Youth Homelessness in the Cotswolds - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 26
About This Presentation
Title:

Youth Homelessness in the Cotswolds

Description:

SinC programme worked in 8 London boroughs with 700 yp most at risk of homelessness. ... The borough probability of generating youth homelessness correlated with male ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:169
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 27
Provided by: STAFFORDSH5
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Youth Homelessness in the Cotswolds


1
National Homelessness Conference 9th - 10th
November 2007
2
What is Homelessness? A study of Young Peoples
Understanding of their Risk of Homelessness
  • Dr Joan Smith and Dr Megan Ravenhill
  • Centre for Housing and Community Research
  • Cities Institute
  • London Metropolitan University
  • Contact joan.smith_at_londonmet.ac.uk

3
The Family Background of Young Homeless People
  • Pre 1997 young people were blamed for leaving
    home
  • Between one sixth and one third of young people
    in any homeless hostel had a background in LA
    care but what of the two-thirds?
  • An in-depth study undertaken by CHCR (Family
    Background of Young Homeless People, JRF, 1998)
    interviewed 56 young people who became homeless
    from the family home, not care, and also
    interviewed at least one parent in half of all
    cases.
  • One third of young people were homeless from
    non-disrupted homes, largely because of their own
    behaviour, but two-thirds were homeless from
    disrupted homes largely through parental
    behaviour.
  • The study interviewed 60 families from local
    estates where young people were still living at
    home. A majority of these parents supported the
    reasons that parents of homeless young people
    made them homeless by asking them to leave.
  • The study identified a Circle of Risk for young
    people.

4
(No Transcript)
5
Identifying young people at risk of homelessness
  • Taking Risks (Breugel and Smith, 1999). The first
    quantitative study of risk was undertaken for
    Safe in the City. 200 interviews of young
    people aged 16-19 years from London living in
    London hostels a matched sample of 150 yp living
    at home on estates
  • Produced two risk indices a) risk by individual
    - their biographical risks from interviews
    b) risk by area postcodes of last family home
  • The odds ratios gained by comparing the
    homeless and local samples created an index of
    risk.
  • Led to the gate-keeping tool of 5 risk factors
    for the Safe in the City programme. SinC
    programme worked in 8 London boroughs with 700 yp
    most at risk of homelessness. Programmes had 3
    dimensions personal development, employment and
    education, and work with parents.
  • Studies in Birmingham, Cotswolds and North
    Staffordshire found the same factors.

6
Risks for individual young people in London
7
Risks by area for the young person
  • Different societies carry different risks of
    poverty, of street violence, of rates of
    imprisonment, of deprivation.
  • In London the postcode of each of the 200 young
    people last lived with their family were used to
    identify the borough ward they lived in.
  • The borough probability of generating youth
    homelessness correlated with male registered
    unemployment at .9149 and the average index of
    deprivation for the borough at .7743
  • Young people are also at risk from moral order
    judgements. Do other parents believe that parents
    have the right to throw out young people who are
    arguing with them, or on drugs?
  • How are young people labelled?
  • QUESTION What understandings do young people
    have of their own risk of homelessness?

8
What is Homelessness?
  • The What is Homelessness? research project
    AIMED to find out young peoples perceptions of,
    understandings of, and experience of
  • Home, homelessness and leaving home
  • Running away and staying away
  • And to discuss their ideas about
  • Preventing runaways behaviour and youth
    homelessness
  • METHOD
  • 30 group interviews with young people (200 plus)
    in four London boroughs out of school projects,
    in school, and PRUs
  • 10 group interviews with parents in four London
    boroughs
  • Then these ideas were tested through
  • 22 individual interviews with young people who
    have run away and, where possible, with their
    parents/carers.
  • Findings were discussed with practitioners and
    youth educators

9
What is home? What does home mean to you?
  • Young People
  • Home was defined in terms of feelings
  • Acceptance, wanted, safe, loved, respected, where
    you belong
  • Activities
  • Where you eat and sleep, where you socialise,
    where you can have safe arguments
  • People
  • Where your family is, where you can trust people
  • Parents defined home as
  • A safe, stable place for you and your children.
  • They were surprised that young people agreed with
    them. They thought young people saw it as bed
    and breakfast and a place for them to have their
    own space.

10
Who is homeless?
  • Young people and Parents
  • Defined homelessness in terms of
  • Levels of safety  
  • Degree of permanence
  • Whether or not a young person could return home.
  • Most young people would not recognise themselves
    as homeless
  • Living with a grandparent or close family even
    if they slept on the floor or sofa.
  • Living with a friend and were wanted there.
  • Half of young people thought that a young person
    who felt threatened, unsafe or unwanted either in
    the parental home or a friends or relatives
    home was not homeless.
  • Most parents did not recognise staying with
    family members or friends of the parent as
    homelessness but a young person staying with
    their own friends would be homeless.

11
Leaving Home
  • Young people thought they would need to
  • Save 1000 to 2000 in order to set up home,
  • Earn between 300 and 2000 a week to cover rent,
    and cost of living
  • Jobs where 16 year olds could earn 1000 a week
    Teacher, nursery nurse, builder, taxi driver,
    shop assistant, plumber,drug dealer.
  • At 16 a young person would receive 50 to 100 a
    week in benefits, and get a 1-bedroom flat from
    the council. Rent of a 1 bed flat was between
    50-500
  • About half the young people knew where their
    local housing office was and half where their
    local social services office was.
  •  Parents thought this showed how unrealistic
    young people were. They wanted the cost of living
    taught in schools and careers advice that
    included wages, qualifications needed and costs
    in London.

12
Avoiding leaving home due to family disputes
  •    Young People wanted
  • Access to mediation between them and their
    parents
  • To know their options if they could not stay at
    home and have explained the consequences of
    choosing each option
  • To be able to talk through their options with
    someone they trusted.
  • To take their time, make their own decision and
    be supported when they did
  • To be able to go back and try again if they made
    the wrong decision
  • Parents would
  • Sacrifice themselves (sleep in the living room,
    turn downstairs room into a bedroom) or allow
    respite stays with relatives.

13
Reasons for family disputes and leaving home
  • Young people
  • The main reasons for family disputes and leaving
    home
  • Family pressure
  • Young persons behaviour
  • Abuse.
  •  Parents
  • Saw peer pressure as a large contributory factor
    in family disputes leading to young people
    running away
  • or staying away from home.

14
Communication between young people and parents
  • Young people
  •  Communication problems were linked to problems
    of mutual respect and young peoples attitudes .
  •  They felt cut off and remote from their parents,
    and often unable to talk to them. They
    described feeling locked down, unable to
    discuss things that worried them, except with a
    very close friend.
  • Young people reported bullying in the
    neighbourhood as well as at school. They felt
    not at home if it was unsafe or intimidating.
  • They wanted to know that if they had a problem
    they could talk to their parents
  • Young people wanted me time, when their parent
    spent time just with them.
  •  Arguments at home are necessary, they are safe
    arguments.
  •  

15
Parents perspectives on communication
  • Parents thought problems of communication were
  • Young peoples attitude, unwillingness to listen
    or continuous flouting of house rules.
  • Feeling cut out by their children, unheard and
    torn between letting them learn from their
    mistakes and protecting them from perceived
    dangers.
  • Seeing that their child was locked down, but
    feeling powerless to break in, instead waiting,
    hoping that the young person would open up to
    them if they backed off
  • Parents wanted equal rights with their children.
    Young people quoted their rights to their
    parents. Parents felt they had no rights.
  • Parents felt bullied by school policies aimed at
    their child and them.
  • Parents feared their neighbourhood and would not
    go out after dark. They feared for their childs
    safety.

16
Safe Arguments and Respect
  • For young people safe arguments are important.
  • A sign of being loved
  • A sign of healthy relationships
  • A negotiation of boundaries
  • A safety valve
  • Parents saw things differently. Parents saw
    arguments as a lack of respect, stressful,
    dangerous, hurtful, treading on egg shells.
  • Young people wanted to be respected by their
    families.
  • To be heard is to be respected. Feeling safe and
    secure within the family and home is to be
    respected
  • Parents wanted young people to respect themselves
    this would keep them safe. They wanted their
    young people to respect them and thought it came
    from their early relationship with their child.

17
Running away or Running To
  • Running away meant
  • Leaving without telling the parent where they
    were. Its aim was
  • To make parents realise something is wrong,
  • To make an angry statement,
  • To provoke a reaction from their parent,
  • To avoid tensions in the home
  • To avoid being punished.
  • Running to meant
  • Staying with a friend or relative with their
    parents knowledge. This was often negotiated,
    parents or young people could make the
    arrangements. Its aim was
  • To give both parent and child space
  • To act as a safety valve
  • To protect the relationship from being totally
    destroyed

18
Running away or being kicked out
  • Young people reported that being kicked out -
    fell into two categories,
  • Irreparable damage to the relationship no going
    back
  • Idle threats where the young person was thrown
    out for an hour or so while everyone cooled down
  • Young people thought behaviour bad enough to be
    kicked out was
  • Drugs,
  • Drink
  • Crime
  • Anything that repeatedly brought trouble to the
    door

19
Young peoples advice to those being icked out
  • Young peoples advice
  • Try and return home avoid leaving permanently.
  • Try and find somewhere to stay for a few nights
  • Get someone else to mediate -
  • A member of their family
  • A friend of their parent
  • Their own friends parent
  • If the unofficial routes fail
  • Look on the internet
  • Go to the housing department or social services
  • Talk to a trusted teacher or other people at
    school (eg. Connexions)
  • Contact organizations such as Childline or the
    NSPCC.

20
Talking to runaways
  • Runaways is a term recognised by young people,
    missing is not.
  • We interviewed young people who had runaway in
    two types of location local projects and
    pan-London projects. The range of experience is
    huge.
  • Local projects Young people ranged from those
    running away for respite - from problems in their
    school and/or neighbourhood but not their family,
    to those running away principally from their
    families. A quarter were permanently re-housed
    away from their family because of abuse or
    neglect. In three-quarters early intervention
    could have helped.
  • Pan-London projects Young people were running
    from their family, or had been kicked out from
    their family. Only a quarter expressed any wish
    to be reconciled with their family, or to go back
    home. Almost all required, or had required, a
    service intervention from Social Services at an
    earlier stage.

21
Runaways in their local area
  • Local runaways were seeking what the young people
    in groups described respite, notice of their
    problems, proof they were loved.
  • Some ran for a day, for a week, others stayed
    away for months
  • Some moved in with relatives and let their
    parents know then they were staying away.
  • Many had experienced traumatic life events
    including death of a mother, disappearance of a
    father, transfer of country orarea, childhood
    illness, parental addiction or criminal activity.
  • In the case of parental addiction or criminal
    activity young people could decide to hide their
    parents activity, or seek help.
  • Their local agencies were important to them.
    There they found a trusted adult from whom they
    accepted counselling and advice.
  • Young people were active in protecting themselves
    from homelessness. Using mobile phones to book
    rooms.

22
Runaways in Pan-London projects
  • All the young people interviewed in the
    pan-London projects were seeking a service
    response.
  • A range of problems from the unendurable (extreme
    physical abuse, threats to life, neglect) to
    family problems from which they needed long-term
    respite.
  • Purpose in running away was different from the
    majority of the local runaways they wanted to
    protect themselves and to trigger a service
    response. Most wanted to go to care.
  • Young peoples problems had either begun at an
    early age (primary school) or physical violence
    had begun at age 11 or 12 years.
  • Physical violence from their mother in many
    cases. Social Services frequently believed the
    mother.
  • Social services avoiding taking responsibility
    for teenagers.

23
Understanding running away
24
Conclusions from seminars with practitioners
and youth
  • Youth work has been undervalued. Older young
    people need places.
  • Local voluntary agencies need support to work
    with the families of young people. Extended
    schools will not capture everybody.
  • Curriculum change needs to begin in primary
    school to capture those who leave school at 11 or
    drop out
  • Peer education and peer mentoring are very
    important when young people are locked down they
    often turn to an older friend
  • Pastoral care in schools needs to be
    re-established as a top priority. The Target
    culture has damaged support for the most troubled
    young people. Extended schools will be
    encouraged to do this.
  • Parenting programmes need to be provided for all
    parents, with their consent, not imposed on the
    bad parents.
  • Pan London funding for Social Services work
    with runaways

25
Policy Proposals
  • Citizenship curriculum to include real costs of
    leaving home primary school top year
  • Support for non-judgemental local services
    working with young people and parents. SinC type
    programmes
  • Non-judgemental parenting programmes in extended
    schools
  • Expanding school anti-bullying programmes into
    one to one mediation training.
  • Website for advice on problems at home and
    leaving home. Keywords need to be channelled to
    the website.
  • Funding mobile phone contact, Keeping the Lines
    Open
  • Funding early intervention and Social Service
    intervention with young runaways from Pan-London
    funds

26
National Homelessness Conference 9th - 10th
November 2007
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com