Jamie, Danika, Kai, Brooke, Navjeet, KEA BIS 343 Community Psychology Lauren Lichty June 8, 2015 Homeless in Seattle Final Paper What is homelessness? Oxford dictionary defines homeless as “a person without a home, and therefore typically living on the streets”. The homeless population includes many different kinds of people from many different walks of life and happens across the globe. This paper will mainly focus on the homeless in Seattle, but isn’t limited to just the city. Some research we found focused on the Northwest, West Coast, and some took the US as a whole. Homelessness ultimately impacts everyone in a community in different ways. It is important in community psychology to analyze all the different levels in which a homeless individual experiences community in order to find the best level of intervention necessary to help aid them in their life struggles. Without considering even one of the different levels, or only focusing on one level, an error of logic can occur. This means that an intervention tactic may come out flawed and applying it to a community may damage the structure, rather than help it. For the homeless individual there are many direct impacts of their homelessness. These are just a few: ● The individual level impacts one’s sense of well-being and how they fit into a community greatly. After losing one’s sense of independence that comes with losing one’s residency, it can difficult to get back into a community setting. ● On observing one’s microsystem, one’s family and friends change drastically. Without the immediate opportunity to be in a community with built in connections, interaction changes. Often relationships become for survival and are considered risky or unhealthy. ● Organizations often can become a lifeline for those who are homeless because they can offer help for free. An example would be of a church handing out free meals or clothing to those in need, or a shelter offering free housing and food. ● Locality and the resources at this level impact those who are homeless. If one lived in a quiet neighborhood before losing their home, the scenery of one’s new home on the streets of a city or town would be very different from their past suburban lifestyle. The openness of the street can feel unsafe and often is unsafe. Shelters may provide sanctuary, but they come at a cost; often the cost of privacy and being treated like a child. ● When someone is homeless, often that person loses immediate connection or access to their macrosystem. Often government aid isn’t accessible to the homeless due to no permanent address of residency which is required for some government programs and aid. It is important to consider all of the risk factors and protective factors associated with a problem, while also observing the different levels of analysis, to accurately develop an effective intervention model. Risk factors show the likelihood of how an event will negatively correlate to a circumstance, while protective factors show the positive correlation between an event and it’s solution. Here are some of the risk and protective factors when considering the topic of homelessness: Risk Factors Protective Factors Jamie, Danika, Kai, Brooke, Navjeet, KEA BIS 343 Community Psychology Lauren Lichty June 8, 2015 Sickness from exposure to elements Shelters, housing, tent city communities Drug use/overdose/health problems Needle exchange, rehab centers, halfway housing Survival sex/prostitution/sex trafficking *Health centers (planned parenthood STD/STI/HIV/pregnancy testing, condoms/contraception. hospitals), shelters Kidnapped and placed in sex trafficking Police aid, media (wanted posters, community search teams) Lack of resources/access to resources: Food, toiletries Food aid/food programs, church donation centers, tent city communities, soup kitchens, Salvation Army Physical abuse/Health problems Helplines, police aid, health centers STD/STI/Pregnancy/Health problems Education, contraceptives, *health centers Potential to drop out of education systems Stay in school and graduate, GED programs Violence Learn self defense, police aid Crime: Placement in juvenile jail/jail/prison Non discriminatory resources, family support Crime: Vandalism, Theft, Petty crime Non discriminatory resources, shelters, soup kitchens, clothing banks Tony Sparks (2010) Broke Not Broken: Rights, Privacy, and Homelessness in Seattle, Urban Geography, 31:6, 842-862, DOI: 10.2747/0272-3638.31.6.842 An article, Broke Not Broken, found that there have been many scholars who have closely examined the privatization of public space. This was done through neoliberal urban policies and planning which resulted in increasing the marginalized urban homelessness. The authors of this article learned through their research that homeless people want the right to be eradicated from public view. A common feeling from the homeless population is that being in public view stigmatizes them. It has made them feel that when in a public space, they are politicized as a visible embodiment in the form of structural injustice of capitalism and spatial injustice. Throughout the observations, the researchers found the visibility of the homeless functions as a signifier for social injustice, homelessness and capitalist development. The authors found that homeless are framed as differential citizens who are often denied material privacy protections of the First and Fourth amendments, simply based on their lack of property. Roy (2003, p. 475) They argue it is ultimately homeless persons’ lack of access to private property and its privileges that justifies the usurpations of privacy represented by the “spatial techniques of fortification, eviction, and surveillance that are used to manage the homeless.” This shows the Jamie, Danika, Kai, Brooke, Navjeet, KEA BIS 343 Community Psychology Lauren Lichty June 8, 2015 marginalization of these people and their right of being considered a proper citizen is being ignored. Although some have likened the heightened level of state intervention and management of the homeless to the treatment of refugees, stateless persons, and illegal immigrants, the legal citizenship status of the homeless is seldom in question (Arnold 2004). ● Homeless people do not want to be identified as homeless. ● Homelessness has signified one’s moral unfitness to exercise the right to bear citizenship· These people do not want to be stereotyped. They often are stereotyped as drunks, drug addicts, mentally ill, lazy, deviant, parasitic, diseased and incompetent in the public eye. ● They are treated “less-than-human” because they lack access to a “fixed and legal residence.” ● They are treated like monitored children in shelters, having to be watched, signing in and out and being questioned profusely. SHARE/WHEEL shelters provide these homeless individuals the opportunity to function as active participatory citizens through their own expression and pursuit of their collective needs and desires. Ensign, J. (2004). Quality of Health Care: The Views of Homeless Youth. Health Services Research, 39(4p1), 695-708. DOI:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00253.x This article summarized an ethnography done in 2002 on homeless youth from both street and clinic settings in Seattle, Washington. The purpose of this research was to find what kind of health care would be most useful and effective for the homeless youth population. The ethnography was a series of in depth individual interviews, as well as focus groups with a sample of 47 homeless youth aged 12–23 years. “All interviews and focus groups were tape recorded, transcribed, and preliminarily coded, with final coding cross-checked and verified with a second researcher.” The findings were that homeless youth most often stated interpersonal aspects of health care and other resources as being important to them. “Physical aspects of care reported by the youth were health care sites separate from those for homeless adults, and sites that offered a choice of allopathic and complementary medicine.” This resulted in many positive outcomes, including: survival of homelessness, improvement of prevention and treatment for diseases, decrease in disease rates amongst homeless youth, and increased trust with adults and the wider community. As a result, homeless youth more likely to reach out for health care, instead of turning to things such as substance abuse or survival sex. This article was chosen because it integrated the community psychology models of research, collaboration, integration, and intervention really well. The research was done in collaboration with the homeless youth community, to hear and integrate their perspectives. This collaborative approach was taken in order to effectively reform health care systems available to homeless youth. Scholarly articles specifically on runaway youth were very difficult to find, even though large portion of homeless youth are runaways. Besides the select few in the 20-23 age range that were homeless for economic reasons such as lack of housing, jobs, etc. Jamie, Danika, Kai, Brooke, Navjeet, KEA BIS 343 Community Psychology Lauren Lichty June 8, 2015 In a federal estimate, Seattle is believed to have the fourth largest homeless population in the country, after Los Angeles, Las Vegas, and San Francisco. A large portion of that are youth or young adults. The number is approaching an estimated count of 1,000 just in King County. Experts believe that at least half are runaways, according to Komo. In a national estimate, it was projected that approximately 1.3million runaway youth live unsupervised, either in the streets or in “unstable housing” such as couchsurfing. Sadly, around 5000 unaccompanied youth die each year as a result of assault, illness, or suicide; states the National Council of State Legislatures (NCSL). According to the 2003 national study done by the NCSL, statistics show that 1/7 youth ages 10-18 will runaway and youth ages 12-17 are more at risk of being homeless than adults Despite the frequently stigmatized story surrounding homeless youth, runaway situations often has very little to do with the individual and has more to do with the intersectionalities of microsystems, organizations, localities, and/or macro systems surrounding that individual. The top 3 reasons for running away are: ● Family problems which include (46%) physical abuse, (38%) emotional abuse, (17%) sexual abuse. There are sometimes just one kind of abuse, however often it is a combination of these types of abuse that are experienced by the runaway. ● Transitions from foster care and other public systems can leave individuals without residency and a lack of income to support themselves. Once released from foster care youth are on their own. Because of admission policies, youth are often not admitted to shelters, which are just for adults. This puts more youth on the streets than adults and denies youth access to resources. ● Economic or financial reasons such as difficulty obtaining and maintaining jobs, lack of affordable housing, and lack of healthcare or other benefits. In the May of 2015, KOMO News covered a story on runaway youth in the Seattle area. One of the interviews was with a 23-year-old young adult named Matthew. He had been a homeless runaway for four years. He told the reporters that when he was a kid, his mom, dad and brother had all died. Rather than turn to relatives, he turned to the streets, heroin and methadone. KOMO News asked him: "Matthew, what do you want people to know about the plight of young people on the streets?" To which Matthew answers: "It's not a game. It's real. Yeah. You look at us like it's our fault. You know, he must've done something for him to be out here, you know. But I didn't do anything wrong for me to be out here. It just happened." Analyzing this from a community psychology lens, these stories are important to keep in mind for integrating prevention and promotion strategies. These studies and statistics illustrate the dangers of “a single story” and how a single perspective of a condition can result in severely damaging a community. One example of this is the recent installment of “anti homeless spikes” placed under bridges or in other parts of the city that serve as resting spots for homeless individuals. The goal was to reduce the amount of litter around business buildings. In this case, the root cause of the issue was misunderstood. Instead of addressing issues that cause homelessness in the first place, such as lack of affordable housing, lack of jobs, or lack of other resources; the homeless population was identified as the direct cause of the problem instead, and spiked were installed to get rid of the “problem”. Manchester resident Cathy Urquhart, who started a petition against these spikes on Change.org, wrote: “These spikes are an affront to Jamie, Danika, Kai, Brooke, Navjeet, KEA BIS 343 Community Psychology Lauren Lichty June 8, 2015 humanity. They tell the homeless that they are not welcome, that they are a problem to be moved on.” Likewise, common social stigmas around runaways youth, such as “lazy”, “juvenile” or “lacking in discipline”, could result in making the runaway population feeling oppressed and misunderstood. This in turn could make them less likely to reach out to resources, and more likely to turn risky behaviors for the sake of survival. This second example is of a tertiary prevention method that was integrated in collaboration with the runaway youth population and resulted in more effective and positive change. The prevention began with a research ethnography done with homeless youth from both street and clinic settings in Seattle, Washington in 2002. The purpose of this research was to find what kind of health care would be most useful and effective for the homeless youth population, and was conducted as a series of individual interviews. The findings were that homeless youth most often stated interpersonal aspects of health care and other resources were important to them. According to Ensign, “Physical aspects of care reported by the youth were health care sites separate from those for homeless adults, and sites that offered a choice of allopathic and complementary medicine.” Outcomes of these types of health care were survival of homelessness, improvement of disease or decrease in disease rates amongst homeless youth, and increased trust with adults and with the wider community making those homeless youth more likely to reach out for health instead of turning to things such as substance abuse or survival sex (Ensign). "DESC - Shelter, Housing and Services for Homeless Adults in Seattle."DESC - Shelter, Housing and Services for Homeless Adults in Seattle. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 June 2015. In today’s generation we are seeing more and more homeless people out on the streets: has the numbers of homelessness increased or are they being forced into more concentrated spaces as they are being pushed out from others? More importantly, are they being helped with their needs? DESC “opening doors, ending homeless” organization has helped people since 1979. They help adults who are helpless living with behavioral health disorders and chronic homelessness. Everyday 2,000 homeless women and men look for the help of DESC but, help is only provided to those who are in the need of crucial assistance. Numerous times homeless people are refused and rejected for help because DESC is specifically designed for the homeless folks that are in fragile need and help. DESC has given many people the hopes of dreaming again, with the powerful help of providers. Their mission today is not only to offer shelters to the homeless but to end homelessness in the community we live in today. Their initial operating style was first-order change. They provided people who needed housing a space to lay their head down. They have adjusted their perspective to recognize the issue grows deeper than just a pillow for the night. This new perspective on the homeless conundrum shows potential for second order change by trying to connect the homeless that come through their doors with resources to get jobs, and affordable housing options. VAN LEEUWEN, J; et al. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual homeless youth: an eight-city public health perspective, Child Welfare. 85, 2, 151-170, Mar. 2006. ISSN: 0009-4021 With the count at approximately 1.6 million homeless youth in the United States each year, it’s important to take this topic with care. This article shows the specific needs that LGBTQ Jamie, Danika, Kai, Brooke, Navjeet, KEA BIS 343 Community Psychology Lauren Lichty June 8, 2015 homeless youth have compared to their non-gay homeless youth counterparts. The reasoning behind these extra needs is because in contrast to their non gay counterparts, LGBTQ homeless youth face a number of added problems including drug use, survival sex (prostitution), physical and sexual abuse, mental illness, increase in HIV risk, and increased suicide rates. All of these added problems lead to increased stress levels. By adding resources specific to their needs, they can then develop better coping methods to battle additional stress. Stress can be broken up into two different levels of stress: distal contextual factors, and distal personal factors. Distal contextual factors are those that, “include ongoing environmental conditions that may interact in various life domains” (Kloos, 255), while distal personal factors can be described as individual conditions that aren’t easy to see at first. Often they are problems that the individual doesn’t voluntarily control, such as specific attributes or genetics. What these both have in common is that they can both act as stressors or resources in an individual’s life. Homeless LGBTQ youth are experiencing a mix of distal contextual factors and distal personal factors that add up to a strong sense of stress in their lives. Their largest distal contextual factor they face would be their inability to find a home and societies lack of view of diversity among sexualities. Their toughest distal personal factor would be the fact that they identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or something else. The article concludes by saying that the additional needs of LGBTQ homeless youth should be observed and studied deeper by child welfare services to build additional resources or coping additional coping methods, specific to the needs of LGBTQ homeless youth. Unlike the homeless adult population, homeless youth are often discriminated against or withheld access to resources such as high-paying jobs with benefits, health insurance, savings, and other community resources (Zerger, 824-5). Lack of these fundamental resources leads homeless youth to engage in risky sexual behaviors in exchange for basic necessities like food, water, clothing, and shelter (Zerger, 825). These behaviors often times lead to physical and sexual violence and drug abuse (Zerger, 830). An estimated 70-97% of homeless youth reported abuse drug and/or alcohol (Zerger, 832). Depending on their age and the duration of their homelessness, that number increases (Zerger, 832-3). The population of homeless youth who are also struggling with addiction is both common and very high, however engagement in any type of drug or alcohol treatment has been very challenging (Zerger, 833). Part of the reason is because treatment is often times not sought or homeless teens leave treatment before having fully recovered (Zerger, 833). Studies show through organizational prevention programs, both homeless and runaway youth have reported reduced drug dependence (Zerger, 830). Homeless youth are often underrepresented in studies since the term homeless only encompasses those who are actively using services like shelters and clinics (Zerger, 826). Few of these studies address the “hidden” homeless population: those staying with friends or living in substandard housing (Zerger, 826). Homeless youth are also overrepresented (Zerger, 835). They are clumped into the same category as immigrants, racial and sexual minorities, physically and sexually abused victims, emancipated youth, and those who are “aging out” of foster care (Zerger, 835). Jamie, Danika, Kai, Brooke, Navjeet, KEA BIS 343 Community Psychology Lauren Lichty June 8, 2015 SOURCES Burnside, J. (2015, May 7). Stories of homeless teens: 'I didn't expect myself to be a runaway' Retrieved June 8, 2015, from http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Youthhomelessness-on-the-rise-in-Seattle-I-didnt-expect-myself-to-be-a-runaway-303008431.html Covert, B. (2015, February 18). Department Store Installs 'Anti-Homeless' Spikes. Retrieved June 8, 2015, from http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/02/18/3624021/selfridgeshomeless-spikes/ "DESC - Shelter, Housing and Services for Homeless Adults in Seattle."DESC - Shelter, Housing and Services for Homeless Adults in Seattle. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 June 2015. Ensign, J. (2004). Quality of Health Care: The Views of Homeless Youth. Health Services Research, 39(4p1), 695-708. DOI:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00253.x Homeless and Runaway Youth. (2013, October 1). Retrieved June 8, 2015, from http://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/homeless-and-runaway-youth.aspx Tony Sparks (2010) Broke Not Broken: Rights, Privacy, and Homelessness in Seattle, Urban Geography, 31:6, 842-862, DOI: 10.2747/0272-3638.31.6.842 VAN LEEUWEN, J; et al. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual homeless youth: an eight-city public health perspective, Child Welfare. 85, 2, 151-170, Mar. 2006. ISSN: 0009-4021 Zerger, S., Strehlow, A., Gundlapalli, A. (2008). Homeless Young Adults and Behavioral Health. American Behavioral Scientist, 51, 824-841.