Effect of Homelessness on People - Essay Example

Running Head: HOMELESSNESS Homelessness [Name Of Student] [Name Of Institution] HOMELESSNESS INTRODUCTION Homelessness is the situation and a communal category of some individuals who do not have any fixed housing which is generally due to the fact that they cannot bear the expenses of a fixed, comfortable and proper shelter place. Homelessness also caters those people whose main residence is in some homeless shelter which are institutions specially designed to provide a temporary abode. In this paper I will explain the term homelessness and describe its effect on the people who lack proper shelter. Next, I will try to analyse the impact that homelessness has on the lives of such individuals and also on other people related to them. After that I will identify relevant practices and strategies that can help resolve this issue. In the course of the paper I will also reflect on the effect on my personal values as a result of working with these service users. DEFINITION OF ‘HOMELESSNESS’ The word "homeless" or "a homeless person or a homeless individual" can be defined as: 1. Any person who does not possess a fixed and proper nighttime abode 2. Any person who has a main night-time house that is either: Governed publicly or is even a privately run shelter which is designed to foster temporary living places (examples: welfare hostels and hotels, mass shelters, and temporary housing for the mentally ill Any institution that gives a temporary accomodation for individuals that are destined to be institutionalized Any public & private place which is not designed for, or normally used as, a normal sleeping place for people (Bassuk, 2000, 41, Community care for homeless families: A program design manual). MAJOR REASONS AND CAUSES FOR HOMELESSNESS Studies show that the common reasons behind being homeless all around the world are almost the same. They are: 1. Lack of resources required for an affordable housing 2. Substance neglect and/or unavailablity of needed services 3. Mental illness and unavailablity of required services 4. Domestic/household violence cases 5. Poverty 6. Release from prison and attempts to re-enter community 7. Unavailablity of proper healthcare 8. Any natural catastrophe 9. Problems in dealing with relationships 10. Lack of proper awareness and/or education (Bassuk, 2000, 113-7, Why does family homelessness occur?) WHY IS HOMELESSNESS A PROBLEM AND FOR WHOM? Homelessness is a growing menace and it has adverse affects on the person himself, the ones related or linked with him and on the society in general as a whole. It affects a wide range of inhabitants. Since each individual has a different level of tolerance and resistance to accept adversity, this problem has different levels of impacts on different groups and ages of people. Some groups of citizens are more exposed to homelessness for the reason that they have smaller amount of rights; finicky needs or are less capable to survive by themselves (Bassuk, 2000, 1097-81, Why does family homelessness occur?). These include: 1. Young natives leaving their house for the first time 2. Aged people 3. People with children to take care of 4. People with bodily or intellectual health problems 5. People on reimbursement or low earnings 6. People parting from care 7. Ex-prisoners, shelter seekers and immigrants IMPACT OF HOMELESSNESS Homelessness has become a national tragedy that affects individuals and families throughout the United Kingdom, including increasing numbers of women and children. It goes without saying that it has a huge impact not just on the lives of the individuals but also to those who are associated with such people. Safe, adequate, and affordable housing is the most pressing need of homeless people. First, the event of becoming homeless—of losing one's home, neighbors, routines, accustomed social roles, and possibly even family members—may itself produce symptoms of psychological trauma in some victims (Bassuk, 2000, 54-9, Why does family homelessness occur?). Typically, the transition from being housed to being homeless lasts days, weeks, months, or even longer. Most people living on the street or in shelters have already spent time living with friends or relatives and may have experienced previous episodes of homelessness. The loss of stable shelter, whether sudden or gradual, may produce symptoms of psychological trauma. Second, among those who are not psychologically traumatized by becoming homeless, the ongoing condition of homelessness—living in shelters with such attendant stressors as the possible loss of safety, predictability, and control—may undermine and finally erode coping capabilities and precipitate symptoms of psychological trauma (Dohrenwend, 2004, 31, Stressful life events: Their nature and effects). Third, if becoming homeless and living in shelters fail to affect the mental strength of the person, homelessness may exacerbate symptoms of ill health among people who have histories of victimization. For these people, homelessness may constitute a formidable barrier to recovery. The homeless can be categorized as chronic, situational, or economic. The chronic homeless have adjusted to life on the streets and may resist assistance. Chronic homelessness is associated with substance abuse and mental illness (Dohrenwend, 2004, 45, Stressful life events: Their nature and effects). The economic homeless could obtain stable housing if they had more income or if more low-income housing were available. The situational homeless are going through a crisis, such as abuse, and need assistance in addition to, or instead of, more income. Homelessness is now less likely to be chronic and more likely to be economic or situational than in the days of skid row. Social Disaffiliation A key affect of homelessness is the felt and real experience of social disaffiliation. It is described as the human need for intimate and long-lasting attachments as a biological imperative that results from long-term evolutionary development (Dohrenwend, 2004, 66, Stressful life events: Their nature and effects). According to this theory, feelings of safety and connection are essential for children to attain the emotional security necessary to develop self-reliance, autonomy, and self-esteem. In adulthood, relationships with others continue to provide a fundamental sense of existential meaning and self-worth (Dohrenwend, 2004, 121, Stressful life events: Their nature and effects). Learned Helplessness People are said to experience learned helplessness, a phenomenon that is often accompanied by profound depression, when they lose the belief that their own actions can influence the course of their lives (Dohrenwend, 2004, 122). SOLUTION Though it appears as a problem that is not so easy to deal with, yet there are ways to cope up with this growing menace and ensure that every citizen gets a proper accommodation. Individual differences of course occur in who views the program as relevant, how helpful it is, and which aspects of the program are most critical for which individuals. Assessing the program with an eye toward its differential use and success for varied clients can help clarify some of the issues of person–environment fit (Coates, 2002, 87-9, New approaches to social problems: Applications of attribution theory). The adaptation principle, then, takes a broad perspective on the nature of the social context, the multiple levels of the environment that influence behavior, and the value of understanding individual behavior as culture and context bound. Furthermore, the person–environment fit notion endorses a “different strokes for different folks” approach to research and intervention (Coates, 2002,77, New approaches to social problems: Applications of attribution theory). With respect to intervention, two complementary approaches may be useful. The first focuses on the development of a continuum of service alternatives, thus creating options for people who define their needs differently. The development of consumer-operated self-help programs in which people who are or have been homeless work together to define needs, mobilize resources, and provide access to services, is one alternative, and the development of squatter communities is another. A second approach is to track the relative efficacy of programs for those in them. For example, and colleagues in the local community have developed an intensive case management program that helps facilitate a permanent escape from homelessness (Coates, 2002, 41, New approaches to social problems: Applications of attribution theory). With the help of knowledgeable advocates acting as case managers, many clients in this program have been able to obtain limited low-cost housing, job training slots, employment opportunities, and human service resources that are available in the community (Rivlin, 2001, 8, A new look at the homeless). Social Support Many homeless people experience actual disruption of their social bonds as well as feelings of distrust and existential separateness. Furthermore, without a support network on which to rely in times of crisis, homeless people may have more difficulty returning to permanent housing and are at higher risk for repeated episodes of homelessness (Rivlin, 2001, 3-7, A new look at the homeless). Helping homeless individuals and families reestablish their relationships and their links to the community will enable them to take full advantage of housing opportunities when these arise. As a first step, every attempt should be made to help homeless individuals and families enter shelters in their own communities (Coates, 2002, 50). The effort and expense of travel can impede the maintenance of social ties among homeless people who are removed from their neighborhoods. Physical distance may engender a sense of psychological distance that increases the sense of isolation. Shelter providers should encourage and help homeless residents maintain social networks, thereby building on strengths rather than focusing on deficits in many cases, homeless people will have stayed with relatives before becoming homeless, straining and sometimes even exhausting these ties (Melbourne, 2001, 11). Once the daily pressure of living together is lifted, social bonds often can be rejuvenated. Service providers must also help create a sense of interdependence and community within shelters. Staff should ensure that the shelter environment is physically safe and secure, because violence, substance abuse, and other disturbances in the shelter may inhibit occupants from establishing or maintaining social connections (Rivlin, 2001, 20, A new look at the homeless). Further, shelter staff can facilitate formal and informal opportunities for residents to share common experiences and develop a sense of mutuality and trust. Personal Control In addition to enhancing homeless people's sense of community, interventions should be designed to reduce helplessness and increase a sense of personal control. For example, shelter residents should have as much of the responsibility for organizing shelter life, as they are able and willing to take. Within reasonable limits, residents should negotiate shelter rules among themselves (Shinn, Knickman, & Weitzman, 2002, 14-8). These rules might govern visiting hours, eating and sleeping times, who may visit the shelter, how and to what extent shelter residents should cooperate in performing chores (such as meal preparation and child-care tasks), and even how shelter funds should be spent. To help shelter residents gain some control in the world outside the shelter, service providers should give residents as much information as possible about their entitlement to benefits (Bassuk, 2000, 150-8, General principles of family-oriented care: Working effectively with clients). Shelter staff, moreover, should collaborate with residents to develop a feasible set of goals, often called a service plan, based on clients' needs and wishes and on available resources. Such a plan should include a reasonable strategy for obtaining permanent housing. It is also noted that the sense of futility and despair that homeless people experience when unreasonable bureaucracies impose their goals and daily activities. For example, they may spend their days searching for an affordable apartment that they know does not exist, driven by the fear that their benefits will be cut if they do not try. Impossible requirements such as these should be eradicated and replaced by goals generated by the clients that are consistent with available services and resources (Shinn, Knickman, & Weitzman, 2002, 5). Finally, to ensure that available resources actually reach the intended clients, case management should be made available to all shelter residents who may be vulnerable to falling through the cracks of an increasingly complex and fragmented service delivery system. These case managers should be ready to assume a variety of roles including “that of service broker, counselor, ombudsman, and advocate CONCLUSION If the above-mentioned strategies are followed, it will surely improve the condition of homeless people, thereby improving life quality not only for them, but for the society as a whole too. REFERENCES Bassuk, E. L. (2000). General principles of family-oriented care: Working effectively with clients. In E. L.Bassuk, R. W.Carman, & L. F.Weinreb (Eds.), Community care for homeless families: A program design manual (pp. 25–31). Washington, DC: Interagency Council on the Homeless. Bassuk, E. L., & Rosenberg, L. (2000). Psychosocial characteristics of homeless children and children with homes. Pediatrics, 85, 257–261. Bassuk, E. L., & Rosenberg, L. (2003). Why does family homelessness occur? A case control study. American Journal of Public Health, 78, 1097–1101. Bassuk, E. L., Carman, R. W., & Weinreb, L. F. (2000). Community care for homeless families: A program design manual. Washington, DC: Interagency Council on the Homeless. Bassuk, E. L., Rubin, L., & Lauriat, A. (2006). Characteristics of sheltered homeless families. American Journal of Public Health, 76, 1097–1101. Coates, D., Wortman, C. B., & Abbey, A. (2002). Reactions to victims. In I. H.Frieze, D.Bar-Tal, & J. S.Carroll (Eds.), New approaches to social problems: Applications of attribution theory (pp. 21–52). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. D'Ercole, A., & Struening, E. (2000). Victimization among homeless women: Implications for service delivery. Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 141–152. Dohrenwend, B. P., & Dohrenwend, B. S. (2004). Stressful life events: Their nature and effects. New York: Wiley. Farr, R. P., Koegel, P., & Burnam, A. (2006). A study of homelessness and mental illness in the Skid Row Area of Los Angeles. Los Angeles: County Department of Mental Health. Garber, D. S., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2000). Human helplessness. New York: Academic Press. Institute of Medicine. (2003). Homelessness, health, and human needs. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Janoff-Bulman, R., & Frieze, I. H. (2003). A theoretical perspective for understanding reactions to victimization. Journal of Social Issues, 39(2), 1–17. Milburn, N., & D'Ercole, A. (2001). Homeless women: Moving toward a comprehensive model. American Psychologist, 46, 1161–1169. Molnar, J. (2002, August). A developmental profile of children and families in poverty.Paper presented at the 97th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA. Rivlin, L. G. (2001, Spring). A new look at the homeless. Social Policy. pp. 3–10. Rossi, P. H. (2000). The old homeless and the new homelessness in historical perspective. American Psychologist, 45, 954–959. Rossi, P. H., Wright, J. D., Fisher, G. A., & Willis, G. (2007). The urban homeless: Estimating composition and size. Science, 235, 1336–1341. Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Helplessness: On depression, development and death. San Francisco: Freeman. Shinn, M., Knickman, J., & Weitzman, B. (2002, August). Social relationships and vulnerability to becoming homeless among poor families.Paper presented at the 97th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA. U.S. Conference of Mayors. (2007). Status report on homeless families in America's cities: A 29-city survey. Washington, DC: Author. Walker, L. E. (2003). Battered women and learned helplessness. Victimology, 2, 525–534. Wilson, J. P., Smith, W. K., & Johnson, S. K. (2005). A comparative analysis of PTSD among various survivor groups. In C. R.Figley (Ed.), Trauma and its wake: The study and treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (pp. 142–172). New York: Brunner-Mazel. Wood, D., Valdez, B., Hayashi, T., & Shen, A. (2000). Homeless and housed families in Los Angeles: A study comparing demographic, economic, and family function characteristics. American Journal of Public Health, 80, 1049–1052. Read More