Women’s Homeless Pathways: A Longitudinal Perspective

9th European Research Conference

Homelessness in Times of Crisis

Warsaw, Friday 19th September 2014

“Just Keep Doing What We’re

Supposed To Do”:

A Qualitative Longitudinal

Perspective of Homeless

Women’s Pathways

Sarah Sheridan, PhD Candidate, Trinity College Dublin

Supervisor: Dr Paula Mayock

Insert your logo here




Focus of Presentation

1. Explanations of homelessness: Structure versus

agency debate

2. Qualitative Longitudinal Research (QLR)

3. The study

4. Housing pathways of sample between Phase I & II

5. Exploring structure and agency in the data

6. Conclusion




Structure Versus Agency Explanations of homelessness:

Up until 1960s – individual deficits

1960s – 1980s – structural explanations

Recent years – interaction between individual and structural

processes

A “new orthodoxy” of homelessness?

Since 2000, research on homeless women had grown somewhat.

Explanations relate more to structural processes: feminisation of

poverty; demographic changes; rise of female-headed

households; weakening welfare systems, etc.

Existing studies which include (valuable) insights on agency among

homeless women generally refer to survival strategies (Reeve et

al., 2005), gender performances and reducing the possibility of

victimisation (May et al., 2007; Huey and Berndt, 2008).

Explanations of homelessness (O’Sullivan, 2008):

1960s and 1970s – individual deficits

1980s -1990s – structural explanations

Recent years – interaction between individual and structural

processes. Certain groups at greater risk of homelessness due to

changing structural conditions.

Relationship between structure and agency not well understood

(Somerville, 2013).

Since 2001, research on homeless women growing slowly – structural

explanations of homelessness.

Existing studies on women which include (valuable) insights on agency

among homeless women: survival strategies (Reeve et al., 2005),

gender performances and tactics to reduce the risk of victimisation (May

et al., 2007; Huey and Berndt, 2008).




Qualitative Longitudinal

Research (QLR) - Longitudinal research can capture the multidimensional

nature of homelessness and how homelessness is a

dynamic process (O’Sullivan, 2008).

- QLR can capture change over time, as “it is only through

time that we can gain a better appreciation of how the

personal and the social, agency and structure, the

micro and macro are interconnected and how they

come to be transformed” (Neale and Flowerdew,

2003:190).

- QLR can enlighten our understanding of the relationship

between how lives are talked about and how lives are

lived (McNaughton, 2006).




Aim of Presentation

AIM OF PRESENTATION:

To explore structure and agency in

women’s accounts of

accommodation transitions over

time.




The Study




The Study Phase I (Mayock and Sheridan, 2012)

In-depth study of homeless women in Ireland

60 qualitative life-history interviews

Ethnographic observation (4 services)

Phase II (Current PhD study)

Tracked and re-interviewed = 40/57 women

Average time between interview = 2 years & 8 months

Lengthy but enlightening tracking process

Ethnographic observation (6 services)

20

10

-20

11

2

01

2-2

01

3




Homeless Pathways of Sample

Emergency accommodation (n=18)

Transitional accommodation (n=9)

Private rented accommodation (n=7)

With friends or family (n=2)

Long-term supported

accommodation (n=2)

Domestic violence refuge (n=1)

Dilapidated house (n=1)

Exited Homelessness (n=17)

Private rented accommodation* (n=6)

RAS accommodation (n=4)

Council house/flat (n=4)

Housing association unit (n=3)

Transitional/Long-term

Accommodation (n=7)

Still Homeless (n=16)

Emergency homeless accommodation (n=8)

Private-rented accommodation * (n=4)

With friends or family (n=3)

Dilapidated house (n=1)

Phase I (2010-11) Phase II (2012-13)




Accommodation transitions

between Phase I & II

Housing Status at Phase II Average number of transitions

between Phase I & II

Women who exited homelessness

1.7

Women who remained homeless

6.3




Preliminary Analysis




1. Exiting Homelessness and

Narratives of Agency Narratives of agency.

Strategies to secure stable housing:

[Interviewer: Did you get help securing the council house?] No!

They [the homeless service] didn’t help! I done it meself. I

would ring the corporation all the time, and I would say ‘Look, I

will live in a dog box!’…...So, I kept ringing, and ringing, and

ringing…. (Bernadette, 40, housed)

Sense of pride and empowerment after being housed:

“I feel as though I did it all myself! Fair enough, I got help and

support, but I feel the majority of it was myself - which is nice.”

(Emily, 24, housed)

The housing officer turned around to me and said, “You poor,

poor girl”, and I said “I am not poor, and neither am I a girl!

(Imelda, 37, housed)




Drawing on sources of perceived power:

“I went to my local politician…I said ‘If you don’t have me, I

am the next one committing suicide. I can’t hack this, I am

sick of being knocked all my life, and no one has ever given

me a proper chance and all I want is a roof over my head for

my children and just to have a bit of peace in my life!’ …I

got an offer of two houses in one day!” (Imelda, 37 housed)

Circumnavigating services and systems to exit:

I would never have taken a place where my Mam lives in the

flats. That was the stem of all my problems. You know?

And, I needed to get away from there fast. That’s why I

ended up in prison because I refused bail – I was breaking

up with my partner, I couldn’t afford a place on my own... I

knew if I went in, I could talk to the probation officers, I

knew people who had got help, and it stemmed from there.

(Donna, 40, housed)




However there were structural underpinnings in their exiting of

homelessness which may be obscured through the women’s

accounts (McNaughton, 2006) .

Women’s routes out of homelessness were heavily

influenced by support from a range of services.

Crucially, the women who exited homelessness usually fit a

certain profile which may be deemed more “service-friendly”:

Characteristics of “deserving” service user (i.e.

homelessness linked to domestic violence or poverty; less

likely to report addiction or mental health problems)

More likely to be compliant, willing to engage and

cooperate, affable, and grateful.

Migrant women reported more positive pathways than

non-migrants.

Lower levels of childhood adversity.

Less likely to identify with homelessness subculture.




I have been there [to council office] and

the chief housing officer…she was not

interviewing me but she saw me from

inside and she saw I am crying and

everything…I think she found me as this

person who was trying to make a better

life I think, I am not a woman only

drinking and no future. She knew I will be

able buy a new house after this lease

finishes in 10 years (Aisha, 34, housed).




2. Remaining Homeless and

Restricted Agency

Structural constraints and restricted options

in relation to exiting homelessness.

So, I filled in an application form and was waiting a

couple of weeks, and she came back and says my

needs didn’t fit the criteria of the [housing]. So, I just

thought argh sure, private rented – or something but

I thought I don’t want to do that, because I am after

sticking it this long here [in B&B], I am not going into

a room like this again to spend the rest of me life. I

have three kids you know what I mean, I need them

to come and stay with me. (Stephanie, 35, homeless).




Personal progress; structural barriers:

So I kind of feel that for getting clean, I am

owed a bit around luck, so to speak, or a

bit of positivity in me life. But I don’t know

who I think owes it to me, but I feel that I

owed something …..I feel like I am owed a

bit respect, or trust…And I just feel like I

am not getting anywhere…Nearly I am

owed it for myself...” (Caoimhe, 34, still

homeless )




Profile of women who remained homeless:

High levels of adversity and victimisation during

childhood

Addiction problems

Mental health issues (worsening over time)

More likely to be more entrenched in homelessness

services and ‘street subculture’.

Less likely to “cooperate” or comply with services yet

were highly dependent (and institutionalised) in service

provision.

Like, people telling me to do this, do that, go for

this, go for that – if I want to do it, I’ll do it. People

don’t have to push me to do it. If I don’t want to

do counselling, I don’t have to do it. It’s like, other

people have control over me, since being in here

[hostel]. (Viv, 38, homeless)




“I don’t feel normal, I just feel like I am a

statistic. I think I am just a number.

…And I am not a number! I am a person!

You know?...I just want to be treated

normal. I just feel that in this kind of

bubble that I am caught with all the

different services, that I can’t be

myself….” (Gráinne, 34, homeless)




3. Structure and Agency

Interplay: A Balancing Act Balancing service requirements with individual needs:

We have to just keep at it. Just keeping what we are

supposed to do…just play the game. (Chloe, 29,

homeless)

I was doing everything to please everybody else, but

not meself. I went to double counselling, double

acupuncture, like everything – anything like. They

would say ‘Róisín, do this! You are very good! Do

that!’ but actually I was doing it for them, I wasn’t

doing it for myself. (Róisín, 40, still homeless)




Negotiating control when interacting with services:

[The homeless support service] wanted to kind of

take over and I didn’t want that. I didn’t want them to

telling me what to do…. As If I was incapable! ... All

that is all over, thank God. I don’t have hassle with

anybody, like I had in the past, that was horrible.

Those people calling you into meetings, that was

horrible… but that’s how the system works.

(Fionnuala, 61, housed)

“Cooperating” and positively engaging with services:

I’ve constantly just learned so much, and it’s really all

down to [homeless service] - they pushed me even

when I didn’t want to do things they pushed me, in a

nice way. (Rosie, 41, housed)




Conclusion (1)

Structure and agency were both present but interacted in

highly complex ways in the women’s narratives.

Women who exited homelessness viewed their exits as being

hugely influenced by their own individual action.

Notwithstanding the very positive impact their own actions had

on housing transitions, when looking beyond their narrative

and at the characteristics of this group, it can be argued that

structural processes played an equally important part.

Women who exited demonstrated a greater capacity to use the

available structures and services to secure housing.

They were a “better fit” with the resources available to service providers

and were more willing to comply, than those who did not exit.

Those who exited by Phase II interview described their “success

stories” in a way which counteracts discourses of homeless women as

victims and vulnerable.




Conclusions (2) Women who remained homeless described restricted agency

and extreme frustration with regards their continued

homelessness.

Over prolonged periods of homelessness, women’s

capability to act as independent agents was stifled as a

result of being entrenched in the homelessness service

system. This negatively impacts on women’s likelihood to

exit homelessness in the future.

Women’s narrative revealed how they engaged in a balancing

act between structure and agency in relation to satisfying

service providers versus their own desires.

Qualitative longitudinal data has the capacity to uncover a

more multidimensional understanding of the women’s lives

over time; it captures both ‘lives as talked about’ and ‘lives as

lived’ (McNaughton, 2006).




Thank you! References: Huey, L & Berndt, E. 2008) You’ve gotta learn how to play the game’: Homeless women’s use

of gender performance as a tool for preventing victimisation. Sociological Review, 56, 2, 177-

194.

May, J., Cloke, P. & Johnsen, S. (2007) Alternative cartographies of homelessness:

Rendering visible British women’s experiences of ‘visible’ homelessness. Gender, Place and

Culture, 14, 121-140.

McNaughton, C. (2006) Agency, structure and biography: Charting Transitions through

homelessness in late modernity. Auto/Biography, 14: 134-152.

Neale, B & Flowerdew, J. (2003) Time, texture and childhood: The contours of qualitative

longitudinal research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and

Practice, 6, 3, 189-99.

O’Sullivan, E. (2008) Pathways through homelessness: Theoretical constructions and policy

implications, in: Doherty, J. and Edgar, B. (eds.) ‘In my Caravan, I feel like Superman’:

Essays in Honour of Henk Meert, 1963-2006. Brussels: Feantsa.

Reeve, K., Casey, R., and Goudie, R. (2006) Homeless Women Still being Failed, Yet Striving

to Survive. London: Crisis.

Somerville, P. (1992) Homelessness and the Meaning of Home: Rooflessness or

Rootlessness? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 16, 4, 529-530.

Government & Nonprofit

Women’s Homeless Pathways: A Longitudinal Perspective