See, that is my thought, but as someone who has worked with this population for years in research, clinical, and non-clinical capacities I have been told in feedback appointments I need more service to underserved groups and individuals different from myself.
I get there are more conventional ways to add this service like working with unhoused individuals and low SES families, but it still feels discouraging that people with developmental and intellectual disabilities are not always recognized within that same framework. It seems like an oversight given how substantial their barriers to care often are. It also ignores intersectionality of these disabilities which are compounded by SES.
This is going to start off weird but indulge me for a sec.
I am fundamentally materialist, philosophically. To me, it really
does all come down to money. We live in a capitalist society with a privatized healthcare system.
I bring that up because the kinds of families who accept volunteer care are people who would not otherwise be able to secure care by any other means in the open market. Additionally, the patient themselves, being profoundly incapacitated, is not gainfully employed, and cannot participate in the market at all—they are wholly dependent on the social safety net. That means, by definition, both the patient and their families are underprivileged vis à vis SES. It is possible some of those families might even be homeless and you wouldn't even know it.
In my eyes, you
are working with low SES families. It just depends how you want to set the interpretive frame within your application (obviously to a reasonable degree, I'm not encouraging dishonesty).
When you talk about your activity, emphasize what you learn about these families in the little moments where you could see clearly how precarious their situation really was, above and beyond their child's diagnosis (although, of course, it's appropriate in my opinion to discuss how chronic illness with these particular manifestations could absolutely worsen anyone's financial posture, if there was one to begin with).
Unless it was a very well-defined, procedural role (like, I don't know, a clinical lab scientist or something where it would be really weird to talk about anything other than the tasks associated with that job), you have total control over what you carry away from that experience and what you choose to discuss.
I hope this makes sense. It's abstract because it really is a wink-wink-nudge-nudge. I am fairly positive you would have been better received if you had maybe not led with their diagnosis.
