I know where I’m going, I don’t look lost. Just
stop me, grab my arm, and say, ‘Can I help you?’ It’s really difficult
for me to not be sarcastic and aggravated. . . . They mean well, but it’s
not helpful.
The postdoctoral fellow described what she calls “boundary-less”
questions she receives from,
people we don’t know that walk up to us in a bar or in a restaurant or
more traditional social situations and say, ‘How do you go to the
bathroom?’ For God’s sake, who walks up to anybody and asks that?
Or ‘Can you have sex?’ What do you mean? I just get bewildered
every time I hear those kinds of questions.
One blind participant, a White woman married to an Asian man,
recounted,
I take my kids to the doctor, and the doctor asks me if they’re my
children (my husband’s Chinese) and how do you even begin to
answer that? Because the underlying assumptions are that you
couldn’t be married, that you have one-night stands, and that you
don’t know the race of the man that you’re having these one-night
stands with. Where do you begin?
One of the most dramatic examples of insensitivity was provided
by the attorney:
A few presidential appointees were at the White House, we had a
meeting with the resident. This guy walked by . . . and said, ‘What are
you gals here for, a race?’ Just like that, grinning. There were four of
us in chairs and he said that. No, we ain’t Special Olympics, we’re
presidential. And in that second it showed, what do you have to do to
get people to change?
All participants discussed strategies they use to address the
challenges of ableism, including ignoring it as much as possible
(especially difficult when structural barriers prevent access); getting support from others; internally reaffirming their goals and
worth; using humor to de-escalate hostility and put others at ease;
challenging it personally, collectively, and legally; and working
actively toward social change. Most women indicated that continually educating others (formally as well as informally in day-today interactions) to destigmatize disability was a necessity (albeit
an exhausting one) in their lives; said one, “You become an
educator a lot. It’s almost as if I need to teach people, because, to
CHALLENGE AND SUCCESS
enlighten them, I can be allowed to relax.” The attorney with a
spinal cord injury described how important it is for her,
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
to engage and to peel away . . . their biases, their fears, their issues,
and to teach people about disability in a nonthreatening way. But I
know no matter where I go, in whatever arena, I have to do that and
that’s always a challenge, to deal with the same questions and the
same attitudes.
Stress and coping. All participants discussed stress in their
lives, most of it related to their disabilities in some way; for
example, confronting the challenges of ableism, managing their
multiple roles in the context of physical and sensory limitations,
and, for some, financial difficulties and dealing with deteriorating
health. The writer/teacher with a spinal cord injury described a
typical morning:
Well, there are concrete limitations on all of us with disabilities,
depending on how heavy duty the disability is. Transportation is
always tricky. I need a personal assistant to get dressed in the morning
and other things. That’s always kind of a crap shoot, that person has
to be on time for me to be on time. I have to look a certain way to be
okay with myself, and if I have somebody else pulling on my pants
who isn’t gonna give a shit about that, I’m very upset. . . . It takes
people with disabilities much longer to get ready to face the day and
most people are already on their way to work when we’re just getting
out of bed after having already had a shower and dressed in the bed.
So I think sometimes that people with disabilities do what everybody
else does but with much less sleep.
A few women reported serious financial difficulties. For example,
a university professor with post-polio syndrome reported “constantly struggling with poverty . . . and the stress of not knowing
where my bills were going to be paid from and sort of having this
private face and this public face of the successful disabled woman
professional.” The postdoctoral fellow stated,
If I didn’t have friends and family who could help me, I’d be out on
the street. . . . I have to stay on [social security] one more year and
there’s nothing that’s going to give me more pleasure than saying,
‘Thanks, I don’t need you anymore.’
A few women noted the effect of their disabilities on their
emotional health; for example, demoralization and cyclical depression, the daily frustration of feeling powerless, and having a poor
body image. By contrast, a university professor with post-polio
syndrome indicated that experiencing the loss associated with her
own and others’ disabilities has had a positive effect on her
emotional well-being, causing her to remain aware of life’s fragility and focused on appreciating each day that she is alive. The
participants with children reported stresses associated with juggling multiple roles, and several also mentioned relationships
(personal and professional) as sources of stress.
All participants used some sort of stress management strategy,
and a wide range of behaviors were noted. Examples included
self-care (e.g., exercise, eating well), support from others (e.g.,
colleagues, friends, family, therapists), maintaining humor and
optimism, and, for a few participants, finding comfort in religion
or spirituality. Many participants also reported having converted
negative or unhealthy stress responses into more positive or
healthy ones over time. For example, a university professor with
post-polio syndrome said, “Before, I wanted to analyze every
75
goddamn thing anyone did. . . . Now . . . I’ll just try as hard as I can
to get on that committee without tormenting myself about why
they are doing what they are doing.” Finally, some participants
reached for deeper acceptance of their disabilities as a strategy for
managing stress.
Health and personal care. The majority of the women in the
sample addressed the degree to which physical and health limitations resulting from their disabilities affect their daily lives. Several of the participants described moderate to high degrees of daily
challenges, whereas a few reported their disabilities affecting them
to a lesser degree. One woman with a deteriorating health condition commented,
I guess the hardest thing is that my health is not a constant—the
variability of it. The other thing that’s quite difficult is keeping, hiring,
training attendants and all that. I feel like my full-time job is really
managing my own care, and I don’t get paid for that.
Social Support
Disabled and nondisabled communities. All of the women in
the sample discussed support from others— both professional (e.g.,
colleagues, teachers, advisors, supervisors) and personal (e.g.,
friends, partners, family)—as critical to their survival and success:
“I have to have people in my life who believe you can live a full
life as a person with a disability, and if I didn’t have that, I don’t
think I could lead my life” [blind university professor]. The
amount, nature, and sources of support were variable across the
sample, and most participants indicated receiving both tangible
support (e.g., financial help, supportive letters, accommodations in
the workplace) and emotional support such as inspiration, appreciation, encouragement (especially for education), and modeling of
success. For example, the writer with rheumatoid arthritis experienced “a lot of people with messages telling you to keep going.”
Participants typically described receiving support from both the
nondisabled and disabled communities, and several emphasized
the importance of this balance.
Role models and mentors. Overall, the women in the sample
emphasized the importance of having role models and mentors.
The majority defined role models as individuals who provide
indirect support just by being visible (e.g., famous persons in the
media or other individuals they admire). Most participants described mentors, however, as directive and active in their interactions (e.g., being teachers, guides, advisors), and a few explicitly
included modeling in their definition of mentoring. One woman
commented, “Anybody can give a lecture, but . . . to guide somebody through . . . to share how you’ve done something, how it’s
been successful for you, how you’ve handled obstacles, that’s truly
a mentor.” A number of the women reported having had several
mentors and role models. For most, mentors and role models
appeared only later in their lives.
Most of the women in the sample also emphasized how important it is for them to serve as role models, mentors, or both for
others. The blind international director, for example, spoke about
the “guiding mode” of mentoring and explained that “to have that
access is so important for disabled girls.”
Career Attitudes and Behaviors
Attitudes toward work and learning. Most of the participants
described the method(s) by which they acquired their occupational
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
76
NOONAN ET AL.
skills, particularly important in this sample because of the somewhat haphazard education a number of them had received. A
number of the women reported learning on the job, and some of the
women had done a great deal of self-learning. The blind investment firm chairperson commented, “I’m very self-taught in most
stuff. I guess I’m an educational loner.” One woman indicated that
her family had taught her occupational skills, and 7 of the women
talked about learning needed skills through classes so that they
could progress in their careers. The blind international director,
although valuing academic learning, pointed out the practicality of
acquiring skills through a work setting: “If you have the possibility
of work staring you in the face . . . and you were going to see a
result from it, that was much more important than academics.”
Some discussed developing occupational skills through more than
one method of learning.
The work attitude that most commonly characterized participants in this sample was very strong passion for their work, and it
would be difficult to overstate the salience of paid, satisfying
employment expressed by these women. For example, a writer/
teacher spoke of her passion for her work against the backdrop of
her disability: “[I] use my work to give me jazz, to give me joy, to
give me connection . . . it keeps me sort of saying, ‘This is worth
being here.’ ” The blind investment firm chairperson shared,
I think if you’d asked me 20 years ago . . . ‘Do you think you’re going
to be there?’ I would say, ‘nay.’ And if you were to ask me today,
where do I think I’ll be five years from now? I’ll say, ‘I don’t know.’
But I will give 100% of what I can give every day.
Success strategies. All participants discussed their personal
views of success, and most of them identified the perceived locus
of their successes and failures. Almost all of the participants who
discussed this viewed their success as partly their doing and partly
because of others; however, all but 1 of these women saw their
failures as their own, a paradox summed up by the writer/teacher
with a spinal cord injury who said,
It may come across that I’m doing everything but there are all these
people in the background that have to be thanked, and that’s part of
the success. . . . The failures that I feel are more put on myself because
of the expectations that I have for myself, I don’t know if I blame
other people as much as I blame myself.
All participants discussed the focus and definition of success
and failure in terms of whether it was internal and self-oriented or
external and other-oriented, with half of them defining success and
failure as both internally and externally focused. Internal notions
of success included persisting despite one’s disability, having
control over one’s life, being financially successful, and living in
harmony with the environment. Examples of externally oriented
conceptions of success discussed were reaching others and positively influencing others’ lives, and achieving recognition and
respect (including not being resented for accommodations). Notions of internally based failure included being hindered by the
disability, not contributing anything valuable, and not being able to
hold a job and support oneself financially. Consistent with this
sample’s focus on self in judging failure, only two externally
oriented factors were mentioned: not having adequate resources to
help and empower others, and not being given a chance to prove
oneself.
A majority of the participants discussed strategies they used to
achieve and maintain their success. Strategies ranged from attitudinal (cognitive and affective) to behavioral (action-oriented), with
about half of the women reporting use of both strategies. An
example of a strategy primarily focused on thoughts and feelings
included seeing work as an opportunity to better the world,
whereas a more action-oriented strategy noted was setting goals
and moving elsewhere if obstacles proved insurmountable.
Leadership and pioneering. Because the sample for this study
was selected for high achievement, it is not surprising that many of
the participants were in leadership roles in their workplaces. Many
women discussed having attained leadership positions in the disability field, and 9 pointed out how their leadership positions
provided them with opportunities to make a difference for people
with disabilities in the organizations in which they worked. For
example, the attorney with a spinal cord injury noted that “my
presence here and my leadership here has resulted in a lot of
changes . . . awareness, sensitivity, more constructive policy
[changes] that make a difference down the line.”
Many of the participants in this sample were the first women
with disabilities to be in their positions, and thus were in pioneering roles as well: “There’ve been a generation of us who almost,
together, for the first time, blazed a trail” [writer/teacher with
spinal cord injury]. Some of the participants self-identified as
pioneers within the field of disability, and others felt that they had
become pioneers because of their disabilities: “I got to the level
where I was the first disabled writer doing disability, culturally
themed work.” [writer with rheumatoid arthritis]. A few of the
participants felt they were pioneers in areas other than disability
(e.g., gender, race), and a few discussed challenges associated with
being pioneers, including doubts about being in that position or
continually having battles to fight. Some seemed surprised to find
themselves in pioneering roles; for example, the blind international
director, who explained, “I never thought I would direct the
international development division of anything. . . . I think sometimes my professional path has given me the ability to kind of
strive for higher goals.”
Sociopolitical Context
Social movements. Typically, participants had experienced the
growth of various civil rights movements and had felt their effects.
A number of women noted the influence of the disability rights
movement. For example, 1 participant noted, “. . . women in the
disability rights community, there have been several who’ve been
very impactive [sic] . . . and their resilience has always been
important, and their leadership, and their ideas.” Several participants also described the impact of the women’s movement; for
example, a university professor with post-polio syndrome who
noted that,
the woman’s movement was a real eye-opener for me, a real mindopener. If [my mother] was the only role model I ever saw for being
a woman, I guess I would have always seen myself as a failure as a
woman.
Several participants described their experience of progressive
participation in multiple human rights movements. The blind international director explained that she “got really interested in the
United Farm Workers issue . . . then really into the women’s
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
CHALLENGE AND SUCCESS
77
A few women emphasized the importance of striking a balance
between pushing to get disability issues to the top of social and
legal agendas versus implementing long-term strategies for ensuring the success of the disability movement. Most reported using
collaborative approaches to their advocacy efforts, including extensive use of networking. Finally, 4 participants also spoke about
experiences with racism, including the attorney with a spinal cord
injury who urged: [the] “racism in our [disability rights] movement, we still have to talk about it, be open about it.”
ily) and appeared adept at turning challenges into opportunities for
personal and professional empowerment.
However, these women as disabled workers also faced many
unique issues reported as salient in the disability literature (e.g.,
Conyers et al., 1998; Trevino & Szymanski, 1996). For example,
given the lack of disabled role models that most participants
experienced early in their lives, family and educational experiences played a pivotal role in the expectations participants developed regarding paid employment as adults. Moreover, racial and
gender issues interacted strongly with disability for some of the
women, enhancing or impeding movement into the work world. As
in the existing literature, social support emerged as critical to
developing and implementing a sense of self as a worker with a
disability, and more women in this sample experienced difficulty
than ease in connecting to a disability identity and community.
Most of the women in the sample acknowledged the importance of
having disabled role models, mentors, colleagues, and friends in
providing support, and many were committed to advocacy activities to “give back” to the communities that had provided assistance and support; both findings are consistent with the existing
literature (Conyers et al., 1998; Trevino & Szymanski, 1996).
Barriers affecting self-efficacy was another theme expressed
throughout this sample. In particular, the positive coping mechanisms used were a strong component in assisting these women
with persevering when confronted with negative attitudes. Not
surprisingly, the sample reported extensive and influential experiences with antidisability prejudice, and the support of the disability
rights movement for many participants was a salient factor in their
personal and career development. This finding is congruent with
previous research suggesting the importance of connection with
and involvement in various political movements for highachieving women (Gomez et al., 2001; Richie et al., 1997), and
suggests a possible career success strategy for women. Many of the
women in this sample also addressed the degree to which physical
and health limitations affect their daily lives, often in demoralizing, constricting, and painful ways. All expressed a deep desire for
self-sufficiency and discussed the impact of paid work in reducing
feelings of dependency, with some specifically noting the financial
hardships a disability can create.
Discussion
Limitations of the Study
The theoretical framework that emerged from data analysis is a
dynamic, person– environment model of the career development of
WWDs that embeds vocational processes in a larger system of
mutually interactive influences on a core self. The core Dynamic
Self includes identity constructs, personality characteristics, and
beliefs about self. Contextual inputs include developmental opportunities, family and cultural variables, impact of disability, support
from others, career attitudes and behaviors, and sociopolitical
context. Like African American and White women (Richie et al.,
1997) and Latinas (Gomez et al., 2001) in studies using a similar
methodological approach, the high-achieving women in this sample were passionate about their work, persevering in the face of
internal and external barriers, self-confident and self-reliant, conscious of their coping strategies, internally motivated, and committed to helping others through their work. These women used
similar support systems for survival (e.g., role models and mentors, networks of women, supportive colleagues, friends, and fam-
The purpose of this study was to generate a tentative disabilityspecific model on the basis of this particular sample; thus, one
limitation of the study is the narrow scope of the substantive theory
described. However, this study contributes to the overarching goal
of the larger NSWA study, which is to articulate formal grounded
theory as described by Glaser and Strauss (1967; see Fassinger,
2002b, 2003). A second limitation of this study is that the sample
used is subject to the limitations of self-selection, and it is unclear
whether the results are applicable to other WWDs. In addition, the
criteria used to select the sample were subjective, as there is no
unambiguous definition of high achieving; therefore, many highly
accomplished WWDs may have been overlooked in the selection
process. Stylistic differences of participants were a limitation of
using a methodological approach that relies on detailed narratives
to provide information. Some participants simply were more verbally expansive in their manner and presentation than more reserved peers, resulting possibly in inaccurate or incomplete infor-
movement and then . . . in the gay rights movement.” A blind
university professor illustrated the same pattern: “I fought against
the war in Vietnam and I do civil rights . . . once I realized
disability was a political issue, I was going to approach it as a
political issue.”
Advocacy. Many of the women in this sample had assumed
advocacy roles, perhaps not surprising given their leadership positions in the workplace. Several participants claimed disability
activism as central to their life’s work, some discussed the advocacy for disability rights inherent in simply working successfully
with a disability every day, and a few shared that they fought
actively for disability rights when confronted with injustices in
their own lives. One of the university professors asserted, “I will
never be happy, even if I get a million awards and a million grants,
if my research doesn’t really tell people something honest about
people with disabilities.” Similarly, the attorney with a spinal cord
injury explained the potential impact of her work:
I can go in and effectively make changes that will be institutionalized,
that will create opportunities and eliminate barriers for people who
would’ve otherwise not been able to be at the table. And I can do that
and do it well, and without fanfare.
Several participants spoke about their willingness to fight for
disability rights despite negative consequences. As 1 of the university professors said:
You pay a price for being outspoken . . . but my feeling is, we’ve
fought very hard for those laws and . . . they weren’t meant to sit on
the shelf and collect dust. They are there to protect us and we have to
make sure that they are.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
78
NOONAN ET AL.
mation about some participants because they did not provide as
much narrative detail. Moreover, as noted above, the interviews of
4 of the participants could not be transcribed because of the nature
of their disability. The use of probing questions was a technique
used to compensate for verbal variability during interviews; detailed field notes also were used to ensure accurate inferences from
the interview data.
Several researchers (e.g., Denzin, 1978; Hackett, 1997; Hoshmand, 1989) have argued that the credibility of qualitative research
findings may be enhanced through the process of triangulation of
multiple sources of data and multiple methodological approaches.
To attempt this kind of triangulation, in the present study, participants were administered a widely used measure of attitudes toward people with disabilities (Attitudes Toward Persons with
Disabilities; Yuker, 1988), with the intention of comparing their
narratives regarding their disability attitudes with their scores on
an objective measure. However, this triangulation was unsuccessful, because of the negative responses of many participants to the
measure used and their refusal to complete it.
Finally, it may be that the similarity of findings in the present
study to those in other studies using the same approach (e.g.,
Gomez et al., 2001; Richie et al., 1997) is due to methodological
invariance, and that the models produced are simply artifacts of the
theory generation procedures outlined by Glaser and Strauss
(1967) and Strauss and Corbin (1998). That the generated models
may be accurate representations of experience, however, is supported by another qualitative study of career issues in diverse
populations implemented quite differently (e.g., Poole & LanganFox, 1997), as well as by member-checking procedures used in the
present study for which participants were given the opportunity to
provide feedback at several points in the research process.
Implications of the Study for Research, Practice, and
Policy
Because all women in this sample were successful, research
investigating the experiences of WWDs who do not achieve successful vocational outcomes is warranted, particularly in identifying variables that limit women’s capacities to overcome barriers.
Moreover, the present study only began to tap the experiences of
disabled women of color or lesbian women, because few women
with these demographic characteristics were in the sample. Examining women with hidden disabilities (i.e., psychiatric, autoimmune disorders) also would enhance the growing literature on the
career behavior of diverse women. Finally, a useful methodological contribution would be to reanalyze the data from this study by
using a qualitative approach other than grounded theory to determine whether a different analysis strategy would produce similar
results.
Given the multitude of barriers reported by this sample, studies
that examine the critical factors of accessibility, health care, and
financial resources (e.g., social security benefits) are needed, both
to document the negative effects of environmental constraints on
disabled persons and to demonstrate the cost– benefit viability of
providing accommodations and resources. Future research also
might include quantitative approaches such as developing scales,
examining influences presented as salient by this sample, and then
administering those scales to larger samples.
The present findings have myriad implications for practice.
Career interventions for disabled women attempting to enter the
work world might well attend to skills such as building social
support, developing strategies for coping with antidisability prejudice, overcoming internalized discouragement regarding gender
and vocational success, and understanding the interactions among
disability and other aspects of one’s salient identities (e.g., ethnicity, class). Identifying barriers is important for policy and advocacy work, as interventions can be aimed at helping to build
positive self-efficacy (Lent et al., 2000; Swanson & Woitke,
1997). Moreover, present findings suggest that the commonly used
feminist therapy strategy of empowerment through “making the
personal political”—that is, engaging interested clients in proactive political and advocacy activities—also may be a very effective
approach for empowerment in the career arena (e.g., enhancing
self-efficacy, building professional networks).
As noted by Olkin and Pledger (2003), training in disability
within psychology curriculums is sadly lacking. Therefore, it is
imperative that these curricula give sufficient and accurate coverage to disability issues, particularly in relationship to other diversity areas such as gender, ethnicity, aging, sexual orientation, SES,
and religion. More than one course is needed to train clinicians to
effectively assist persons with disabilities. Furthermore, using the
whole network of the person with a disability (e.g., biological,
psychological, social, environmental, economic, legal, policy, and
political) is critical when considering how to proceed with therapeutic intervention.
The pervasiveness of ableist attitudes and behaviors described
by participants in the present study also points to the need for
effective training of helping professionals regarding disability, not
only in knowledge areas such as learning about physiological
realities and disability resources but also attitudinally in addressing
internalized stereotypes and beliefs that may hinder sensitive,
effective intervention. It also is important for clinicians to consider
the accessibility of career services and the appropriateness of
assessment procedures in their vocational work with disabled
clients (Enright et al., 1996), as well as the possibility of needing
to advocate directly on their behalf. Finally, practice in the policy
arena must address issues of access, ensuring that people with
disabilities experience the full range of opportunities for leading
fulfilling, productive lives. This is perhaps best described by the
following participant:
. . . there’s something beyond you that’s more important, that you
have to have a sense of responsibility to all people, to all the world,
to the advancement of this world, even when we’re gone, that there’s
something way beyond you that you have to be concerned about . . .
it’s a sense of connection and a social responsibility . . .
References
Alston, R. J., & McCowan, C. J. (1994). African American women with
disabilities: Rehabilitation issues and concerns. Journal of Rehabilitation, January/February/March 1994, 36 – 40.
Asch, A., & Fine, M. (1988). Introduction: Beyond pedestals. In M. Fine
& A. Asch (Eds.), Women with disabilities: Essays in psychology,
culture and politics (pp. 1– 40). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Betz, N. E., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1993). Individuality and diversity: Theory
and research in counseling psychology. Annual Review of Psychology,
44, 343–381.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
CHALLENGE AND SUCCESS
Conyers, L. M., Koch, L. C., & Szymanski, E. M. (1998). Life-span
perspectives on disability and work: A qualitative study. Rehabilitation
Counseling Bulletin, 42, 51–76.
Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Crewe, N. M., & Clarke, N. (1996). Stress and women with disabilities. In
D. M. Krotoski, M. A. Nosek, & M. A. Turk (Eds.), Women with
physical disabilities (pp. 193–201). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Danek, M. (1992). The status of women with disabilities revisited. Journal
of Applied Rehabilitation Counseling, 23, 7–13.
DeLoach, C. (1995). Women in rehabilitation. In A. Dell Orto & R.
Marinelli (Eds.), Encyclopedia of disability and rehabilitation (pp. 762–
767). New York: Simon & Schuster.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to
sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Enright, M. S., Conyers, L. M., & Szymanski, E. M. (1996). Career and
career-related educational concerns of college students with disabilities.
Journal of Counseling & Development, 75, 103–114.
Fassinger, R. E. (2001). Diversity at work: Research issues in vocational
development. In D. Pope-Davis & H. Coleman (Eds.), The intersection
of race, class, and gender in multicultural counseling (pp. 267–288).
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Fassinger, R. E. (2002a). Hitting the ceiling: Gendered barriers to occupational entry, advancement, and achievement. In L. Diamant & J. Lee
(Eds.), The psychology of sex, gender, and jobs: Issues and solutions
(pp. 21– 46). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Fassinger, R. E. (2002b, August). Honoring women’s diversity: A new,
inclusive theory of career development. Paper presented at the 110th
Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Chicago,
IL.
Fassinger, R. E. (2003, June). Career issues for women in the United
States: Experiences of prominent women. Paper presented at the biannual conference of the Society for Vocational Psychology, Coimbra,
Portugal.
Fassinger, R. E. (in press). Theoretical issues in the study of women’s
career development: Building bridges in a brave new world. In W. B.
Walsh & M. L. Savickas (Eds.), Handbook of vocational psychology
(3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fine, M., & Asch, A. (1985). Disabled women: Sexism without the
pedestal. In M. J. Deegan & N. A. Brooks (Eds.), Women and disability:
The double handicap (pp. 6 –22). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction
Publishers.
Fitzgerald, L. F., Fassinger, R. E., & Betz, N. E. (1995). Theoretical
advances in the study of women’s career development. In W. B. Walsh
& S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Handbook of vocational psychology (pp. 67–
109). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Fulton, S. A., & Sabornie, E. J. (1994). Evidence of employment inequality
among females with disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 28,
149 –166.
Gill, C. J. (1997). The last sisters: Disabled women’s health. In S. B.
Ruzek, V. Olesen, & A. Clarke (Eds.), Women’s health: Complexities
and differences (pp. 96 –112). Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory:
Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Gomez, M., Fassinger, R., Prosser, J., Cooke, K., Mejia, B., & Luna, J.
(2001). Voces abriendo caminos (voices forging path): A qualitative
study of the career development of notable Latinas. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 286 –300.
Guralnik, J. M., Leveille, S. G., Hirsch, R., Ferrucci, L., & Fried, L. P.
(1997). The impact of disability in older women. Journal of American
Medical Women’s Association, 52, 113–120.
Hackett, G. (1997). Promise and problems in theory and research on
women’s career development: Comment on Lucas (1997), Richie et al.
79
(1997), McCracken and Weitzman (1997), Rainey and Borders (1997),
and Schaefers, Epperson, and Nauta (1997). Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 44, 184 –188.
Hale, T. W., Hayghe, H. V., & McNeil, J. (1998). Persons with disabilities:
Labor market activity, 1994. Monthly Labor Review, 121, 3–11.
Hanna, W. J., & Rogovsky, E. (1991). Women with disabilities: Two
handicaps plus. Disability, Handicap & Society, 6, 49 – 63.
Hollingsworth, M. A., Tomlinson, M. J., & Fassinger, R. E. (1997, August). Working it “out”: Career development among prominent lesbian
women. Paper presented at the 105th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.
Hoshmand, L. (1989). Alternative research paradigms: A review and
teaching proposal. Counseling Psychologist, 17, 3–79.
Jans, L., & Stoddard, S. (1999). Chartbook on women and disability in the
United States. An InfoUse Report (Document No. H133D50017-96).
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Institute on
Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
Kaye, H. S., & Longmore, P. K. (1997). Disability watch: The status of
people with disabilities in the United States. Oakland, CA: Disability
Rights Advocates.
Kruse, D. L. (1998). Persons with disabilities: Demographic, income, and
health care characteristics. Monthly Labor Review, 13–22.
LaPlante, M. P., Carlson, D., Kaye, H. S., & Bradsher, J. E. (1996).
Families with disabilities in the United States (Disability Statistics Rep.
No. 8). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2000). Contextual supports and
barriers to career choice: A social cognitive analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 47, 36 – 49.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage.
McLennan, N. A. (1999). Applying the cognitive information processing
approach to career problem solving and decision making to women’s
career development. Journal of Employment Counseling, 36, 82–97.
McNeil, J. M. (2001). Americans with disabilities: Household economic
studies (pp. 70 –73). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office, U. S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports.
McWhirter, E. H., Torres, D., & Rasheed, S. (1998). Assessing barriers to
women’s career adjustment. Journal of Career Assessment, 6, 449 – 479.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An
expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Morrow, S. L., & Smith, M. L. (2000). Qualitative research for counseling
psychology. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (3rd ed., pp. 199 –230). New York: Wiley.
Nosek, M. A., Howland, C. A., Rintala, D. H., Young, M. E., & Chanpong,
G. F. (1997). National study of women with physical disabilities: Final
report. Houston, TX: Center for Research on Women with Disabilities.
Olkin, R., & Pledger, C. (2003). Can disability studies and psychology join
hands? American Psychologist, 58, 296 –304.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd
ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Phillips, S. D., & Imhoff, A. R. (1997). Women and career development:
A decade of research. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 31–59.
Poole, M. E., & Langan-Fox, J. (1997). Australian women and careers:
Psychological and contextual influences over the life course. Melbourne,
Victoria, Australia: Cambridge University Press.
Prosser, J., Chopra, S., & Fassinger, R. E. (1998, March). A qualitative
study of careers of prominent Asian American women. Paper presented
at the annual conference of the Association for Women in Psychology,
Baltimore, MD.
Richie, B. S., Fassinger, R. E., Linn, G. S., Johnson, J., Prosser, J., &
Robinson, S. (1997). Persistence, connection, and passion: A qualitative
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
80
NOONAN ET AL.
study of the career development of highly achieving African American–
Black and White women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44, 133–
148.
Rousso, H. (1993). Disabled, female, and proud! Boston, MA: Exceptional
Parent Press.
Scott, K. (1993). The effects of post-secondary education on the lives of
women with physical disabilities. Canadian Women Studies, 13, 5–14.
Shahnasarian, M. (2001). Career rehabilitation: Integration of vocational
rehabilitation and career development in the twenty-first century. Career
Development Quarterly, 49, 275–283.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Swanson, J. L., & Woitke, M. B. (1997). Theory into practice in career
assessments for women: Assessment and interventions regarding perceived career barriers. Journal of Career Assessment, 5, 443– 462.
Traustadottir, R. (1992a). Part I obstacles to equality: The double discrimination of women with disabilities. Journal of Leisurability, 19, 4 –9.
Traustadottir, R. (1992b). Part II obstacles to equality: The double discrimination of women with disabilities. Journal of Leisurability, 19, 3–14.
Trevino, B., & Szymanski, E. M. (1996). A qualitative study of the career
development of Hispanics with disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation,
62, 5–14.
U.S. Department of Labor. (2001). Highlights of women’s earnings in
2000. (Bureau of Labor Statistics Rep. No. 952). Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
Yuker, H. E. (1988). Attitudes towards persons with disabilities. New
York: Springer.
Received September 30, 2002
Revision received July 18, 2003
Accepted July 30, 2003 䡲