TEE EXPERIENCES OF HOMELESS FAMILIES IN METROPOLITAN TORONTO IN 1997

DANIEL A. ANSTETT

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies in partial fuifilment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK

Graduate Program in Social Work

York University Toronto, Ontario

September 1997

141

ofCaad,

Bibliothèque nationale du Canada

Acquisitions and Bibliographie Sentices

Acquisitions et services bibliographiques

395 Wellington Street ûttawa ON K1A ON4 Canada

395. me Wellington ûtîawaON K1AON4

National Library

Canada

The author has granted a nonexclusive licence allowing the National Library of Canada to reproduce, loan, disûiiute or sell copies of this thesis in microform, paper or electronic formats.

L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive permettant à la Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou vendre des copies de cette thèse sous la fome de microfiche/nlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.

The author retains ownership of the copyright in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantial emacts f?om it may be printed or otherwise reproduced without the author's permission.

L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur qui protege cette thèse. Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement reproduits sans son autorisation.

THE EXPERIENCES OF HOMELESS FAMILIES IN METROPOLITAN TORONTO iN 1997 by

DANIEL ANTHONY ANSTETT a thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of York University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK

Permission has been granted to the LIBRARY OF YORK UNIVERSIN to tend or seIl copies of this thesis, to the NATIONAL LIBRARY OF CANADA to microfilm this thesis and to lend or sel1 copies of the film, and to UNIVERSITY MlCROflLMS to publish an abstract of this thesis. The author resewes other publication rights. and neither the thesis nor extensive extracts from it may be printed or othewise reproduced without the author's written permission.

This study represenfs the work of many people. First, I want to Say thanks to al1 participants who gave so wilhgly of tbek time and spka h i r i iiie lieut abuui th51 experiences. 1 am indebted to the staff of both shelters for their support, kindness, and

helpfil reflections. A special thank you also goes to Sharon Bloorne and Mary Catherine Hyatt who typed the endless transcripts and to Virginia Smith for her helpful critique of the text.

Dr. Brigitte Kitchen, my thesis supewisor is to be recognized for her support for this project fiom the beginning and her assistance at eves, stage. Thanks also to Dr. Amy Rossiter, Dr. Ken MofTat and Dr. Esther Rider who offered helpful cnticism and suppon

on my thesis cornmittee. Also, 1 want to thank al1 the clients and staff 1 have worked with over the years at Fred Victor Centre, the Quaker Cornmittee for Refugees, the Refugee Information Centre and Family Residence. This work is really a compilation of these

yean of experience and growth with each of you.

Finally, 1dedicate this work to my wife Sandra and son Daniel. This work became a family project for the pst two yean and it would not have been possible to complete without you.

v TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

ABSTRACT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

CHAPTER IV

FllWINGS supports

Housiog Finances Children Shelter Life

Meetings With Staff

CHAPTER V

ANALYSIS

CHAPTER VI

PROPOSALS FOR POLlCY AND PRACTICE

CHAPTER VI1

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

i

This study investigates the lives of homeless families. The work focuses on a group of five sole support rnothers and their children who are currently residing in family shelters

in Metroplitan Toronto. Toronto has the largest population of homeless families in

Canada-

HomeIessness among families in Toronto is a recent phenornenon and the causes are varied with numbers increasing substantially of late. Little information on this population

is available. The homeless family remains hidden in shelters. Govemment response to this group has been limited to the provision of short term emergency shelter. Currently families are staying longer in the syaem and have fewer options to get back into the community. The lack of affordable housing, low vacancy rates, and more food bank

usage indicate current welfare budgets are inadequate to meet basic needs. Women and youths are particularly vulnerable to homelessness.

The study looks at supports, housing concerns, financial issues, children and daily life in the shelter as described by five sole support rnothers. These aspects have been analysed

based on shelter programs and goverment income maintenance and housing prograrns. While the study is only a beginning, it is hoped that this is a fim step and that more research will be cam'ed out particularly with regard to developing standards and housing policies to assist homeless families and significantly reduce the homeless population.

VII Current policies are seen to be lacking and may well prove to be costly as there has been and will continue to be an increase in the numbea and the problems faced by these families.

While the sample itself is too small to make the assumption that al1 shelter residents would have similar problems, the detailed descriptions of these families provide us with

a snap shot of who is in the shelter system and what their problems are. Data is also supported by meetings and discussion with staff and the author's experiences of working with this population.

The study concludes with a critique of governments that are currently moving away from

funding social programs by explaining the potential problems created by the cuts. Rather than cutting assistance to the most vulnerable memben of our community, it is argued that there needs to be a long term cornmitment to low incorne and homeless families for

the provision of safe, affordable housing by al1 levels of government. This would require

an increase in social assistance rates and the provision of more social housing. Anything less could result in chronic poverty and homelessness that will prove damaging to the health and welfare of our community.

This work studies the experiences of horneless families. Sole support mothers living in shelten in Metroplitan Toronto were intewiewed and their words form the basis of the study. The shidy also includes rny experiences and those of shelter staff in working with

this population.

The main areas that arose from these interviews were: family supports; housing concerns; financial issues; children; and shelter life. It was found that homelessness itself is an important social dilemma given the barriers faced by the families studied.

The concept of homelessness translates concretely into living in alienation and isolation on the fnnge of society. It is the loss of stability and control over one's life. It is a bottomless pit, a whirlpool that takes families M e r down, making the effort to get out harder each day. When a person is homeless it becomes problematic to leave an address for employment, needed services, or fnends. The individual becomes increasingly isolated from support networks essential to daily living. Baurnan and Grigsby describe the process starkly : "People who become homeless soon loose confidence...they shifi

fiom the higher fmct ioning behmiozirs associcrted with recently dislocated people to

more chronic pattern of social isolates. "

2 The reasons for homelessness are varied and include social, economic, political, and physical factors. The phenomenon has proven to be ''resilie~despzte perioctr of economic and social refonn and growth (Oberlander and Fallick 1987). Canadian "

research since 1987 lists the main causes as unemployment and underemployment, poverty, lack of affordable housing, divorce and separation, inadequacies and inequities

in the provision of social welfare, deinstitutionalisation (of psychiatrie facilities), and displacement caused by urban renewal. (Oberlander and Fallick 1987) The homeless have traditionally been seen as single people; however, recently there has been a growing

number of homeless families with children. Homeless families are now the largest group using homeless shelters in Metropditan Toronto (Metro Hostels 1997)but the public's view of the homeless remains that they are single alcoholic males suffering from

psychiatnc disorders. In fact there were more children than single males in Toronto shelters in 1995 (Metro Hostels 1995).

Homeless families are at the bottom of our social safety net. Understanding more about what they face can help us develop an analysis of what is wrong with current policies and

what needs to be changed to prevent other families from entering a state of permanent homelessness and instability.

The Political Context;

Canadian political leaders are rapidly moving us into the new global economy where there is a massive movement of power nom individual states to transnational corporations. Tony Clarke (1997) refers to the "transnational corporate agenda " that no longer makes it possible for nations to intervene in the marketplace on behalf of the public good. Rights to food, clothing, shelter, health care, education, social equality, and public services are being sacrificed for the sake of lower corporate taxes and lower wages that are incentives for international capital.

Canada's political terrain and resulting social and economic landscape were altered radically by the bilateral fiee trade agreement with the United States in 1989, and later by the trilateral agreement with Mexico and the United States in 1994. These agreements

enshrined the rights and fieedorns of transnational corporations in Canada. This led the neo-conservative govemment of Brian Mulroney to retreat in its support for social programs through decisions such as the replacement of the universal family allowance with a income-tested child benefit. The current Jean Chretien government has continued

on this path by destroying the base of our social and income support programs, the

Canada Assistance Plan (CAP), in the spring 1996 budget. The CAP included the federaYprovincia1cost sharing arrangement for social assistance. Shelters were cost

shared under CAP. CAP'S replacement, the Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST), provides block fûnding for health, education, and social services. It reduced iransfer

4

amounts to Ontario by $1 billion in the past fiscal year and by 63 billion in the current

fiscal year (Metro Comrnunity SeMces 1996). Social sewices may suffer the most in this arrangement as it is not a universal program which produces less acceptability and only the residency requirement for social seMces remains in the CHST.

The neo-conservative agenda evident federally has now taken hold in the province of Ontario. With influences from the Reform Party, the new right in the US,and business interests, the Ontario govemment wants a r e m to fiee market capitalism, with little or

no state intervention in the economy. The notion of the collective good is replaced by individualism and the pnvatization of state services. Ontario is cutting back on its funding for social programs using the argument that govemment is too big, debt ndden, and inefficient. Downsizing or disrnantling entire programs is picnired as the only

solution. Kitchen (1997) refers to this social agenda as "azming to snrttle the effect socid program huve on income distribuîion."

The very first group in our community imrnediately affected by this downsizing agenda has been people on social assistance, who had their benefits cut by 2 1.6 percent four months after the 1995 election which brought the Conservatives to power. These people

are the most vulnerable because they lack a political voice, and are often blamed by consematives for o w economic malaise.

5

Overall cuts to the Ontano budget for the p s t two years total $8.2 billion. In a repori

card one year after the social assistance culs, the Ontario Social S a f i Neîwork (1996) concluded tbat "thosemost affected @ythe CULS) are children. single mothers andpeople w irh disabilities: there is a hollsing crisis, men~alund physicd health of poor people hm

deched; community supports are being decimated; and Ontario zsfacing a hunger epidemic." A series of detailed impact reports stating the amounts and explaining the

human costs of cuts to communîty agencies in Waterloo County have illustrated how the basic fabric of our communities has been altered. (Social Planning Council of Kitchenery the City of Toronto, Metro Waterloo 1995) In Metroplitan Toronto, a joint s ~ d by

Toronto, and the Social Planning Council(1996)received responses fiom 629 out of 1,453 cornmunity agencies. They found 162 programs had already been cancelled during 1995, and 106 programs faced cancellation in 1996. A further 33 1 programs were under

review. In a survey of retailen in Parkàale, an area where 54 percent of residents live

below the poverty line, half the businesses experienced a decline in business volume and 64 percent of businesses were womed about the coming year. (O'Connel 1996) A

subsequent survey of Parkdale residents found that 56 percent of households purchase fewer goods and services, and 73 percent stated they had to buy less food and clothing (O'Connel 1997). The cuts have weakened or destroyed support senices and have drained money out of the Ontario economy by weakening the spending power of low incorne consumers.

6

In January 1997 the province announced it would download social housing, social assistance, hostels, child m e , and long-term care ont0 municipaIities; in return the province would take over funding for education. Metropolitan Toronto would be left with a shorâall of $531 million not including the upgrading of public housing and long term

care facilities, highway maintenance or transit subsidies (Metropolitan Toronto 1997). Cntics objected stating municipalities should not be responsible for services that are dnven by the economy. With considerable modifications to the above proposal, including the revenal of eduction and social services funding, Metropolitan Toronto will still be

faced with a shortfall of $350 million. Such a budget shortage will lead to more cuts in

areas such as income maintenance and housing programs for low income people. ïhese decisions will be forced upon municipal govemments that cannot legally go into debt. These cuts are required to implement provincial tax reductions that largely benefit higher income earners. Given this agenda and continued high unemployment, more and more Ontario residents will end up in a cycle of poverty and the overall quality of life will decline.

Bistorv of Shelters In Toronto:

The first shelters evolved frorn the work of charitable organizations and church groups in

the latter half of the nineteenth century. At a 1886 conference on state charities in the U.S., the causes of homelessness listed included "drinking, fack of employment. poverty. dishonesiy, strzkes, fciness, ignorance. fack of home training, and force of hab d" (Blau

7

1992). Similar attitudes existed in Canada.In Toronto, the United Church with its Fred

Victor Mission and the Salvation A m y with its men's shelter began the first hoaels and rehabilitative classes, with the specific goals of reforming the moral behaviours of the immigrants and the poor. Fred Victor Mission taught the homeless to be morally upright, to tum away fiom sinful ways, and to becorne in effect like the virtuous middle and upper classes who were working to morally rehabilitate them.

In the 1930s the Seaton House hostel for single men nui by the city was opened in response to homelessness caused by the depression. In the 1950s the three above mentioned hostels al1 built new buildings in order to assist retumed World War II veterans and others. It is significant that, witb the exception of Seaton H o w , the hostels were al1 run by charitable organizations, and this trend has continued to the present. Assistance to the homeless has traditionally been seen as an act of chanty, not a government responsibility, because these people have been seen as having fallen below the nom of social acceptability and are labelled as outcasts. Their experiences and realities are hidden and ignored

Shelters for families and youths fint supplemented those for single men in the late 1960s and early 1970s. A major factor in beginning these shelters was migration to Toronto of

people from economically depressed regions of Canada, most notably the Atlantic provinces. In 1968, Metro Council took over the World War 1 Veterans Residence at 674

Dundas St. W. and started the first shelter for families. Later, single parent mother led

8

families moved to Robertson House on Sherbourne Street. D u h g this same period, shelten for abused women were established due to an increasing awareness of violence in families. Then when the recession hit in the early 1980s there was a rapid expansion of the homeless population that began in 1981 and continued throughout the 1980's.

The hostel system has never recovered from this period. In the mid-1980~~ especially in 1987, there was a huge entry of refugee claimants that caused the system to operate at

1O3 percent of capacity! Federal immigration legislation in 1989 and in 1991 lessened this flow, but the recession, high unemploymern and the steep increase in welfare

recipients during the late 1980s have continued to put heavy dernands on the system. Most shelters have had to operate at capacity. The average shelter population in 1992 was 2-48 1. It rose to 2,954 in 1994, and it is now standing at 3,407. (Metro Hostel

Services 1995 and Metro Hostel Services 1997). One cm see a trend toward greater

reliance on the system with increases occumng after the October 1995 changes to Ontario's social assistance rates. John Jagt, director of Metro Hostel Services, said this about the numbers in 1997: "the length of stayfor al2family categories is increasing and workers are concerned about the adverse efects this had on the chddren " (Metro Hostel SeMces 1997).

9 e Poteatial Growth of a New U a d e r c l s

Growth of the shelter system fiom the 1980s to the present has coincided with the rise of

the individualistic, go-it-on-your-own neo-conservative agenda Kitchen (1995) refers to

the decade of the 1980's as "creating a sense of family isolation...replacing welfare state Ii&eralism with the neoconservative notion of selfish individualism." The expansion of the shelter system in the U.S. during the 1980s can be compared to the proliferation of

poorhouses in the early nineteenth centwy. Culhane (1993) States that "..hoth coincided w irh controczions in 'outdoor relieJ ' or cash assistance to the unemployed and indigent.

and both system were promoted. »1part, ar refonns offering 'indoor relief ro society 's oufcasts." We may be

witnessing the formation of a new underclass, one that may well

be with us for generations if trends continue. Just as Elizabethan poor houses failed to meet their rehabilitation goals because most of their inmates were poor through no fault of their own, we rnay also fail because our measures represent short term solutions. Such

failures may produce unimaginable human suffering that could make a long-term impact upon our community.

omeless Policy;

Policy to assist homeless families in Ontario has never been clearly formulated. It is

usually a reflex response to a variety of different kinds of crises. There is always an underlying assumption in the policy response that the lack of housing, and consequently,

10

the state of homelessness are temporary situations only. The notion of the short-tem solution in shelters policy is typical and is mentioned in many studies. (Gulati 1990; e are hoping the shelter stay is of short dwation, data Rossi 1995). While s e ~ c providers

from Metro Hostels Senices indicates that shelter stays are increasingly longer (Metro Hostel Services 1995). Recent wncems indicate thai homeless families are moving fiom one shelter to the next, or are moving out temporarily only to return.

Legislation regarding the homeless consists of a few lines in the General Welfare Assistance Act that refer to a hostel or shelter as a place where board or lodging and personal needs will be covered by welfare (GWA Act 1985). No legislation that specifically mentions the homeless or the rights or entitlements of a homeless perçons or families exist. Shelters are defined in Metroplitan Toronto as "(p[cces-. ..fo provide emergency shelter and assistance to homeless individuals andfamilies on a shorl-term basis. until altemafive arrangements can be made for their hotsing or treatment need"

(Metro Hostel SeMces 1995).

The composition of shelter populations provides a glimpse of what is going wrong in our community and uncovers areas of deficiency in our social prograrns. Along with food

banks, dropins, and clothing depots, shelters represent programs of 1 s t resort. Shelten help the most wlnerable families in our cornrnunity. It has been found that "shelterstaff are ofien the fitst human service workers to idenrrfy and address the diverse needs of homelessfarnilies and children" (Rossi and Weinreb 1995). Shelters then are the places

Il

where people are sent or end up when there are no other programs or places left to assist

them. With the current downsizing of govenment sewices and entire programs, shelter providers are concemed that shelters may end up k i n g used by spending conscious officiais as inexpensive spaces to warehouse vulnerable penons, while the underlying causes of homelessness are ignored. This occurred in the U.S. after the restmcturing of

social policy under Ronald Reagan. It was found that "the rise in homelessness and the radical restmctming of the welfBe state thnt began with the Reagan Revolution is no coincidence..." (Gulati 1992).

Until attention was drawn to homelessness in Toronto in the winter of 1995-1 996 by a municipal task force, homelessness had never been a major public issue. Attention is begiming to grow as increased assistance to the homeless is coming to be seen as an option as larger numben of poor people becorne homeless because of cuts to social programs. Many advocates for low income people are concemed that those currently on social assistance will evenhially use up al1 their resources and will no longer be able to maintain an apartment and provide food for their children (L.Lalond 1997). Advocates also fear increases in child abuse and neglect, and farnily violence may also result. A recent report on Metroplitan Toronto did indicate increases in child abuse rates. (K-W Record 1997)

Jiomeless Families in Toronto;

This study look at the experiences of homeless fmilies in Metropolitan Toronto in 1997 from theû own perspective. It explores their current situations in the areas of social

support, income, housing, the impact on chiidren and daily shelter life. It then offers suggestions for reform based on this information, on meetings with staff and on experiences working with this population. The work was conducted at two Toronto family shelters that house primarily sole support rnothers. The shelten were mediumsized and had varied resident populations. One shelter was a non-profit; the other was run by the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto. An earlier pilot study of mine has also

helped in the development of this study.

Homelessness among families in Toronto is a recent phenomenon and its causes have becorne diverse, especially with numben increasing substantially of late. Little

information on this population is available in Toronto or in Canada The homeless family

remains invisible. Policy to assist this group has k e n limited to the provision of shortterm emergency shelter. Currently families are staying longer in shelten and have fewer options to get back into the community. The lack of affordable housing, low vacancy rates, and more food bank usage suggest cunent welfare budgets are inadequate to meet basic needs. Such increases in poverty will result in greater homelessness. Over the long terni, homelessness can bring despair and helplessness that destabilizes families.

Recent midies in Toronto have shown significant increases in evictions during the p e n d after the October 1995 social assistance cuts ( Metropolitan Toronto 1996). As evictions

continue and family resources and supports diminish, more families rnay have to enter shelters. The following list represents the questions 1asked myself What lead to their homelessness? What becomes of them after entering shelters? Do they get out of the shelter system? How are they able to cope as a family living in an institution? What support have they received fiom the shelter, family, agencies, and fiiends? What do they do in the shelter? Are they getting the assistance they need? What are the obstacles they face? How are their children coping? How is their physicaVmenta1 health? What was life like for them before and after the cuts to social assistance? What have been their experiences with their former apartment units and in their current apartment searches? These and other questions fom the basis of my study as I attempt to get an understanding

of the recent past and of the current issues and concems of homeless families.

Pousing in Toronto;

There is an obvious, major link between homelessness and the lack of affordable housing. Dolbeare, Leonard, and Lazere (1989) confirm that this is one of the primary reasons for the increasing number of homeless people. A 1983 study on homelessness in Metropolitan Toronto found that 52 percent of hostel residents came directly h m their

14

own housing units "which they hod Iost due io evicriom, reril increases md unemployment" (Metropolitan Toronto 1983).

Since the election of the Mike Hams government in Ontario, the housing situation has become more dificuIt. High rental rates, the expected removal of rent controls, the low

vacancy rate of -8 percent in Toronto (CMHC 1996), the elimination of fiinding for subsidized housing, and the state of disrepair of many aging apartment buildings in the city will al1 result in increased hardships.

About 40 percent of Ontario's private rental stock is occupied by people on welfare. (Social Planning Council of Metropolitan Toronto 1996). These rents have not been lowered despite welfare reductions. It is obvious that the rent must now corne out of the

food portion of the welfare payment, an amount which has also dropped! Shouid a farnily decide to move into cheaper accommodation, the change will be dificult. It has been

estirnated that only 2.6 percent of apamnents suitable for a single parent with one child

are available in Toronto at the cunent welfare shelter rates. ( Social Planning Cowicil of Metropolitan Toronto 1996).

The imminent removal of rent controls combined with the low vacancy rate, wiiiresult in substantial rent increases. Decreases in shelter payments for welfare recipients may put rents completely out of reach for those on social assistance. Poor farnilies will be forced into illegal fire traps, into overcrowded sharing arrangements, into migration fiom

15

Toronto, or into shelten. There will be increased harassrnent and control by landlords, decreased physical and mental hedth, and M e r isolation for families.

The hostels division of Metro Cornmunity SeMces, which cwrdinates and finances

Metro shelters, found that single parent mothers with children in shelten on the twelfth of November 1995 had shown an increase of fi@-three percent since the previous year,

compared to an increase of twenty seven percent in two parent families (Metro Hostel

Services 1995). Why was there such a large increase for single mothers with children? No doubt the ferninization of poverty, the continued and growing economic disadvantage of single parent female led fmilies as compared to other families provides a partial

explanation.

With a significant increase of the divorce rate in Canada to one in three mariages, the

number of single parents has increased substantially. Women represent eighty-five percent of single parents, and over half of these families live in poverty. Sixty-five percent of women are renten compared with 29% of men. Single mothers spend, on average, sixty-five percent of their income on rent (Statistics Canada 1990).

There is an escalating attack against women by the Mike Harris government as single mothen Family Benefits incomes are reduced, day care is cut back, pay equity legislation

16

is eliminated, and second stage housing grants are cut back. The previously mentioned downioading to municipalities will m h e r cut existing programs. Cutbacks to social

programs, particillady incorne maintenance programs, seMces offered by comrnunity agencies, and subsidized housing mean that women who are already rnarginalized are becoming more vulnerable to homelessness (McClain and Doyle 1983).

Ottier Policv Concerns:

Longer lengths of stay in the shelter system rnay eventually make the system a n d to a halt. Longer stays cause the total shelter population to skyrocket. This iricrease may force shelten to push people through the system and develop more restrictive admission critena. As a shelter worker 1 am starting to wonder and worry about what homeless

people can do and what the shelters can do to resolve matters. The incredible stress on such vulnerable persons is a recipe for disaster. hcreased pressures on staff witl also

h m the system.

Because of the prevalence of homelessness in the U.S., there has been a great deal of literature produced there. Studies and information about the situation in the U.S.can give

us a glimpse of what life for homeless fmilies rnay become in Ontario. U.S. homeless families have been found to be young, with Iimited education, female led, with young children, normally one pre-schooler and one older child. The majority were women of

colour (Johnston 1989). McChesney (1995) developed a conceptual mode1 of risk factors, and concluded that poverty increased with "a visible minority family, a single fende and a young age asfarnily hend. '"

Dai1 (1990) found that homelessness was precipitated by a series of crisis and the mon significant crisis for homeless women was that a relationship with a man had dissolved due to physical violence. Mills and Ota (1989) found that domestic violence c a w d homelessness in 21.8% cases and Bassuk and Rosenburg (1988) concluded that homeless mothers were twice as likely to be Mctimized than low income housed counterparts. Victimization as a chilcl, mental health issues, dnig abuse were listed as other causes while immediate causes included persona1 crisis, evictions, loss of employment, a shortage of affordable housing and transience (Dail IWO).

Given social assistance cuts and the high cost of housing in Toronto, the duration and frequency of homeless episodes may incremise. This would contrast with the solution

18

proposed by Huttman and Redmond (1992), who suggested the need for both quick action and suficient supports. They discovered the ability to assist farnilies to move promptiy into permanent housing lessens the negative impact of a stay in a shelter. This makes sense, but it is important also to emphasize the obvious link between homelessness and the lack of affordable housing. In a comparative study of fernale headed families in a family shelter, it was found that the shorter the period of homelessness, the less severe the consequences while the longer experience had a more severe impact (Molnar and Klein 1990; McChesney 1990). Since there may be longer shelter stays in Ontario because of high rents and low assistance levels, it will be important to know the effects of prolonged homelessness on families. Such transience

has been proven to create instability in U.S.farnilies as children are constantly forced to change schools and neighbourhoods (Berck 1992). Rocha et al. (1996) found that U.S. families with one child were 1.5 times more likely to find housing than farnilies with three children, and shelter residents were five times more likely to find housing in 1983 than in 1992.

Many homeless mothers in shelters have k e n abused or have suffered other major disruptions early in their lives. Daly (1990) listed these disruptions as k i n g abuse, alcoholism, the death of a parent, or exposure to fiequent violence. Such disruptions c m

have a lifelong impact and may be a factor in recidivism rates.

19 Farnilies in shelters have been categorized as chronically homeless (those homeless more

than one year), episodically homeless (those who alternate arnong fhends' homes, shelters, and short-tenn interludes in private housing), and the situationally homeless (those homeless for the first time) (Ziefort and Staunch-Brown 1989). Toronto shelters

are increasingly seeing more high need episodically and chronically homeless people. Such categories are helpful in looking at homeless people both to understand them better and to develop programs which meet their varied needs and distinctive needs. Too often,

the homeless population is considered a homogenous group, when in fact there are quite varied and distinctive subgroups.

Social support lessens the loneliness, isolation, and powerlessness experienced in homelessness. Through support networks,homeless famiiies are able to begin to reconstmct their lives. These networks, which traditionally consisted of extended families are now ofien replaced by the community as a whole. Too ofien in the cases of homeless families, such networks are fiagmented and evenhially disintegrate. They then feef disconnected-

There is a great deal of research confïrmingthe need for support networks that act as stress mediators, and mitigating factors in coping with dificult life events. Social support networks produce a "buffering effect" (Gottlieb 1983) which absorbs the impact

20 of stress-producing contingencies. Stack (1974), in a study of low inwme wornen's networks, referred to them as women's capital that buttresses them against poverty and homelessness. Gottlieb (1983) noted "thepresence ofsignificant interaction berneen sttess and support...and high-stressed groups Zacking support in the comrnunity are at greatest risk of dadjustment and or illness. " Constant moves make support networks

often difficult if not impossible to sunain. In a study of fnendships and support networks among homeless families, it was found that there was "a progressive detachment of personfrom comrnunity " as a result of hornelessness (Ziefon and Staunch-Brown 1989).

Members of homeless families were likely to "experienceserious p e r s o ~problems l in the context of shrznkhgf m a l and informal support networh..." in the U.S., Bassuk

(1993) found entire support networks that had taken years to constnict had eroded

Ziesemer, Marcow, and Marwell(1994)suggested that social workers should look first

at support networks. They assert that "workersshould assess oparent 51 support network, strengrhen existing nctworks, offer opportunitzes to build new networks, andprovide f o n d support networh." They also stressai that helping children to fom networks

among siblings, peers, adults, and school system staff reduces the stress they experience because of poverty.

The notion of support and support networks provide us with a framework to understand better the needs and coping mechanisrns of homeless families. Still homeless fmilies

21 will need some stability and resources to be able to find, wnstnict, and maintain such

networks.

Incorne is obviously a major factor that can determine homelessness. Phillips et al. (1988) studied goal attainment in households living in a family shelter for ninety days or

more. They found progress was made in child care and individual adjustment and supports in seventy-one percent of families. In areas such as income and housing,

however, there was minimal or no progress. This failure points to the fact that larger social issues have to be resolved.

The cause of homelessness is termed the "affordability gap" in research that studies the gap behveen incomes and rents @olbeare 1992). Policy changes in income support prograrns in U.S. federal and state systems have pushed high risk populations into homelessness Ofagen 1987). Various studies showed that welfare cutbacks resulted in

the long-tenn problem of a larger homeless population (Halter 1987; Gulati 1992).

Literature on the impact of provincial social assistance cuts is begiming to emerge. One report from the Metro Advisory Cornmittee on Homeless and Socially Isolated Pesons

described an "evictions crisis" when evictions increased by 25% in January of 1996 as compared pre-October 1995 figures (Metro Toronto 1996). A City of Toronto report on

22 the impacts of the cutbacks focused on the increased dernand for hostel spaces as

c>reiiminary evldence ofeconomic evictions" (City of Toronto 1996). This report

developed a ten point plan that included the needs for linkages and coordination with landlords, tenants and cornmunity agencies to prevent evictions and link vulnerable

persons with support services. The Ontario Social Safkty Network (1995) found the main

reason for higher social assistance rates in Ontario relative to the rest of Canada in the period prior to October 1995 had to do with the high cost of housing in Toronto, where the highest percentage of welfare recipients resided.

The Social Planning Council of Metroplitan Toronto repons that the last month rent deposit is still required by over ninety-five percent of landlords in the city (SPC 1996).

This deposit remains a major problem for many shelter residents as social assistance no longer covers this deposit. Most farnilies are behind one month rent and must borrow, hy to Save money fiom other income such as the child tax benefit or pay the debt back in

installrnents should the landlord allow this arrangement.

U.S. studies by McChesney (1990) and Buckner (1991) found that where there is no housing for low income families, few housing subsidies, and few unskilled jobs that provide sufficient income, intervention will not reduce homelessness. Mulroy and Lane (1992) saw that the lack of affordable housing led to a four stage path to homelessness:

"aresowce squeeze t h precipifates the Ioss of houring; raiderilid mob ilïty that desrabilizes; discriminalion in housing that constrains choices; and multiple stressors

23 t h t demoralize afragilefamily system " In Toronto we see a similar path with social

assistance cuts; moves to stay temporarily with relatives &terlosing housing;

discrimination due to income, raceymarital status, and fmily size; and the resulting stress of eventual homelessness.

The impact of homelessness on children cm be severe. Berck (1992) wrote about the experiences of thirty homeless children and found that "it fiomelessness) daastates childrens ' education. health and self esteem. N srrains famzly relationships and brands children with a siigma in the eyes ofpeers. She did a follow up of children in families "

who found housing a year and a half afier her research. "lnsome of ~hefamiliesthe

children are getting on wirh their h e s and thriving, in others their education or lheir morde have been damaged beyond the point of repazr. " In other words, some were able

to adjust because the impact of homelessness was Iimited, while in other cases the damage fkom prolonged homelessness remained.

Nord and Luloff (19%) found homeless children did not do as well academically or socially as their housed counterparts. They attnbuted this to Yack of rime and aplace to do homtwork, imtability, out-of -schoolperiodr.fiequent changes of schools. and

stigmaiizution. " Parker, Rescona and Strolley (199 1) found that "pe-school homeless childm exhibited luwer devdopment and more emotional-behaviourdproblem than

24

did their domiciledpeers. " Drupper and Halter (1994) Iooked at bamiers in educating homeless children and found there was a lack of parental involvement, inadequate

transportation, inadequate clothing, and a lack of coordination between shelters and schools. Children were becoming lost between shelters and schools when neither was responsible for their education. Also, children with special needs were not aiways assessed or placed appropriately. Koblinsb, Morgan and Anderson (1997) compared homeless preschoolers with other low income children in a cornparison group and concluded Y..homeless mothers provided less Iearning and ucademic stimulaiion, lesr

vurieîy in social and ~ ~ [ l u rexperiences, uï less wannth and affection. and a less positive physical environmentfor their children.'This makes sense given the increased stress and the activity required to survive, movement within the school system, having to conform

to institutional houn and the decrease in living space.

in a study of 139 children in shelters, Whitman et al. (1990) found that mentally challenged or borderline children were at three tirnes the rate than in the general population, and horneless children were at a greater nsk of developmental and language delays. They concluded that "the programmatic responses @om schools) to these

children 's specid needr...do n a accountfor the complexities of homelessness,further alienation..and isolation resultj?om a cycle of labelhg and react ivity.. .mderlying treatable problems and leaming disabilities remuin. " Bassuk and Rubbin (1 990); BoxhiIl (1990) and McChesney (1990) and Dail (1990) found that homeless children in the U.S. had delayed social and emotional development which showed aggression,

25

withdrawal, dernanding behaviour and sleep disorders, abnomal social fean, p r coordination and speech difficulties. Some fifty to sixty-five percent ofchildren over five

were in need of psychiatrie help and displayed syrnptoms of depression severe enough to include attempts at suicide.

Researchers have described the darnaging effects of shelter life on children. In US. shelters it was found they found M e opportunïty to establish routines, a lack of privacy, time wasted and unsupervised activity (Bassuk and Rubin 1987; Boxhill and Beatty 1990). Hussman and Hammen found

" h t

when bomburded with criticism in u

communal setting rnothers began to question their capacity îo be goodparents ...the resull is irritability and inadequate attempts to manage @mily affairs). "

Solutions:

Dai1 (1990) found families moving fiom one shelter to the next due to time limits in shelter stay. This habitua1 problem created a "&e

of i ~ b i l i r und y zmectrrity... " As a

solution Dolbere ( 1 992), Dai1 (1 WO), and Mills and Ota ( 1 989) suggested "ren~al subsidies, aforrdabbly priced housing, income-based housing assistance. prwention ussistonce, support services including education,job counselling~and mental health services. "

26

Daly (1996) sumeyed a variety of innovative housing initiatives and found that a transitional housing project in Boston was successful in assisting women to secure housing they could otherwise not afford, and the Association of Women's Residential Facilities in Halifax and many transitional housing programs for women allowed residents the time to son out goals and piece their Iives together in supportive environments that often included assistance with counselling, education, employrnent, housing, daycare, and referrals. Daly (1996) mentioned that welfare hotels such as those in New York only patronize homeless people and accentuate their deficiencies and

isolation. He concluded that ''more permanent flirdable houssing is required...housing andsentices to assist rhe homeless rntlrr be appropriate IO needs, equirable in rems of

distribution,have user control and decision making power, and homing should be uccessible to public services, have efective supporl setvices. be secure and easily accessible. " He suggested curent emphasis on casework needed to be replaced by these

self help housing initiatives.

Permanent housing mixed within the community for chronically homeless families in

Bucks County Pennsylvania allowed families to remain close to support networks (McLann 1990). In the mid-1980sNew York state began a housing program based on the particuiar needs of homeless families. Social seMce cornponents were included in each

of over 170 projects.

27

Lindsay (1 996) developed a process of community restabilization for sole support

mothen and looked at four major factors in restabilization: children, who represented their motivation to struggle for a better fihue; perwnal resources such as coping skills

and religious faith; extemal resources or agencies; and socioeconomic context. While the

first three factors couid make a positive difference, many participants still reported structural factors such as the lack of employment and restricted inwmes prevented them

from getting permanent housing.

The prevention of homelessness has been t i e d in a few locations in the U.S. In St. Louis, there is a court order to assist the homeless that mandates appropriate services to assist families in getting out of the cycle of homelessness. Stretch and Kreuger ( 1992), reported that St. Louis had a five stage treatment plan of prevention, cnsis intervention, stabilization, resettlementhransitional housing, and community integration. They studied 20 1 families and found a 83.5 percent success rate after one year.

The above literature gives a broad perspective on the needs of homeless families and it presents some of the possible solutions to their problems. M e r looking at the results of

my research in the following section, these studies will again be considered in both the analysis and conclusions.

THODOLOGY;

easons for the Studv:

1 have worked with homeless persons for over fifieen years in Toronto and have seen the

results of the recent negative policy developments for families. There is very little written about these alarming new realities. In fact there no study exists of these farnilies

in Metroplitan Toronto, the largest urban area in Canada and the area with the largest nurnber of homeless. The airn of this snidy was to tell the story of these families through their expen'ences. My goal was to find out clearly what their problems are in their words

so that this information cm become public knowledge. This is rarely done as studies have tended to focus on the numbers of homeless, staff responses, and particular programs. The voices and experiences of homeless farnilies are seldom heard or understood.

Given the scale of recent social policy changes at both the federal and provincial levels,

the time has now arrived to look more closely at the homeless and the decisions we make about them. This study represents an introduction to the problerns, the issues, and essentially the realities of a sample of homeless families fiom their perspective. It will no doubt produce more questions than it answers, given the irnrnensity of the problems.

#en

I did the initial pilot interviews I considered the following general questions: Who

are the people living in Metro's shelters? What are their problems? How have they k e n able to sunive and feel comptent to look afier themselves? in what types of housing

have they k e n living? What are their current expectations in ternis of housing? Have they had any luck at finding a place to live? How hard is it to get an apartment when you

are in receipt of social assistance and live in a shelter? What are the landlords saying

when they apply? What impact, if any did the social assistance cuts have? What kind of supports have been helpful? What was it like to move into a shelter? How are the children doing? Have they been affected by the reductions in social assistance?

After the pilot i n t e ~ e w sI, continued to start off the interview with the reason(s) the family entered the shelter, their recent past, and their present situation. From the experience of the pilot 1 also listai children, cuts (to social assistance), housing, familykommunity supports, agencies, employment and health to make sure the option existed to discuss each of these areas. At the end 1 asked how they saw their future. Generally there was limited discussion about the future as the current problerns were so overwhelming. When asking questions I used the above areas as guidelines only refemng to them when the discussion seemed exhausted. Participants were able to state what they wanted within these broadly defined areas, moving on to various themes fiom these starting points. The families themselves then created the i n t e ~ e w and s were encouraged

30

at the outset to bnng up any and al1 issues of importance so that open discussion could express what was on their minds. 1 felt comforiable with the interview process. 1was able to take a back seat and encourage participants to speak about what was important to

them.

1 have wed a qualitative exploratory design that gives detailed descriptions of five

homeIess mothen and their families. The complex nature of this study and the homeless family as the unit of analysis require such an approach. This descriptive method will allow me to "better understand h u m behnviour and aperience (ofparticipants) and... grmp the processes by wlzich people comtnrcr meaning and describe what those meanings are " (Bogcian and Bilken 1992). Such an approach assigns value to the

experiences and insights of participants.

1felt the intemiew approach used was egalitarian because it valued participant input. The

interviews had a profound impact on me and had a positive impact on participants, according to their statements. 1 was impressed by these women's cornmitment and stniggle to survive despite ail the obstacles and difficulties they faced. 1 will never forget their courage. They were an inspiration for me,and I hope that this work will do justice to their experiences and reflections.

31

My method was influenced by Haraway's notion of a researchers' "partial perspective."

(Haraway 1988). This work represents my partial perspective influenced by the particular

contexts or the "situated howledge" @aly 1996) of the women in this study.

Partici~antsand Samole;

1 inte~ewedsole support mothers who resided at two medium sized Toronto family

shelters. Shelters were chosen because they are places where horneless families are most easily found and where they can be most comfortably interviewed. 1chose not to intewiew other homeless families that rnay be doubling up with fhends or family because they are hard to locate and may be living in situations where they may need to conceal their presence. Sole support rnothea were selected because they are the vast majority of residents in most family shelters, and from the pilot it had become obvious that the women 1 interviewed were generally more open to my study, more aware of their

families needs, and better able to respond to my questions and engage in dialogue on the issues facing them. (Onecouple did participate in the pilot, but the woman did most of the talking in the interview.) The shelters were also chosen because they are well established and easily accessed through staff'.

The families studied were on social assistance, living in Ontario in Septernber 1995, and

had been homeless and in the shelter for longer than one month but not longer than four months. The stipulation of Ontario residency ensured that families could look at the

32

impact of any social assistance cuts f?om their own experiences. One to four months represents the average length of stay in the shelters studied and is a brief enough period that the rnothen could still remember the issues that brought them there. Yet it is also a long enough time for them to have gotten over the initial adjustment p e n d The families

also spent enough time in the shelter to begin to experience the vatied issues people in their situation have to face. I decided that those staying in the shelter for longer than four rnonths are too few in number and their problems are perhaps too complex for this limited study. 1 did not accept any recent arrivals to the province because 1 intended to

ask about the impact (if any) of the October 1995 cuts to social assistance.

A purposive sample was obtained by contacting staff and later residents in two family

shelters. 1wanted participants to be of varied ages and backgrounds in order to provide a representative picture of the larger shelter population. Pseudonyrns were used for al1 participants.

The mothers in the eight interviews including the pilot ranged in age fkom twenty to forty

years. There were four under twenty-five, three between twenty-six and thirty-four and two over thirty-five. The age range is representative of the shelter population whose

average age for sole support mothers is thirty years. (Metro Hostels, 1995) Parents had twenty children ranging in age From four months to twenty years living with these eight

33

families. Four children were no longer living with their families at the time of the interviews. Three of these four had recently separatecl, two of whom were older children

who decided to move out, the third was a boy of eight who was sent to stay with his father.

The five women whose stories have been highlighted in t h s snidy were ages 24,28,35. 37, and 40. Two were Afncan Canadians and three were Canadians of European descent.

One woman was three rnonths pregnant at the time of the interview. Participants lengths of stay in the shelter varied from just under one month to four months. Three women had

substantial work histories. None of the women were working at the time of the

interviews.

The following descriptions of participants will help gain a better understanding of these people which will in tum make it easier to undentand the study and the contexts fiorn which the quotes are taken. 1 will introduce briefly each of the participants listed in the

order they were interviewe4 beginning with the pilot.

Emma was a twenty-nine year old single mother on FBA who had k e n abused by her spouse, whom she left five years ago. She had one eight year old son,was in the shelter for four months, and had found a new address in a housing cooperative thanks to

34

assistance nom the shelter. She is no longer able to work due to hydrocephalous and has

been in and out of the hospital regularly. She requires an irnplanted shunt near her heart in order to survive and has severe migraines from the anti-rejection medication. Emma fonnerly worked at a daycare. Her relationships with her ex-spouse's family which had k e n very good was strained when she entered the shelter. They threatened to go for custody of her son stating she was not a fit mother. A poor relationship with her parents was alw M e r strained by their negative reacùon to her shelter stay. Now that she had

found a new address, there was a tmce and relations improved slightly. On the day of the interview she was going to celebrate her son's birthday at his paternal grandparents. This was their first contact in four months. Emma also stated she received support from a

social worker at the Hospital for Sick Children

Ross and Dave:

Rosa and Dave were twenty-one and twenty-two respectively. They were in the shelter for one month. Both were present at the interviews. They had four children, four and three year old girls and boys of 16 months and four months. They had been separated for ten rnonths out of the past four years of their relationship. Dave had worked briefly as an assistant superintendent and had received limited training in small engine repair. The farnily had been on social assistance for most of the past t h e yean. Rosa had a blood clot in her leg due to k i n g prescribed birth control medication a week after giving birth.

She is now unable to walk for more than ten minutes without severe inflammation of her

35 leg that forces her to rest. The couple has known each other al1 their lives, as Dave was the step son of Rosa's uncle.

Rosa carried out al1 the housing searches, and went to see places henelf despite her health. She was mature beyond her years, and generally took responsibility for al1 family matters. Her sixteen year old brother whom she also looked afler, lived with the family and was a big support. He would ofken go with his sister when looking for places, and his GWA incorne would assist the family income allowing them to rent a larger place. They

had yet to find a new address. They had k e n looking daily and were starting to get mistrated due to the prices of units and the p o r conditions they found them in.

They iost their former address due to non-payment of rent three months after the social

assistance cuts and had k e n living temporarily with Rosa's mother who decided, while they were there, to accept a transfer to a smaller unit in Metro Toronto Housing

Authority (MTHA), forcing them to leave. This put a strain on Rosa's relationship with

her mother whom she used to phone daily. Now she stated they speak weekly, when they are not fighting.

Anna:

Anna was interviewed alone as her husband had been asked to leave the shelter that week. Anna is twenty years old and her husband Jim was twenty-five. They have three

36

children ages two, one and six months. They met each other while living on the streets and in youth shelters. Both had been crown wards with Metro Children's Aid Society

(CAS). Both were drinking and using dmgs d e n they met and Jim still had a drinking problem. Anna stopped drinking and doing h g s &er the birth of her first child.

Supports included Anna's family; a Children's Aid worker; a youth shelter and the shelter outreach seMces; and a food bank. h

a and her children lived with her mother

before entering the shelter. She has been living with her husband sporadically only and felt sorry for him as he was often out on the streets.

Anna lost her father when he committed suicide after attempting a divorce fiom her

mother. Apparently he had wanted custody of Anna. At twelve years she found out what

happened with her father, and the relationship with her rnother then slowly deteriorated. She lefi home at thirieen years. Her life as a child was hard, she looked after three younger brothers and sisters because her mother held two jobs. She confessed that she did not really have a childhood/early adolescence. Ana reconciled with her mother after

the birth of her fint child as she felt "...as a parent 1 now understood what she

sacrificed."

Anna still feels strongly about her husband remaining in the family "fiorthe sake of the children." Her mother was opposed to the relationship. The couple were together for most of their recent 18 month stay in MTHA. They left due to dnig deals occurring

outside their unit and overall security concerns.

ants ia Tbis Studv; -

Mary is a forty year old mother of three with a grade twelve education. Two children, a

sixteen year old and thirteen year old were with her, the oldest recently moved out on her own. She has k e n in a number of abused women's shelters after leaving an abusive relationship when her children were small. She recently left another city in Ontario afier having been discovered by her ex-husband who had threatened her. Mary has now been in the shelter system in Toronto for the past four months. She stayed for a month at another shelter but moved to the current shelter when school was about to start as the

new shelter was closer to her children's high school. She had her own business and it had k e n a great success, but she has recently required Family Benefits. Mary is an extrernely resourceful penon, and has many swival skills that involve developing new support neîworks wherever she happens to be living. These networks were required as she has

had to move whenever her ex-husband located her. Recently she has found it more difficult to develop and maintain these support networks given cutbacks to services and agencies. Mary usually attends a church regularly and fmds this a support to her and the children. She has however found it difficult to do so now that she is in the shelter. She

has no contact with her family for security reasons. Mary had found a flat to move to, but was subsequently himeci d o m after waiting almost a month.

39 Donna's three oldest children were al1 in CAS care at some point. While in care one daughter was abused and the other two suffered from the dislocation of the move. Donna took them to counselling for over three years and they are now able to get on with their

Iives. An ongoing issue for DOM^ is that her eleven year old son has a leaming disability, caused she feels by the constant moves. He has not been able to leam to read as yet, but was in an excellent school recently with al1 the supports in place. He progressed, but then

they had to move again, and the new school just hasn't been the same.

Donna lost her apartment where she had been living for four years in the winter of 1995 as she could no longer pay the rent after the social assistance cuts. Since then she has lived in drug infested places where she was stabbed, witnessed a shooting, and lived in constant fear. She then rnoved to a shelter but her time ran out there, and she reluctantly returned to her old address despite safety concems. She is currently on FBA but has a

huge overpayment with them due to a wornan that FBA daims was living with her. Doma f i d y denies this claim.

Donna fin& that the shelter system is simply not working. She no longer has enough

money to get an apartment, and she may end up having to move quickly into inappropriate housing, which rnay only lead to another shelter stay. This is a major concern as she knows the children will be hurt from al1 the moving. Donna has limited contact with her family, and she has few friends. She has been in the shelter for the past six weeks.

Carol;

Carol is a thirty-seven year old mother of five cbildren ages eight, nine, fourteen, eighteen, and twenty. She has three years of high school, and had worked eight yean ago

as a taxi dispatcher. Her eighteen year old son recently rnoved in with his grandmother. Carol was evicted from a Metro Toronto Housing Authority (MTHA) building after

living there for eight years with her husband and children.

Carol's husband went into a residentiai treatment program, and the rest of the family entered a shelter. Carol was at a shelter for six rnonths, during which time her nine year old atternpted suicide. AAer the shelter stay she ended up finding an apartment where the rent was extrernely high. The family were recently evicted as they were behind in the rent and the landlord stated the place was needed for a relative. Carol's husband recently decided to separate although they had not been living together for about two years.

Caroi's nine year old son Charlie has serious mental health problems and is currently not attending school. Carol is with him al1 the time and finds it hard to do apartrnent searches

and everything else that is required of her. She was recently depressed and is on medication. She has yet to find a new address and has been in the shelter for five weeks.

Carol has had sorne contact with her mother who is supportive.

I[)iane:

Diane is a twenty-four year old mother of two boys ages t h e and four. She is three

months pregnant. She was living with ber boyfriend at a motel and was prostituting to suwive, before getting her two boys back fiom their father who went to jail. At this tirne the Children's Aid Society (CAS), stated they were going to take the children into care if

she continued to live with her boyfhend. Apparently he could become violent and had

k e n verbally abusive. CAS had decided that the children could not be subjected to this type of environment with her boyfhend, and that she would have to go to a shelter.

The father of the two boys would be in jail for the next six months, when he gets out

Diane was considering retuming her youngest son,or perhaps both sons to hirn. Her four year old had been with her most of the time, and Diane was very concerned about k m as

he was not able to speak. Diane preferred to keep hirn fiom school as yet and assist him progress at his own rate. The main issue for Diane is her fight with CAS as to whether she can have her children and continue to live widi her boyfnend Ryan. She is concerned

that when moving out of the shelter she will want her boyfhend back, and this will lead to another confrontation with CAS which rnay lead to the loss of custody of her boys. She

felt she was being forced to decide between her boyfhend and her children. Her children, she recognizes, have been bounced around a great deal due to the instability of both their

parents.

42

Diane was abused as a child and had spent years on the streets fiom the age of thirteen. She had met their father living on the streets and had been heavily involved with dnigs at

this time.Since then she has completely lefi the dnigs behind, but now feels she has no fkeedom. She feels she is constantly king told what to do by so many agencies that are

involved These include the courts,the probation officer, CAS, and die shelter. Diane did not feel she had any power to change her situation or get out of it. She longed to return to

the motel program where she had been living with her boyfriend, yet she prefened the way the present shelter has 'pushed"her in the area of housing.

Diane has had morning sickness daily. She looked hred and seemed very confused. Although not having decided completely as to what she would do, she seemed to be

leaning toward being with her boylbend, the father of the child in her wornb, whom she saw as a support she desperately needs. She has no one else to tum to. Her only Fnends were those on the streets and she was wanting to get away from them.

Helen is a thirty-£iveyear old mother who has an eleven year old daughter. She irnmigrated to Canada fiom Jamaica as a young adult. She has a solid work history, but was laid off in the initial round of hospitd cutbacks in 1991,where she had worked for

just under five years as a lab technologist. Since king laid off she has worked at part

tirne jobs and lived off her savings. When her Unemployment Insurance Benefits ran out,

43 and most of her part time jobs ended, she was forced ont0 welfare for fourteen months.

To top matten off her first month on welfare happened to be October 1995, the very month social assistance levels were cut. Helen found it extremely difficult to pay her rent which ended up being over seventy percent of her incorne. She also had to provide special food for her daughter who had allergies. She slowly got into debt, was behind in

the rent, and eventually agreed to leave. She had been living in a building run by the

Metro Toronto Housing Company Limited (MTHCL)where she was paying full rent, no subsidy was available. Then she moved into a fiend's home for four months, leaving

there when her fiend's boythend becarne upset. The next step was the shelter, as her family cou1dnytassist, in fact it was around this same time that her father had died and

her mother had enough to deal with. Helen was and rernains close to her family and &ends, however she sees them much less. Living in a shelter in a remote part of the east end when she had previously lived dl her life in the west end, has been hard. Fnends and

family are now far away.

Helen is currently in her second year of nursing school thanks to a government bunary arranged through a ternporary medical agency she worked for. She is highly motivated, confident, and ready for any challenge. She hopes to find employment in Canada, but will move to the US.for employment if required. She has relatives there who c m assist her. Helen is the oldest child in her fmily and was always the most successfûl, the one that could do no wrong. She has a lot of pnde and is vety confident given her good grades in nursing. She had f o n d it extremely difficult to make the transition into a

44

shelter, especially d e n her particular motel is in such disrepair, yet she is confident her situation is soon to change. Helen has a great deal of support from her ex-husband7s

parents who have looked after her daughter while she is at school. While Helen is working hard at her studies, she has yet to find a new address. She thought she had fomd

a place recently but was discriminated against and was denied the apartment.

Research Process:

Phase 1: I met with the manager and assistant manager of the shelter, explained the purpose of this study, and received their approval to do the interviews on the premises.

They suggested using the board room, a space that 1 agreed was the most suitable for i n t e ~ e w sAt . the meeting, we decided that 1would not be involved in any casework with the families. It was decided that my contact would be the assistant manager who

would assis with finding participants. 1 contacted her in two weeks and she helped to

find three participants for the pilot. 1 met with each participant the week before the i n t e ~ e w to s seek approval and agree on a date. These gatekeepers were helpful throughout the process but when the assistant manager took a leave fiom work at the

begiming of this study, 1ended up contacting most of the subsequent group rnyself

Phase IL The Pilot: A pilot study was conducted in June 1996, and the study was written in July and August 1996. The pilot interviews were helpfil in the development of general categories which formed the basis of this study. There were two mothen, Emma

45

and Anna, and one couple, Rosa and Dave, who participated Dave, however, did no? contribute much to the conversation.

The pilot found that al1 the families had major problems with housing, both in tems of past housing units and the current housing search. It was discovered that the social assistance cuts led directly to hornelessness in two farnilies and contributed to homelessness in the third fmily. These cuts were found to have severe ramifications for low income people. Supports for the three families were strained and tended to diminlsh over time during the shelter stay. This led to greater isolation and to more dependency on the shelter. Adjustments to shelter life were mentioned frequently. A lot of resentment

and opposition to shelter rules were expressed. Levels of stress were similar for families in both phases, where there was a difference was in the area of physical health. In the

pilot two participants were permanently disabled and a third, Rosa's husband, had lirnited ernployability due to a senous car accident. In the pilot, 1found the women interviewed al1 had extremely strong commitments to their children and families, and al1 actively conversed about the problems they faced. It was after this study that 1decided to interview oniy sole support mothen because 1felt they had a lot to Say, represented the majority of fmilies in the shelters, were working hard for their families, took responsibility for the direction of their respective fmilies, and were more open than the

men to doing the intemSews.

46

In the pilot, participants were given a few general questions. Both the information and the experience of doing these interviews then helped me formulate the questions mentioned above that 1wanted to cover in rny interviews.

The pilot had included three participants, and a M e r five interviews with families were

found sufficient to develop the study's themes. A description of the pilot participants and significant quotes are included in the findings in the following two chapters.

Phase III: Phase III consisted of five interview conducted from December 1996 to February 1997. The interviews were again conducted in the board room of the shelter because it is a quiet and cornfortable room where there are no interruptions other than the intercom. The encounters were usually held on Sunday momings or weekday evenings

when there was less activity and fewer staff present. The Sunday interviews were over by midday so that participants muld as& with chores and with feeding their children. Daycare arrangements were made in advance with other residents. These were calm and quiet times in the shelter, and participants seemed to appreciate having time to get away and talk about their experiences and problems. Participants generally recomrnended others in the shelter whom they thought would be interested and who met the criteria.

This snowball style of finding respondents by word of mouth made assistance from staff less necessary. The taped portion of the interviews varied from an hour and fifieen minutes to almost two hours. As the i n t e ~ e w progressed, s the themes becarne more

47

defined. Initial categories that had been developed in the pilot were used as the starting point for questions in the next phase.

Before each i n t e ~ e wfifteen , minutes was taken to explain the purpose of the research,

give the option to participate or leave at any time, receive consent, and fi11 out the basic data form. As mentioned previously, the interaction was informal, and allowed

participants to tell their stories. After the i n t e ~ e w was over participants stayed behind for a few minutes or up to half an hour to continue discussing some of the issues. They appreciated my listening ear without the annoyance of the tape recorder. Notes were then made on these conversations as they were ofien helpful in hirther clari&ng statements made earlier.

room and Contact with staff was limited to assistance with opening the i n t e ~ e w reporting back when 1 was leaving. Staff also assisted with the initial promotion of the study and with getting participants to the interviews.

Two interviews were held but not included. One was done using a faulty tape recorder;

another was with a participant who had a very soft whispering voice that couid not be picked up by the tape recorder. Two shelter residents stated they would do the interviews but then declined later, one due to illness and another because she decided during our

preliminary discussion that she did not want to be taped. Because of these cancellations,

48

the limited size of the shelter population, and time constraints, a fifth participant in the study was located at a second shelter.

The fm shelter is a communal facility run by a nonprofit downtown agency. It has been operating for twenty years and receives fiuiding nom the Hostel Services Division of Metro Cornmunity Services, the United Way, and private donors. It has three sections that operate independently. Residents eat communally, often share rooms, have contact with at least one staff person at any time, attend weekly floor meetings, and abide by a

variety of d e s . There is an on site day are, help with housing, and some follow up later in the community. The second shelter is operated and funded by the Hostel Services Division. It uses motel rooms rented from private motels in Scarborough. There is one

staff advocate available during the &y only with other staff located at night at another site. There is a day care and after schwl program area on site that has limited hours. Residents do their own cooking.

Field notes were taken during and immediately afier recorded interviews. Information

from my personal experiences and discussion, and discussions with many staff working with this population were able to fûrther support the data and analysis.

Phase IV: Mer interviewhg participants, I decided to l a v e the matenal a few weeks

until al1 the transcriptions were finished. I then camed out the initial coding which took

four weeks. At this point 1placed al1 sentences fiom the inteniews in categories and

49

these categories were slowly combined 1 then did a second coding in early March when I

had a complete week away fiom work. This brought the categories d o m to w l v e .

Phase V: Mer the interviews and coding, 1returned to the original shelter where 1 interviewed the staff in two separate floor meetings. These meetings were proposed by the manager of the shelter and were helpful in giving me both feedback and information

on current trends. The meetings were not tapeci, but 1took extensive notes. I was able to add their input to my own reflections in the development of a more thorough analysis. A summaiy of the information From these meetings can be found in chapter four.

Phase M: Analysis of Data and final Writing:. During this process, the research, my experiences, and those of the staff combined altemately to move the analysis along. Evennially the categories in the second coding ended up k i n g fürther reduced to eight. M e r leaving the data for a while, 1 was able to combine most elements of the eight areas into a final five categones before writing. These five areas seemed to sum up for me the essence of the interviews. 1then decided to begin writing. The findings, analysis, and conclusions follow,

Five major themes or areas emerged fiom participant's experiences. These were: supports, financial concems, housing, children and shelter life. Each theme represents a major area of concern of eveq participant and each resulted in huge amounts of data

fiom the interviews. What 1 have chosen to do is to divide each theme into smaller sections and look at each section separately. 1will begin by Iooking at supports.

SUPPORTS:

Supports and support networks, the agencies and seMces that assist these families, were

looked at according to responses from participants. The support data covered approximately eight percent of the interviews and represented one of the largest themes. This area is important as homelessness both produces and is caused by social isolation.

It is crucial then that these families have someone to turn to, agencies and seMce workers that cm respond to their complex needs. The following findings indicate that these supports are often not there or are harder to access and may explain in part why the family is homeless.

Definitely certain resources such as day care made it easier to survive and even thrive despite being homeless, while the absence of others fbrther complicated matters. The basic resources and supports needed were divided in the following areas: family and

51

fnends; the shelter and other residents; networks and volunteering; children; community; and fathers and boyfriends.

A.

Egmilv and friends:

Family was the most important source of support for Helen and Carol, and family contacts existed for Donna and Diane. Helen had a great deal of support fkom family, especially her ex-husbands parents who lived in the ara of the shelter. She explains that their assistance enables her to attend school: The good part about it is my daughter's grandmother, her &d7s mom, lives in the east end. So for me they take her on as their own child. These grandparents provided al1 the daycare, meals, and ovemight stays required so

Helen could attend nuning school while king in a shelter. Her daughter was their only grandchild and they were pleased to be able to spend time with her.

Carol found family, specifically her mother and sister to be a major support. They had helped her in the past and could still be contacted. She explains how they assisted her:

...they're there for me. They offer me the use of their phone to make phone calls. My sister drives around to take me looking for places. Getting out and going to Msit them is a big help because sometimes the stress is so hi& here I feel l'rn going tu explode...

Family also ailowed for an experience of the normality of non-shelter living. It was a break fiorn the routine in Carol's case:

It's so nice to get away and just to see the nonnality in their house. Rather than living with forty different people. However, even in these two families where there was greater support, contact with supports was lessened after entry into the shelter. This was primarily due to the distance and scheduling. The stigma of being in a shelter, of having family or fnends "finding out" about where they were was an issue that resulted in having to stay hidden and isolated This particularly affected Helen: For quite a while they didn't know. I didn't let them know what has happened....for my mom, 1continued to try to find a job or go to school or do something with myself. She likes that so 1 didn't want her to feel like really let d o m that this happened and 1have to be in a shelter...so I just kept it hush hush.

Very few, usually only the teenagers and even they only to a limited extent, had any contact with former peers. Carol explains:

They've lost a lot of their fnends. From MTHA and that neighbourhood. Even after we moved out of there. People that they met at the 1st address. You know w e don? have the means to keep in touch with them. There's restrictions here that you have to be in by a certain time or you can only have Msitors at a certain time so there's a lot of stops for keeping in with your old crowd." My notes recordai the sadness in Carol's voice. She realized the importance of these

fnends and took the losses very seriously. Carol went on repeating words fiom my questions in her answen in a monotone voice. The repetition seemed to reinforce an

53 ineviîability. She was repeating words just as she saw the events themselves being repeated for her family as each &y they seemed to be loosing more of what they had, whether it be fkiends, a place, a neighbourhood, or furnitue.

The dislocation caused by the move to the shelter itself and the incredible distance that was required to maintain regular contact with fiiends and family was an issue for Helen:

...al1 my life 1have been ... in the West end, so its a major adjustment moving from your fnends and family to corne al1 this

WYIn fact, moving to another and largely unknown part of the city was a major problem for most participants. Low income people must depend on a variety of community supports to survive. Having a friend at a local church or cornmunity agency who helps, a contact at a food ban.or a place where one can talk wiîh someone are extremely important and these were suddenly taken away in a strange neighbowhood.

Mary had decided to put fnends on hold in Toronto until after she settled:

...their (children's) fhends don't know they live here. And like we moved away a year ago and no one knows that I'm back in t o m . 1 haven't contacted any of my f'tiends. 1 haven't contacted anyone until I make sure that we are going to be staying here, that our roots are planted. Family was a negative support for Diane. She was abused by her father and leA home at thirteen. Her parents have now separated, and she has limited contact with her mother, and younger brother and sister. She had moved home recently but found it extremely

hard Al1 the memories are still there. She did not feel protected by her mother when she was growing up:

My dad and 1 don't talk My mom will Say one thing to me but then say another thing behind my back She's doing that to her own child. I don? see me doing that to mine. Diane's situation is similar to many homeless youths and many residents of shelters who

report major disruptions, oflen abuse, early in their life in their family of origin. Al1 three participants in the pilot also reported major disniptions in growing up, one due to a death, another due to abuse, and a third due to alcoholism and abuse. This latter point of exposure to violence was in fact the CAS argument as to why they did not want Diane's boyfhend to be living around the children. One can see the cycle of abuse and violence in the life of Diane who was abused as a child and as an adult, and now her children have

been exposed to a violent environment. Diane simply stated: "Abuse hos been around

since 2 was a child. II S never lep me yet." Her only contacts were her mother who ignored the abuse, the abusive boyfhend, and her sister she tried unsuccessfuliy to share

an apartment with.She concluded by saying: "You 'vego! to do it yourself-'

Those with more contact with family, especially Helen, who had a relatively high level of contact, were found to be less isolated. Judging from Helen's goals and her self confidence, I saw she also had greater self-esteem while those with few such supports seemed more isolated, especially Diane who flatly stated: "1 have no one."

55

Contact with family and fiends rernained important for al1 but practically speaking it was ofien dificult to arrange, costly, problematic or even dangerous as in Mary's case.

These supports were often kept on hold until the fmily could r e m to the comrnunity and rebuild their lives.

B. The Sbelter:

From the data it became obvious ftom my perspective that support f'rom family and

fiends increases self esteem, courage, and the confidence to act, to better oneself despite al1 the stress and pressures faced. Peer support in the shelter allowed residents to get together with someone who understood them and offered assistance or solutions to their problems. The problem with such peer support in the shelter is that it is temporary.

Families were coming and going regularly so it was hard to maintain these relationships. Such support can be negative because it usually only occurs within the shelter system. The falseness or instability of temporary support that would eventually end as residents moved out was a reality of shelter life. One of my observations was that these supports may have actually been taking away fiom previous and potential supports in the

community, as they became more inward looking. In this sense, the advantage of the motel program as opposed to the communal setting is it did force people like Helen to

keep outside contacts or suff'er greater isolation. There were fewer contacts within the motel due to the independent style of accommodation. In Helen's case however, she did manage to maintain some outside contacts.

56

For the majority king able to develop fSendships with the others in the communal shelter is a s e v a l tactic. It makes life bearabie and it ailows the women to discuss what 1s on their mind with those most

able to understand All identified the support among

peea as king significant. However it became clear from the data that more support

systems were tuming in&

Participants spoke about getting support from shelter

residents, staff, and their children rather than from the outside world. The world outside

of the shelter had stigmatized them ço that this had become their only safe haven, a place where everyone was in the sarne boat and everyone understood you.

The shelter itself although temporary, had increasingly became an important source of support. Donna explains:

....we are up to two, three, four,(o'clock in the morning) crying, just going over things, trying to cope with it...Basically that's what we do in here. We stay up a lot figuring out and talking about how we're going to get out of here. Even Helen, in the motel program, found some shelter supports: They have this program that we go to on a Wednesday morning and I just started going there last week, so I get to meet quite a few of the other girls who live here...you get to know that you're not alone. Not just you facing that same problem. Supports among residents themselves were fhrthered by the shelter that had regular weekly meetings to create geater cohesion among residents. Donna, Mary and two

57

women in the pilot mentioned these meetings as a chance to express one's opinion about

how things were going for them, and what their problems had been that week. Mary refmed to the meetings as ' a chance to see where everyone is at. " This allowed them to Ieam nom others and to discover that others were facing the same problems.

h addition to peer support the shelter program itself was seen as supportive, it provided the basic needs of food and shelter essential to stability. Diane explains she was able to:

...sort some things out....and 1 wouldn't have had al1 this ( a place to stay) if it w n ' t for the shelter. Donna felt the shelter provided some needed security she couldn't find in private market housing: At least 1 know that it's safer, we're not worrying about anything...it's not the best place or the worst place. You still have problems in here but it's nothing like what's going on out there. The daycare and children's programs were seen as extremely beneficial. Al1 participants

spoke highly of them. Donna explains: It helps here by watching them in the moming..A gives me tirne to sit d o m and cal1 places and you lcnow make appointments and that.

Diane, in speaking about her son who did not enrol in Kindergarten, also felt cornfortable with the daycare:

Oh he's in the daycare here right now....He loves it. Soon as I get

him he'll be tellhg me, 'Oh 1painted, and had a snack.' So 1 thought that by putting him in day care here it'll kind of get him

adjusted to a crowd. And you know doing this and doing that and he'll be ready by next year. Why start him if he's not ready?

The child advocate in the shelter daycare helped Carol who has a son with mental health problerns: "She is the one who inztiuted the process al the C M e to have him ussessed" She also remarked on the assistance of former child advocates when previously in the shelter:

...they showed concem They even came up to the hospital when he was in the

"

hospita[, tu make sure everything was okay. "

Emma in the pilot was gratefûl for al1 staff and residents had done for her but now she was leavhg the shelter, she and her son were going to miss the support: It's going to be hard on the both of us. You know cause here we've been dependent on everybody and we've had so many people around for months and months and months. AI1 of a sudden we have to break. It's going to be really hard-...They' re going to provide some outreach support.

The shelter staff were seen both as a support and enforcen of d e s . Some complained about inconsistencies among staff in ternis of d e enforcement. This iead to problems in a variety of areas including disciplining the children Carol explained: "Euchund e v e v

one handles things dzfferently and thor coures a lot of confision " Mary was extremely concemed about staff burnout and their inability to listen due to the pressures on the job. She felt the staff did what they could. However in a previous stay in a shelter for abused women, she had felt a great deal more support. She explains:

...if you're falling apart someplace, they don't really have time. There's too many other people, too many other things they have to do.. .So they're running around doing al1 the essential things. But

you c m be standing in fiont of them and falling apart, saying, '1 need someone to talk to right now .' They're like, 'Five minutes!' They try to be supportive but they have other things they have to do tw. They get ovenvorked and they get crwith people...

It may be tbat this shelter was not able to respond to women with greater ne&. Perhaps they could be better served in a place where there was a smaller !jtafFresident ratio. Two women suggested that one staff advocate as opposed to many might have been a solution, as some were concerned that al1 the staff were aware of evexything that was going on with them. Carol explained:

You can't go to that one person and discuss your problems because everyone knows them here. And that gets to be a linle bit ..., you get to feel...Hmm what are they looking at me for? Am I doing something wrong today or what? Rosa in the pilot sirnilarly stated: "They 're warching you, it rnokes me feel gui[& .." Participants were feeling the staff gaze as a means of control, stressing their shortcomings rather than their strengths. Those who had been in a shelter with one advocate, and Helen who was cwrently in such a shelter, spoke highly of these advocates and felt they assured them of one special confidant or listening ear who was always there

for them. Helen said: She keeps checking in...any linle problem that 1 had, 1could call her, she was very helpful. Very very helpful. She's always ready to listen.

Carol aiso had such a worker when previously in another program. She stated:

...they're right there for you. You can just call them up if you need to talk.

On the other hmd, Diane clearly recognized the efforts of al1 the SM in the communal shelter, and didn't feel assisted with the weworker of the motel program: It's going okay here but they realiy push you to get a place. There (the Motel Shelter) they didn't help you at all. They didn't push you to get a place...the only thing they were womed about was the guy in my room. Diane clearly hated the pressure king put on her to get a place, yet she a i s wndemned the previous shelter for not doing the same thing. She was indirectly recognizing the

value of this negative support or 'tough love' evident fiom shelter staff.

To conclude, fiom the above discussion it was revealed that the shelter as a substitute provided sorne of the supports the women had previously had in the community. The staff were present to them when they had the time, and other residents were around to

talk with, and offer suggestions and encouragement. Yet these supports including the provision of food and shelter were al1 temporary, they would end within weeks. It is the uncertainty, this lack of permanence that was the weak Iink in the support systern.

Whatever was built up here would soon end and the family would again have to readjust to another situation.

Mary referred to her skills at integrating into or foming new support networks. She spent

more tirne talking about these supports and her volunteer efforts than anything else. It

62 previously volunteering in a soup kitchen in another city and how she depended on

getting two loaves of b r d When it was then reduced to one loaf, she explained: "thal made u huge diference. "Volunteering then had also becorne a means of survival.

It was also revealed in this area that many of the community agencies were going through

funding reductions and these often had an impact on sewices accessed or they simply led to waiting lins. Mary,Donna and Carol al1 commented on lengthy waiting lists for

agencies and seMces being the nom. Mary stated "...everybody 's gor waiting Zists,

evevbody is bookedso hard" Donna, Carol and Helen mentioned long waiting lists for various govemment housing projects. Helen managed to get on these lists, however both Carol and Donna had been former tenants and couid not reapply due to rentai arrean.

Al1 community support networks then could be described as strained. Few besides Mary even referred to them as a support. The potential to fom new networks was limited by

being away fiom traditional neighbourhood supports, and by having to adjust to

institutionai routines. Those who had or were able to f o m or join support networks reported k i n g able to h c t i o n better as a result. Mary, and Helen to a lesser extent, belonged in this category. They both had more hopes for the future, and felt better about

themselves and their goals. They were probably the two wornen in this study, along with

Emma in the pilot, that had greater chances of rernaining in the community upon leaMng the shelter.

Children were sigbted as being supports to their mothen by most women. They were the

reason to continue their struggie at al1 costs! The younger mothers saw their children as the motivation for succeeding at changing their lifestyles. In the case of Diane, this meant giving up drugs: Diane: I used to be bad when 1 was fifieen. 1 used drugs, I used coke and crack and everything. But 1 didn't have kids or anythmg at that time to worry about. DA: So you've changed once the children came along? Diane: Yeah, once the children came along....I stopped by myself. It's been six yean and it's over with. Six years. DA: And your children have been with you for five years? Diane: Yes. ïhey have k e n a big part of it. The mothen with older children spoke of them as supports and even caretakers. Mary saw her daughten:

...as excellent children, staff like having them around, that's why we can stay as long as we have because they like having us around They help out a lotMary's daughters were very protective. Her eldest came by at the end of our interview

and recounted how she was upset she couldn't defend her mother who was recently challenged by staff while she was at school.

Emma in the pilot was grateful her son understood her hydrocephalus. She said:

He's pretty good When we were first on our own in 1989 1 got really sick and he went up and told my superintendent that he really Ioved me and mornmy needed help. Carol saw her daughter as being a help to her and the other children: "Shehebs out a lot with the kidr und t h gntes me a break " The children provided a constant motivation

and kept these women focused and detennined. Anna refers to these motivations in the pilot:

I want to be able to give my kids the best of things, not spoil them but give them what I never had. 1want to give hem a happy childhood. 1 didn't have that In addition to the motivation in both Mary and Carol's cases, their eldest daughters took on some caregiver roles that were invaluable. They also often assisted with the parenting

of younger siblings.

The majority of fathen were not directly involved with raising their children. None were paying support. One who was invoived, the father of Donna's son, had recently been given custody. The problem here however was that he limited Donna's access and now

the boy was no longer wanting to be with his dad.

Diane saw her boyfhend as a support because he assisted with the chores and looked afier the boys:

He helps me with them you know...He used to wake up in the momings and give them breakfast or give them a bath and get them dressed..So at least I had t h e to myself Diane's former husband often cared for their two boys, she states:

He's got Iegal custody of Freddie. He will probably go back to his dad when he gets out of there. (Jail) And it will be a little easier for me. The little one may go too. Carol's husband came by ocwionally, but was never consistent. Helen's husband was of little help to her, however his parents, as mentioned previously, were a major support.

Mary alluded to a cornmon activity of fathers in the shelter who went out panhandling to provide extras for their chilciren.

Emma in the pilot found that both her ex-husband and her family were hostile to the notion of her being in a sheiter: Between his father and my family they were trying to see if they could take me to court to prove me an unfit mother because I was in a shelter.

To conclude, most fathers offered limited if any support. Diane's husband k i n g the only exception and at present he was unable to assist the boys because he was in jail.

MI mentioned the use of food banks, which were used more fiequently in recent years, and were normally accessed midway through the month when the welfare fun& had been

depleted. Carol stated: "Wehad to me a lot offood banks " Diane also explained that she

had '@ne

to several. " Mary complained: "You can only access them once a month and

they gzve out less "

In the pilot two families had extensive ties with outside agencies. One was the network

around a downtown youth shelter dropin that assisted Anna with food, diapers, and other essentials. They had a special support program for young mothers. Anna spoke highly of

this agency: They know me; they know the problems I've gone through.. .Like you know with the cuts and running out of groceries type thing I can go d o m there anytime to eat... Emma had developed outside supports around a hospital she accessed regularly. These programs included a specid fiiend for her son: Blaine haç a special fiiend in Sick Kids (Hospital for Sick Children) and he çees her on the Sundays that he's home fiom Daddy's fkom 12:30 to 7:OO. They normally go and do different things and she helps him with his homework. DOM^ had received personal support and even financial assistance fiom the Jamaican

Canadian Association (J.C.A.):

She (worker at the J.C.A) helped me out on a personal basis. The rnoney she gave me was out of her own pocket, like twenty dollars, ten dollars, and she would pick up food fiom food banks for me. Mary had found rnany support networks in the p s t that included agency supports from Goodwill, Salvation Army and others. Diane saw her probation oficer regularly. Carol took her son to the Shoniker (mental health) clinic, and she had also been seeing a psychiatrist. Mary mentioned CAS as a support on her basic data form, but did not refer to in our discussion. And that is about it! Few of the women could think of any other

recent agency supports that were meaningful and ongoing Sociai assistance workers were usually seen in a negative light, or not referred to. They were generally blarned for holding up their cheques and causing unjust overpayments. CAS workee were seen by Diame as controlling her and her children, and forcing her to separate fiom her boyfhend: "The Chiidren 's Aidgof i d v e d andforced me to corne to a hosrel." Mary

had a church community that had been a huge support in the past, however she was not in contact with them since her return to Toronto. She stated she simply couldn't afford the transportation to maintain this support and she preferred to put al1 this on hold until she

had secured housing. When discussing how it was desîabilizing for the children who were on the move ail the time and going to different schools, Mary then stated: Going to church is the same thing. If you're not able, if you don't have that little nest...You really feel like you want to stay at the same church comrnunity. And a lot of times you feel in some way they can help you but because you're moved on the other side of town, you're not able to go...so you're getting into a habit of rnissing churchand its really hard (on the kick) because it's taking care of them spiritually, now they're w i n g around reckless, they don't have any guidance.

68

To conclude, the famil]1 supports that existed were the most significant of supports for the majority of participants. However these supports had shrunk since entering the shelter, and this trend wodd probably continue due to the longer the shelter stays. The stigmatization of their presence in a shelter, the d e s and the lack of resources for transportation, combined with the increased distance of most supports, al1 mitigate

against these families. As a result new supports were sought out rnostly within the shelter. These supports were tirne limited and potentially destructive. One case in point

here is when residents end up moving out together. This has rarely been successful. Carol was attempting this "doubling up." Both Emma and Rosa in the pilot had tied sharing

with others. Emma attempted to live with a m'end, and her son. Rosa, as mentioned

previously, with her family, who had a large MTHA unit.

Community supports were found to be insuficient and present a major challenge. Donna, when asked if there were other support agencies assisting her right now, replied flatly:

"There'sno agencies." Indeed there are fewer and fewer cornrnunity resources that can be accessed to assist this vulnerable population. The women stated there were waiting lists with longer waiting periods, or programs that had closed entirely. Also, the circumstances created by the transient lifestyle itself made accessing more permanent

supports an issue.

69

To conclude, supports were mostly family and fnends with limited agency involvement. The lifestyle of these families, combined with Mexible and often overbooked senices,

made getting comected with groups offering support very difficult. Networks also had suffered due to the move to the shelter. Fathers were rarely a help, while children were prime motivaton, and older daughters had also became caretakers.

This is the most important category. Larger amounts of data exist on housing than any other area discussed. Housing is always on the mincis of homeless families. It is their fundamental issue, their daily wony. The search for îhe allusive apartment becomes a full time job.

The word "housing" was mentioned 63 times by al1 five participants. Specific areas covered included housing help centres, where it was again reported that there was no help available or services were overstretched. Donna said "they never retwn your cdls...they men 't any help. Donna, Carol and Helen mentioned long waiting lists for

various governrnent housing projects. Helen got on these lists, however both Carol and

Donna had been former tenants and could not reapply due to rent arrean. The word "house" was mentioned 84 times in the five interviews. Although finances were mentioned more ofien these housing discussions were considerably longer. The individual lines referring to the word housing represented 1.7% of al1 lines in the data. Most of these conversations on housing referred to problems encountered in former

homes including security issues, drugs and violence, poor maintenance, current housing searches, and general discussions about finding housing given limited resources and availability.

71

This category includes past experiences in former apartments and the current bousing search. In this group of five mothers, no one had achially secured housing at the time of the interview. Mary was hoping to share a place but remained unsure of what the

landlord's plans were. (Emma in the pilot had been successful in finding a place.) Al1

had lived previously at a variety of addresses and had difficult experiences there. Al1 had been cMng out extensive housing searches before the interview. The discussion on housing included the following subcategories: pst housing, the cost of housing, the housing search, subsidized housing and housing and finances.

Al1 participants, including those in the pilot, had major difficulties with former

apartments. Al1 had moved at least twice in the past year. Places they had lived in were &en infested with mice and roaches, many had senous plurnbing or heating problems. In

the pilot, two families had lived in apartments that were condemned by city inspectors.

Emma had taken a landlord to court due to ongoing disrepair problems that not even city work orders were enforcing yet her apartment had not been condemned. Such situations were common as rental payment took presidence over al1 other issues. She gave me a

detailed account of her problems: The windows were insuficient duruig winters so you had a constant draft. Pipes were mted and leaking. The bathroom sink was on the floor because pipes had deteriorated so bad. He wanted me to sign an f i d a v i t saying that I would pay him rent whether the repairs were done or not. He placed death threats against my

family. 1 went into court with pichues and reports frorn the health department. 1 had al1 the evidence. They just gave me so many weeks to get out.

Most participants had lived temporarily with a fkiend or family at one time or another.

This bansience was typical, as in most cases al1 possible avenues were explored before the family entered the shelter.

Three out of the eight farnilies had lived in MTHA until recently and Emma in the pilot was soon to move into a CO-op arranged by the shelter. The MTHA projects were referred to as being dangerous places where there was a lot of dmgs and violence. Anna describes

her MTHA unit: 1 had people doing crack, taking fie& attacks in the staircase,

banging on the walls right beside our unit. My kids were in that environment.

with former houçing units were extremely dangerous and iife D O M ~experiences S

threatening. The following is a description of the first place she found after moving fiom her apartment. She had resided there for four years until it became too expensive: Afier the cuts (October 1995) 1took a cheap apartment...there was e v e w n g going on there. There was like gun shots k i n g fired and 1got into so many different fights. 1was stabbed once. 1 couldn't let my kids go outside there...a h , l've never seen roaches like they had there.

Her next address was no better:

I was s k n g a house with four different people...1 started to find out who these people really were, there were a lot of illegal activities going around the house and it reached a point that there was a shooting. The children witnessed everythmg and could have got shot. I escaped to a shelter then returned when 1didn't find a place. Then it was getting wone...we had to contiine ourselves to the bedroom.

Donna then spoke about subsequent address that she quickly picked up just to get out of the housing situation described above: We then found out about a basement where 1 lied about how many kids 1had and 1 ended up geîting beaten by a dnuiken landlord..

Donna lived in three different places that t m e d out to be dangerous for her and her children. This was al1 after she had to move nom a stable apartrnent where she was able to pay the rent and survive for over four years. She went fiom this stability in the community into a cycle of episodical homelessness because she was now too poor to afford the rent.

Diane was simply moving fiom motel to motel. She had given up on finding an apartment. She explains: " 2 was sfaying in motels, then when the kiak came bock I was in the motelsforfour months. " She has not been living in adequate housing for over two

years.

Most of the women had k e n living in many different places. Moving was the nom for many. Carol complained that "myson has been infour schools this pas1 year. " These

fmilies were frequently bouncing around fiom place to place and much of thcir cnergy was lost in simply coping with al1 the problems encountered by such transience.

As mentioned previously and confinned by the &ta, d e fiordable housing is no longer

a possibility for homeless families who are expected to find an apartment afier a shon shelkr shy. 1Mary cornplains aboui the impossible housing siiuaiion she and hrr iwo daughtlrs fiud tliemselves in: i've corne fiom a three bedroom to a IWO. Tried to get a onebedroorn. That's impossible. They won't rent to me because i've got two teenaged chiidren. Most of the two bedrooms i'm iooking at are eight hundred pius utiIities. So right then i'm going fiom fivr fifty-four inçiuding utiiitirs tu eight hundred pius. Ï o u just C ~ L1 h. n ' i know wheri: yuu'rc: guing iv w m e up wiih h i exiri ruoriq...lliat's siiil hkirig a lot oui OC ihe goccry riioriey.

Donna described the impossibility of renting an affordable apartment: DA: How is your housing search going? D o m : Good but very expensive...I wouid have k e n out there a long time ago. The places are there «, be rented and there are places you can get. But it's the money...

Carol spoke about problems encountered in finding housing: "There's alwcrys something blocking you Eitherjinanci~lproblems or housing problems" Later in the interview,

when refemng again to getting an apartment, she explaineci: "1hi hoping by Marchjirst 1'12 have a place. Coming the end of this month, 1'11have most of the money for the down

75

paymem and fhen1'IItake itfiom there. " Carol however has already k e n in the shelter

system for five weeks and it will take another four weeks justo have first and last month rents to begin to look for housing- And this swing will oniy occur if there is no other ernergency that requires her to spend any of her FBA cheque. Residents in shelters do not receive welfare, but those on FBA are eligible to receive a reduced cheque each month, but are also given this reduced amount upon discharge for their first month in the

community..

Diane refers to what Landlords normally ask for: They just want a deposit or last rnonth rent....they want too much rent. 1mean a deposit, you don't have a deposit, you're put ai the end of the list first of ali, nght? Last month rent was an issue for al1 the women. While 1st month rent is still gmnted to families who are looking for a new address in most municipalities in Ontario, the Social

Services Division of Metro Toronto Community SeMces Department cut this benefit in 1993 in the hope that landlords would soon stop requiring it.

Here is an excerpt fkom the interview with Helen who is looking for a two bedroom:

Helen: 1can cope with something from seven twenty to seven fi&. But anything over that 1wouldn't be able to manage... DA: Have you seen many places? Helen: Yeah, I've seen quite a few..mt in that price range. DA: A bit over? Helen: Yeah, eight hundred, nine fi% al1 the way up to a thousand do1lm.

Mary refers to some of the two bedrooms even she has seen: Even at two bedrooms that I've tried to get into or that 1 went to see that are at eight hundred, eight fi@ and nine hundred I wouldn't keep my dog there. And its not like my standards are hi*. The ovewhelming issues then are that of cost and the quality of fiordable housing given lowered m i a l assistance rates, low vacancy rates, and the nsing cost of the limited

affordable apartments available. This makes it more and more difficult for these women to get out of the shelter system into a place where they feel secure and where they can senle down. The poor conditions of the existing Bordable housing stock add m e r pressure on their abiliîy to find a cornfortable place they could cal1 home.

To conclude, the pnce of housing made the search extrernely difficult. It seemed like these women were finding very few available units that hdlords would rent to someone

in their situation and with their limited price range. Emma sumrned up the situation well:

A lot of people when they've been searching they've basically said the same thing. Some are nice but they are too expensive and some are just what we al1 le&

C Tem~orarvSolutions;

Given the pressures being placed on them by the shelter, many of the £ive women were consideringjust taking any apartment. Yet they were living with the fear that this would only be a temporary solution requiring them to M e r uproot their children. Yet they

were becoming increasingly desperate to get out of the shelter, as they both wanted their independence and also had pressures from staff. Some were tmly womed about a temporary move while others saw such a move as inevitable and predicable. It had in fact becorne their Iifestyle. The following conversation is with Donna who was considering

such a temporary solution:

Donna: I'm at the point now where I'm looking at a one (bedroorn) or a bachelor just to get the kids out...1 heard that with bachelors you don? have to give them last months rent. And it's like three ninety-five.. . DA: But the thing about bachelon and one bedrooms is that it isn't permanent. You might end up in the same situation as the last time? (She entered the shelter after a lying about how many children she haci, the landlord ended up fighting with Donna.) Donna: You're right. It's just that they make it so dificult for you, a lot of us (women in the shelter) are talking about it and that's the problems we are getting. Carol was also looking at a similar temporary solution just to get out of the system for a

while. She was also recognizing that no matter how hard she tried, she still felt she could

end up having to return. She explains: Carol: I was thinking at one point 1was going to try and just get a small place. 1 was phonùig and going to see places that are one bedroorns just to get out and be able to say it was my own. DA: And that may not 1 s t very long. Carol: No. Because you'd go crazy...

When commenting on the prospect of moving out with the curent welfare rates Carol also expressed scepticism as to wheîher she could last in the commmity: Carol: There's going to be a month somewhere in the year where you're going to have to dip into your rent money because there's

something that is needed Not something you want something that's needed and it affects you the rest of the year. DA: So given thai, how do you feel about the prospects for maintaining an address? Could you end up back in the shelters a second time? Carol: Exactly. And it's hard. 1mean you try to make it work, but they put limitations on you.

In the two quotes above DOM^ and Carol both used the word 'Yhey" saying "they d e it roo d~flaltforyou"or "theyplace limitations on you". At one level Donna's comments

rnay have been refening to Landlords, but they were also speaking about the shelter system and to the community that has created these barriers. "They" meant society and those responsible for the policies that impact upon their families. Also, it brings up the

issues of power and control, for 1 think both women felt that the larger society was in

charge. They were always forced to act and respond to the demands of others. They felt powerless living in a system in which some were designed to fail. Carol, upset with her

situation and curent social policy trends, simply stated: "They berter do something."

Diane was also unsure of her fuhue. She didn't really believe that a place would corne aiong for her. She really didn7tthink she could make it back into the community. Given

ber recent experiences and her low self esteem, she simply felt a decent affordable place for her and the boys would not materialize. Even if it dici, she may also have been worried that it was not the best solution either given the problems with her boyfhend and the CAS:

DA: So you don? see the fuhue as you getting your place and staying with the boys full time? Diane: Yeah, if I found a place and...I can't see it. 1 hope it happens you know. Bill (hyhend) sees me getting a place but 1 can't see it if 1get an apartment rnaybe things would be better with me and the kids. Maybe l'il learn to be with them with health.... At the end Diane was more hopefbl however it seemed like she was really unsure of what

to do. She did not know whether in fact leaving the shelter was the best solution at this point given al1 the ongoing unresolved issues she had to deal with. I was left with a sense of her despair and feelings of helplessness. Although Diane wanted to leave, her leaving

would put the children at risk, yet she knew that eventually she was going to have to leave. ORen there were no easy solutions.

Emma in the pilot referred to a temporary solution that she had recently tried and that she saw others attempting as well:

I see a lot of people doubling up and sharing the rent and sharing the bills because otherwise you just can't do it. 1 can see two single mother's with Say one or two kids get a big enough place. One of the rnost comrnon reasons for leaving these shared arrangements were when utility bills or other common areas such as the kitchen or laundry were shared. Despite

the dificulties, apparently there were more families than ever taking this route.

To conclude, many felt powerless by this situation and were &en just grasping at straws, tqing to move anywhere. They felt they had little control over their housing situation. It didn't really matter what happened they were going to end up losing out in the end.

Everyone in the shelter was stnrggling to get a place on a daily basis. They were always

looking over their shoulden at the other hostel residents and watching their housing searches. Often there were so few apartments that were affordable and accepted social assistance that many would end up competing for the same few units that met their

criteria. Mary aptly described the situation: "Zr 5 like crabs in a bucket you know. " Carol describes the cornpetition faced: Forty difYerent people al1 thrown together fighting for a place to live and I mean its really tough fiom here you get forty different

people calling the same number...And then when you know somebody gets a place, everybody else feels let down because they didn't get it. They were tryïng for the same place. It's sort of, 'Uh04 what did I do wrong? What has she got that 1don't have? The searches themselves were seen as difficult if not impossible, as landlords were very intrusive in their questioning and were not willing to rent often no matter what they said

or did. Questions around income and employment were the first to mise, and were offen difficult to handle. Mary explains: The first question tbey ask is: "Are you working?" And if you say you're on FBA some don't understand. So if 1 say l'm on welfare, then nght away...Oh! Usually they'll get two more questions, not realizing what FBA is...they think it's a pension...the next question is: "How many people are going to be using the place?" You tell them, then they say "who's going to pay the rent?"You try to find options to work around, but as soon as they find out you're on assistance they want nothing to do with you and point blank say: "We don? accept people on assistance."It's total discrimination. If they don't want to be that cmde they'll ask how many children and then say well I don't think it will be big enough."

Helen a very calm and quiet person who presents well, has a good work history and a

very calm temperament The only time she becarne upset in the interview and raised her voice in frustration was in order to tell the story of how she as an African Canadian was

recently a victim of discrimination in the following scenario: 1found this nice reasonably priced place. Because of my situation the landlord told me he had to get a CO-signer.1have this fnend

who's record is perfect. He just bought a house, he has a brand new car. He works for the city. The landlord looked at me and told me his record was so good I brought everything that he asked me to bring. He accepted everything and then the &y after he called and said my friend's record was too good! The landlord had not believed her fkiend. When I suggested that she could have pursued

this matter as such discrimination was not allowed, she told me there must have k e n

some other reason why she wasn't supposed to get that place, and that it wasn't her way to cornplain.

AI 1 participants agreed that most landlords required last month rent . Diane explains:

They want a deposit or last month rent. They want it up fiont before you apply and without the promise of address note (required by welfare) you can't get it. And they won3 give their address before they give the cheque so it doesn't work out for me.

This was typical of what at lot of shelter families faced. Most landlords wanted to see money up front before discussing tenancy. It was reported that landlords who were aware of how social assistance works wiil often wait the two to three days for their assistance cheque, however they may still rent their place out should they find someone else. Also,

landlords rnay be well aware of how welfare works, however they simply want to say no to this particular person and this is one of a variety of convenient means of excluding or

discrirninating against families on welfare.

Many complained that the shelter desperately wanted them to secure a new address but it

was almost impossible for them to find the time to actually look. Carol explained the

They're afler me to go out and look for places which 1do...But 1 have limitations because of my kid's school. 1have to walk them, they Say its a security issue...So I'm generally limited to looking in this area right now within walking distance so that 1 can be back in an hou. Because that's the only time 1 have, an hour in the moming and an h o u in the aftemoon. Doma complained about how hard it was to actually aparmient search due to the communal phone. The phone was in the centre of the hall, visible to all, and often became an issue. Doma relates what has happened to her when calling landlords:

Ten minutes is al1 we get for each call. Staff monitor it. There's arguments about the phone. "Get off the phone!" you hear in the middle of your cal1 and kids screaming in the background and they Say: 'How many kids do you have?' With the screaming you cannot hear yourself. Then the staff is screaming 'I said ten minutes! 1 argue and they Say: "No, now!" and you have to hang UP-

Mary referred to the pay phone that shelter residents also used:

We have to limit our time on that phone booth A lot of my money too went to the phone. I'd get $10.00 in quarters and I'd be getting answering machines, gemng cut OR..ItY s really mistrating...."

Another wncern of Mary's is thaï when landlords called back the cal1 would always be answered by someone stating the name of the shelter. She explains:

They say "good afternoon Toronto Shelter," then they (landlords) just hang up. They won? even lave a message. Out of sixty calls 1 left with messages for them to r e m nobody called...then 1 started going out walking up and d o m the streets finding someplace 1 codd talk to a penon..and it just went really really bad. Mary thought she had been accepted at another address, but was eventually tumed down. Her daughten then came and told her about this great place their school fiend's mother

had found. When they went there it ~ n e out d to be this sarne address! She then found the following place: For two months I called the woman, the landlady, for two months, she was renovating, getting everything in order. I got into a mix up with a WA worker who was off sick...everything happened that could, finally it got in order and then the landlady got into an argument with her son and she moved in herselfl So even afier two months it just folded.

This scenario is typical as sometimes even the landlords that are willing to rent or have felt sorry for a family and have decided to take a chance despite their usual critena, many end up getting concerned if the family are not able to meet deadlines for deposits or other requirements. So even after they have numired a relationship and are getting their hopes up, they will anive at a point where there are still other often uncontrollable issues which

potentially prevent occupancy. Mary has now finally found a place she feels may work out, yet she still has a number of concems:

But now 1 have a house. 1was supposed to sign a lease this Friday. They didn't contact me . I contacted them. The landlady is now

leaving the country for three months and her son is taking over and he doesn't really w e about the fact that I'm in a shelter and I've been looking for a place for three months. He just wants to rent to whoever has money ...And the fnend 1 am sharing with 1just met in the shelter and I h o w absolutely nothing about this person. These s h e d arrangements were becoming more cornmon as shelter residents could simply no longer afTord a place on their own. According to staff, shared arrangements rarely worked as families would eventually have differences or one woman would have a serious problem such as an addiction that perhaps prevented prompt payments of rent. Eventually one family would leave, forcing the other to go as well.

To conclude, it is becoming harder and harder to secure the few remaining affordable

units. Over recent years this has resulted in a situation where each successive apartment is often of poorer quality than the former. As Mary states: "My standard S have r e d y lowered. Every time 2 go ro Zook for another place. " Housing searches became extremely

time consuming, and were a daily source of frustration. The searches themselves seemed to M e e r debilitate and hstrate participants. They simply lacked the resources, the landlord references, employment, bank accounts, CO-signers,or the immediate cash required. This made their accegtance unlikely in the few affordable places that they could locate. Housing in Toronto was becoming out of reach for these families. They were having to resort to smaller or s h e d arrangements that were oAen inappropriate, sometimes dangerous, and usually temporary.

Personal finances were found to be a continual problem area. There was always a shortage of fun&. The women were constantly adding up numbers and thinking about how they could manage if they had to take money out of the food for rent. Many had current expenses such as storage. Two of these women had overpayments with WA and G.W.A. that also had to be factored in when looking for a place. Many were spending any

savings they did have on food for their children when the children refused to eat shelter food. Finances were mentioned throughout the interviews. It is interesting to note that in total the word money was mentioned 109 times for a total of 2.1% of the total lines in the interviews.

In the pilot Rosa stated: "We (she a d her husband) were alwaysfight ing about money." Anna explained how she was attempting to change her spending habits: "As soon as Z gei money Z spend zt, but ï 'mstaning io budget type thing" Donna complained about WA: "ifthey had given me the muney I could hove gotten the place. " She went on saying:

"Moneytalh, they don 't core how you gel it. " Mary said "the money jusf goes. "

Often it seemed that while they were looking for a v e n & , however they did not have s&cient resources to secure a place. They were still having to wait to Save enough for first and last month rent. Carol found henelf waiting for eligibility changes. Carol's twenty year old daughter could not be included on the welfare cheque at al1 as she was

not attending school. However in two months she would be twenty-one, then she would be eligible for an assistance cheque and could pay an extra $350 for rent. Such a situation was typical, there always seerned to be an additional barrier or hurdle to overcome that

ofien lead to long waits. Alâhough it was late January when the interview took place, Carol spoke about her houshg goals this way: 17mhoping by March first that I'II have a place. So that would only mean one month of having to sustain ourselves on a low income. Mary was not able to Save much of her FE3A cheque after fleeing her last address. She

found being continualiy uprooted lefl her without the essentials which meant she could never get caught up with her finances: 1 was spending it (her FBA incorne) on essentials that aren't covered in the shelter...we came with only a suitcase...when my children started high school1 didn7thave clothing...we had to buy books...the money just goes.

Donna, who is on WA,sees her situation and that af many pers as hopeless. She feels stuck:

One thing that really bothers me is the system of how they work with you while you're in the shelter, to get out...1don't feel that it works...they don? give you the money to find a place...I have a storage fee to pay and other expenses to pay. Donna is refemng to the reduced FBA amounts rather than full assistance both during the shelter stay and in the first month afier. WA always pays at the end of the month for the previous month. This means that upon leaving the shelter regdar assistance is resumed in

87

the second month While it makes sense to lower assistance while it is being provided in

a shelter, the policy encourages longer shelter stays to save rnoney for first and last

month rent. Such stays M e r debilitate. There is no incentive to Ieave quickly. The FBA policies both delay the departure from the shelter and create longer term problems.

Donna's concem also addressed the lack of money up front to secure an address with a landlord She clearly stated: "money talks" when dealing with landlords. Diane who would be applying for G.W.A.,reacted similarly: "They just want a deposit..and without

a promise of address you can't get in." While others seemed to have more skills at getting apartments perhaps due to greater experience in looking, it was clear that these two women were often intimidated and fnistrated by the process. As Diane stated

nurnerous tirnes in the interview. "It's hard!" Two others in the pilot and one other participant in this study also described the search as "hard." Other words used were

"impossible," and "nustrating."

There was also a lot of fnistration around the incorne maintenance prograrns and their individual case workers. Some stated potential apartments were lost as they could not access their worker in time. This happened to both Donna and Mary. m e r s complained that the phone system used by their case workers was inaccessible.

The Social Assistance Cuts;

Questions were initially asked concerning how participants were able to budget and meet their needs on social assisuince before the October 1, 1995 cuts. It was found that many were able to purchase most of the basic food items they needed to hold them over until the child tax benefit came in on the twentieth of the month, Food banks were used occasionally and some of the families were able to take the children out for one treat a month such as a meal at MacDonalds or a Tuesday movie. They used clothing depots, but were able to purchase new boots, shoes, and other required items. They reported being

able to eat on most days or always by combining their food purchased with the food bank food or help from a fnend or relative.

Al1 five families interviewed were severely affected by the 2 1.6% reduction to social assistance cheques. This cut directly lead to Helen's entry into the shelter, it was the

main reason why Carol felt she lost her place, and it lead to more fiequent and longer periods of homelessness for the other participants. In the pilot, which took place shortly

after the cutback in rates, two out of three families listed the reduction in their income as the reason for entenng the shelter.

The following area will cover detailed conversations conceming life before and after the social assistance cuts. Many found rental amounts prohibitive after their income was

lowered substantially. Emma in the pilot gave a straightforward reason as to why she ended up leaving her place four months d e r the social assistance cuts:

I had to decide what was best for hirn mer son) and myself. If 1 didn't feed hirn then I would have Children's Aid on my case w o n d e ~ what g was going on. If 1fed him,then 1 would face eviction so I chose to feed him. Mary explained what happened to her budget after the cuts. In our conversation before this quote she had been speaking about the lessened amounts she gets from the food

banks in 1997 compared to what she received in 1995: DA: Did you notice a change with the cuts? Mary:Definitely. DA: At what point in the month would the money be running out? Mary: About the middle of the month. Just before the child tax credit would corne in. About a week before that came in. DA: Before the cuts you were able to survive that week, you had money? Mary: No problem, no problem. Because that extra two hundred dollars or whatever was taken off the cheque is unreal. When you're on FBA, hvo hundred dollars makes a world of difference. While Diane was just getting by in the cornmunity before the cuts, since then she has been in shelters twice and has stayed in motels for extended penods. She explains: Diane: (Before the cuts) I could take almost any apartment. DA: You were able to get places then. Diane: Uh-hum. But since the cutbacks, that's been my problem. 1 guess. 1 hadn't figureci, 1 never thought much about that but yeah...since then it's been hard DA: What did you do to swvive with the reduced income? Diane: I went to several food banks. Had to. Sometimes it got to the point where they would refuse and I would have to go without.

Later, when we were discwing the new maximum rates for renting apartments, Diane spoke about the limited incorne for food and other expenses she would be left with. Part

of this reduced food money would have to go towards rent: DA: You're going to have to use food money for rent? Diane: Yes. Then you have to go to food banks or 1don't know...1 guess that's when people decide to do crime and go out on the streets. (Diane mentioned earlier that she worked as a prosthte.) Later when asked what happened when the social assistance cuts occurred, Diane explained: 1 moved back home at that point...but it didn't work for long, then I started renting motel rooms.

Carol referred to the devastating impact of these cuts on her farnily: Carol: It really affected us a lot. 1lost two hundred and some odd dollars oEmy cheque. That's not a little amount. It's large when you're geared to running your household to what little money you get in the fim place. And then to be chopped two hundred extra...it just throws you right off. You can't build yourself back up. You don? have enough to live on as it is...way below the cost of living. It was bard. DA: What areas did you cut back on? Carol: Groceries, clothing for the children. Things they need 1just couldn't fiord.

From this conversation, Carol immediately spoke about the &op in self esteem of her children showing the comection between the econornic realities and her children's lives.

The children's needs beyond the food had becorne extra.

After the above discussion, Carol then explained that they had been given an increase in rent at the start of the year and since they were getting a paydirect fiom FBA they assumed the rent increase would be paid. FBA neglected to adjust the amount they sent to MTHA and MTHA did not advise thern wtil the end of the year. At that point they were behind a lot of mooey. They ended up being held responsible for the rent and were evicted. Carol felt she could have paid it if it hadn't been for the 23% reduction. She explains: That two hundred dollars that was taken off my cheque I could have used to slowly pay off my rent. But there was no way I could have budgeted to take anything out of what 1 had to work with afier the cuts. 1 was smck by the contrast between Donna's life before and afier the social assistance

cuts. She had a good landlord whom she rented from for four yean. She was able to swive on her own, h

l her cheque was cut. The cuts came so quickly that Donna Iike

many were caught off guard She related the following story with a lot of ernotion: Donna: When the cuts happened...I found out what was happening with al1 these cuts. It was explained to me ...you'll have to move because you won't be getting that money no more. And I didn't really believe it unti1I saw it happening, I couldn't keep up with it no more. I had to move and in between I'm holding back rent. The landlord didn't want me to l a v e...even after 1 paid partial rent for five months she was trying to help me out saying it's okay you can pay so much...1kept paying her S700,I would hold back the rest. That's for the kids. Between winter gear and food it's pretty expensive. 1used food banks too. Eventually my debts were too high. Donna also rnentioned how things were going before October 1995 and the impact of the social assistance cutbacks on her acquaintances in the building where she lived:

DA: Do you feel you could have maintained this address without the social assistance cuts? Donna: Yes. Because everything was right. 1 mean, 1 was in school, 1 was juggling working at my child's learning disabilities and we were paying our rent. Food was not as we would like it, but it was there. And we were getting help fiom places that were in that area. DA: Were you ushg food banks then? Donna:Not really ofien, but it helped us get ahead...But with the cuts it doesn't matter how hard you try you're still going dom. We just couldn't get back up. A lot of people moved out of the building at the time and we're like al1 on assistance...1rernember we were talking in the laundry room: "The cuts! We can't fiord it! My kids! l'm going to have to move!" A lot of people sent away their kids A lot of kids here went back to Jamaica...mers would go out with a man just because he was helpuig out And that was the choice you had you know.

In the faIl of 1995 suddenly the social assistance cuts becarne the main topic of conversation in Donna's apartment building. The options available to people had shrunk.

The options for single parents had decreased even M e r . Donna paints a dismal picture of children leaving ( which soon after happened with her son as well), and of people

unable to sunive or "'going down" despite their efforts. The situation had become unbearable and there was no longer an immediate solution. Donna as othen,were on the road to transience, instability, and homelessness.

in the pilot Anna referred to the cut in assistance rates affecting what she could purchase: 1 feel like I'm not going to be able to do as much for my kids. Because 1 can't fiord to. Because of these cutbacks 1 can't a o r d to do nothing. 1can't afford basically nothing. You know,running out of diapen, three kinds of diapers, that's a lot of money nght there...1 can't S o r d to go pay for expensive rruuiing shoes. There's some people that can and because of the cutbacks a lot of kids will make fÙn of other kids.

Emma had written to the province after the cuts, she comments on the letter. It was right ftom my feelings, my own thoughts. 1 think the cuts are outrageous. Hams is targeîing people and he doesn't know their situations.Single mothers running fiom abusive men. It's not fair that they targeted the welfare system at al1...I stated if you cut any M e r , this is what your gonna force me to do. Not that 1 would jeopardize my son, but you know the cuts have done enough jeopardizing.

To conclude, the cuts to social assistance levels have had a lasting or permanent impact

on these families. Their fiitures are now in jeopardy. Their children, who are their future, were being directly affected. People were becoming homeless for the first time. The rate

and length of their episodes of homelessness were soon to increase due to the new social assistance rates. The effects are far ranging when one considen the prolonged stays in shelters and the ongoing impact this instability has on children. Children's needs were no longer being met.

Children, already mentioned in the categories above, are perhaps the greatest Mctims in this tragedy called homelessness. The following findings indicate that their lives are one constant shuffie with little stability, few or transient fnends, stigmatization by peen in schools, and even confusion as to whether to listen to parents or shelter workers. Children in these families a h had leaming, emotional and behavioural problems. Mary explains "the children get bounced arozmd so much they don 't even h o w where they are. " Carol's comments were perhaps the most revealing:

And you know something and it's really strange because I take the kids out and 1see a complete difference in behaviour...as you walk through that shelter door, it's like you see another child emerge. It's really strange. They start to react to the other kids and they feed on it. Right now my son thinks he owns the place. He thinks he owns the TV type thing because he doesn't have, he doesn't feel he has, anyihing that belongs to him.

This lack of ownership or control over personal space and possessions, and the loss of stability in one's home environment is dificult for anyone, however, it is more so for a child who requires stability for growth and maturation. Rosa in the pilot noticed that her daughter who had been toilet trained had regressed to using diapers upon entering the shelter. She explained: What 1 have noticed is that ever since we have been in here is that my youngest daughter she acts like a baby. I had her completely toilet trained..and now 1had to put her back on pull ups, she doesn't even go to the toilet.

Given the lack of privacy, other children in the shelter acted out to get attention, to define persona1 space, or simply out of fnistration. Diane was reaching out for help as she felt she had lost control of her boys who acted out She expressed a need for assistance with parenting skills. Often the staff were the ones her two boys saw as the authority figures: With two families in the same room, what do you do when one child wants the light on and the other off. Then they start. (The fighting) They're really dominant They won? listen to me they're boys and I'm the mom you know...at least they'll listen to the office al1 right. 1 need help.

Diane saw that the fiequent moves were taking their toll on her boys, especially the youngest who was four and could not speak. No doubt his inability to cornmunicate added to his fnistration level. Diane tells us:

He's moved a lot. That's part of his problern with his little temper and "hypemess" and that and I think it's because we've moved several times. Move, move, move. To his dad, to me and back to his dad. He doesn't know what's happening. Carol found it impossible to discipline one child only as al1 the children had to share the same bedroom:

The fourteen, nine and eight year old al1 have different needs that need to be addreçsed and you can't do that in one room. 1have a problem disciplining young children because if you discipline one you discipline them all. Ifone has to go to bed then they al1 have to go-

Due to this, Carol also saw staffgetting more involved with disciplining her children. She particularly had a hard time keeping control of her nine year old son Charlie. Charlie was diagnosed as having ADHD. (Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder.) She attributed

his behaviour and diagnosis to al1 the moves, and the loss of self esteem especially since October 1995 when she could no longer fiord clothing and other basic things the

children needed. Both her eight and nine year old boys were aîtending a special school when living in their MTHA home, but Carol couldn't afford the bus tickets any more and

they missed many classes.

Carol's son Charlie attempted suicide a year ago upon moving out of his home of eight years and into a shelter. When asked about the suicide attempt, she felt the move to the shelter, and his stigrnatization in school for king a 'shelter kid' was the last straw. When asked what caused the suicide attempt, she explained: Stress. Being eveming, being in a hostel, kids calling him names at school about being in a hostel. And then with the ADHD...

At the time of this interview she had still not found the appropriate program that would

be able to help Charlie. He was in a section twenty-seven school in another municipality, but now the shelter was within another school district. Carol explains their current plight:

Carol: 1 think its an emergency situation. Charlie already tried to commit suicide. He needs some counselling. And its still going to take six months. DA: 1s he getting any counselling at al1 nght now? Carol: Only his psychiatrist every DHO months, and that's not enough! DA: How is his mental health right now? Carol: He's been digressing since we came in. He's starting to become physicaily violent again. And he's talking about wanting to hurt himself ..He closes off to you. You know, he doesn't want to talk to mom.

97 Charlie was o d y allowed to attend the shelter class in the local school because of his previous behaviour. He was at the shelter with nothing to do for the rest of the day. The

week afler the i n t e ~ e w1 spoke with Carol again in the hall of the shelter and found out that Charlie had broken the nose of another boy in school by kicking him with his anng boots and was now expelled for good. Chariie was on a waiting Iist for an assessment at

the Clarke hstitute for Psychiatry. Carol hoped he would be able to get into a new program after the assessment but the prograrns had waiting lists of about six months. By this time the family would have moved fiom the shelter and would probably be in another municipality. There Charlie would again have to go through another application process as such programs are offered according to specific boundaries. Such restrictions

may limit access to this and other programs. Charlie had previouçly been on a waiting Iist in Scarborough but didn't get a chance to begin a chikiren's mental health program there either. He keeps falling through the cracks. Charlie's younger brother also attended a special school. Carol was womed that he too may end up with a similar condition to that of his brother. She stated he was already acting out "more und more.

?'

Donna's son Andrew has a leanüng disability. He is eleven yean old and is not able to read as yet. He had lived in a number of foster homes, and is currently attending a special education school. DOM^ explains his situation in the following conversation:

D o m : I buy him special materials to try to help him out with reading. I'm really scared that he may take an easier way out and might get in trouble with the teacher. So I'm trying...it's really sad because they say he's so good at math.He just cannot read. DA: What would have caused it?

D o m : It's the moving because we had a great semp at the school we were at with him and they were so good We al1 worked together. It was fine. We had it in place. He had a big break through. We were so proud. That's when 1 had to move and they moved him frorn that school...It's just been al1 the moving a11 around the place that didn't help him. You know he started going through a lot after that and he'd been treated badly in al1 the foster homes. 1just got them out of foster care and got the family home and then al1 the cuts siatted and it was hard to deal with. They just came out of therapy and everything afier four yean and then to face al1 these cuts. in the both of the i n t e ~ e w quoted s above both Donna and Carol move ri& fiom the

leaming disabilities and the mental health problems of their children to their transience and the reduction in their social assistance rates. Both clearly and directly made this connection. They continued to discuss the relationship between their children's ability to progress and cope, with their own ability to run the family with an income that was insuficient and that produced many recent hardships.

Out of these five families, three that I was made aware of, had children with leaming

disabilities, developmental andor mental health problerns. Carol had two children, making it four out of the eleven children living in the shelter with their mothen at the time of this study had these additional problems. This is an incredibly high ratio. Another interesting detail is that d l four of these children were boys. The majority were also in the nine to eleven year range. Three out of the four of the boys (Carol's and Diane's) were hard to handle. They took up a lot of their mother's time and energy making it hard for them to concentrate on getting housing or solving other problems they had. As Carol

99 said of her son "he's here di the tirne. I can 't gel anything done." These boys also took up a lot of time for shelter staff.

This subtheme was one I initially overlooked, but later it came out loud and clear from

the second coding. Many children in these families had lived apart fiom the family or were currently living apart fiom the family. Some of these children were moved about a lot in the care of Chikiren's Aid or with differem caregivers, and some of those who were older had made a conscious decision to leave.

There were children in three families that were with another caregiver or had left the family. Donna's children had been separated fiom her for four years in Children's Aid homes and before that had been in the m e of her mother. Diane's two boys were separated from their father who had recently been their caregiver. Such adjustments and resulting feelings of neglect or loss are extremely difficult for any child, but when they

are combined with poverty, isolation, and a lack of support, it can become traumatic.

Donna was particularly distressed by her son having gone to live with his father. When

she had lost her aparûnent and ended up in a dangerous building she made arrangements through the courts for the boy's father to have custody:

Donna: He went to his father's house.

DA: Have you had contact with him? Donna: Yeah, on and off. It's like hard. He uses that against me...Sometirnes he (father) likes to see us sometimes he don't. DA: Were the arrangements made in family court? Donna: Yeah. And then 1 find out that my son is not hapW.... do now 1 want to bnng it back to court. But how am 1going to get it back in court? 1 don? even iive anywhere. He cornes on weekends when 1 really put pressure on his father, but since I'm in here, he's not been here. I can't let him (father) know bat. We went on conversing on this topic for a few more minutes. During this conversation

Donna described the stress this separation produced, how hard it is even to establish phone contact with her son, and the problems he faced in his curent home. This separation was one added stressor. Given the harrn that her other children had faced when being separated while in custody of CAS, Donna had ample reason to be

concerned. The other main point here, is that this could have been prevented had Donna

been able to maintain her initial address. One could alrnost descnbe her cment plight of homelessness as a downward spiral. She stated: "no matter whut you do you 'regoîng

Mary's eldest daughter ended up taking off with her first boyhiend. She explained:

She got tired of running, She's like nineteen. She doesn't want to run no more. She's been Nnning al1 her life. Carol found that her son was simply tired of shelter life and the instability it produced. She found his leaving hard to accept as it broke up family dynamics. Refemng to shelter

life and the problerns you could have with other residents, she then began to speak about her son in the following conversation: Carol: That's one of the reasons my eighteen year old boy chose to stay at my mothers rather than stay with me which really was upsetting because it sort of broke up my family unit. Because of the fact that there were single women with children and he didn't want to be in that position. DA: 1 suppose it was difficult for him to share the room as well. Carol: Yes. There's me and my daughter plus the three younger ones. There's no pnvacy DA: 1s he going to corne back when you get a place? Carol: No, he's staying out on his own...He's staying out there for now. He's looking for another place with a friend. But he's ...1 guess he's taking that fint step. Carol did not want her son to leave. She felt he wasn't ready to be on his own, yet she also knew that what she had to offer was also unsuitable. This was just another indicator,

and a more concrete one for her, that her family was faliing apart. She also missed her husband who had formally left her recently, although they had been separated for over two years. She did not have time to deal with that, and now her oldest son was going She spoke with hesitation, then emoiion, on her son taking this step.

Diane's two children were in the shelter with her, but that was o d y because their father happened to be in jail. She was keeping the eldest only until his father would be released in six months. This back and forth movement of the boys had occurred a number of

times.Although Iater Diane spoke about wanting to keep her youngest son Clayton, in this conversation she stated she would need a break when his dad gets out of jai!:

Diane: 1see both of them going back when he cornes out and he fin& a place to live, I'II let them go to him for a while...He wants to have at least Johnny and he said he'd like Clayton to be around for a bit. DA: Wi11 you see them on weekends? Diane: It just depends. Oh yeah, I'd still stay in touch. DA: You feel that you need a break to get younelf together? Diane: 1need a break. I don? have my mom or my family, it's always me. From the above, one can conclude there is no definite plan around custody. Upon analysis of ail the discussion around custody in this i n t e ~ e w it becarne apparent that neither Diane or the boys' father showed the stability to keep the children al1 the time. It therefore seemed probable that this pattern of movement between the parents would continue.

Mary's oldest daughter, as was mentioned earlier, also lefi due to their instability. To conclude, four out of five families experienced separation at some time and it was ofien directly the result of the homeless/transient lifestyle. Even Helen, who did not fit into this category, was ofien separated from her daughter for shorter periods. Her 1 1 year old was at her grandparents due to her busy schedule. Along with the stressors in the lives of these children and their parents, can be added the loss that comes with these departures/separations of children. Most separations had recently occurred and wouid

add to the stress of king in a shelter. The entire family unit would no doubt be affected as those who lefi may have been a support to other siblings.

This category refen to what life was like within the shelter itself as there were always cornplaints about rules and food The food, shelter rules and the feelings of participants about shelter life will be looked at now, as wil1 the stress produced by living in a shelter.

The basic provision of food to a child is fundamental for any parent. Al1 children have Iikes and dislikes when it cornes to food. The diets of these chiidren in the shelter were

no different. When the children refused food parents inevitably ended up purchasing it any way they could While it was easier and more economical to get the children to hy more of the "shelter food," they ofien were unsuccessful due in part to the additional stressors already placed upon their children by the new environment. The ability to Say

yes or no to the food is one of their few decisions, and one of the ways the children could

make a statement against where they are. The parents were well aware of this. Thts was their children's protest because mom could not provide them with their own home.

Mary explained that a lot of families on GWA had no extra food money and were out

panhandling a lot. She clearly discusses the dilemma: A lot of times people don? want to eat the food. So if your children go to bed at night crying because they didn't like supper then you're thinking the next day, okay what about breakfast...A lot of the children are under so much stress they don't want to eat, because they don't want to be in here. They're out there panhandling so they can get a nomal meal for their kids. And everyone is like, "Wow look at that!" You know that's normal ...

Diane also found it hard to adjust to the shelter routines. During the first week her

children were refusing to eat the food. Here she discusses the initial solution she came up with, and the fact that she did have a few more options tbanthose on welfare due to her

FBA incorne:

I ordered pizza a few times and we were wamed not to do it again. It's not easy for people runnïng the shelter either. You're not allowed to bring food in because there are others that are not as fortunate as us. Which we're not fortunate... Carol discussed in more detail what life in the shelter meant to her. When 1 asked what lead her to begin hollering more at her children, she responded: Ifs the constant enclosure with them right now because when you're in a shelter you can't move without your kids. When you're at home or in a home situation you al1 go off and do your own linle thing. So there's space and tirne to be alone. Here there's not. It just felt like everything was enclosing on me, like 1 was in a box, no where to ~LUII, no corner to hide in. Diane felt she was being moved about "like apuppet." Mary previously referred to the shelter experience as k i n g "like crabs in a bucket. " As mentioned earlier, they felt they had little power and control over their situation. The experience of being in a shelter felt like they were enclosed, or "in a box" as Carol mentioned.

The shelter niles were also a constant problem area. It was mentioned that the d e s were not always enforced and this wuld lead to confusion. Bedtimes, doing chores, the telephone and whether or not they were looking hard enough for housing were the main problems identified. Mary mentioned that some residents would get into fights

IO5 intentionally. She explained: "They just needed attention." The d e s thernselves were an issue as many were accustomed to living on their own. Suddenly their daily activities and routines had to change to conforrn to the pre-established rules over which they felt they

had Iittle control over. In the pilot however, two families mentioned that the rules had provided routines for their children.

Stress:

Shelter life was a stressful experience. Other peoples rules and ways had to be adapted to. These women lost control over personal space, over f

a over who to be with, who to

share a room with,and what you could do and when. They had to leam to share everything. They were forced to constantly deal with others, including staff.

The levels of stress due to life in the shelter was high for al1 five women and for the families in the pilot. They had difficult childhoods, dificult maniages, children with problems, an extremely limited income From welfare, and they were now stuck in the shelter system living closely with many others. They desperately wanted just to have their

own space and sorne extra time to sort out al1 their problems.

Diane and Carol in particular had an incredible amount of stress in their lives. The word stress was found twenty-two times in a text search. Carol mentioned stress eight times,

Diane seven and Mary five. Al1 participants except Helen who did not live a communal

sening, commented directly on the high level of stress that existed. This is how each participant commented on the stress faced:

Mary: You interact with so many people and they're just-..it7s really stressfil....if you don't get along with one or two of the other residents its hard....the stress you have is landing on the staff and that's reflected back. Carol: Sometimes the stress is so high in here I think I'm going to lose it..Even my eight year old is showing signs since we came in here. He is having discipline problems at school...Things he hadn't shown any sign of for eight months. (Since the last shelter stay) Diane: It's been really hard dealing with eveIyone else. It's really stressful. Kids are always fighting here. Rosa (Pilot): Living here is stressful. W n g no money is stressfùl and having staff look at you al1 the tirne is stressful.

Both Diane and Carol were so overwhelmed by the behaviour of their boys that the stress was unbearable. They were able to accomplish very little if any of their goals due to the

stress that existed on top of al1 the other issues they had to deal with. Additional stressors on Diane were her pregnancy, wiresolved issues around abuse she suffered as a chilci, and problems with her boyfhend who was still in the picture. She also felt pressure rnounting that was instnicting her as to the nght come of action. This pressure came frorn Children's Aid, probation, the shelter, and her boyfhend. Here she expresses concem about the undue pressure: So 1 think, geeze if they knew, they do not know what type of lifestyle I lived before. They'sç got to understand it isn't easy to corne back to reality and start living in an apartment and forget about everythmg else, you know. Abuse, you know and the problems 1 have been having. They've got to understand it's not that easy to get out there and get a place like that, you know.

A few moments later, Diane went on for about five minutes on this same theme, covenng

some of the stressors mentioned: It's hard they've got to undentand, I've got problems with my kids, I've got Children's Aid, I've got courts, I've got other things that are on rny mind. It's not easy to stop and sit d o m and even do something. It's h a d

Later she summarized her concem concentrating on CAS, on her particular worker there, and on what would happen if she chooses to go back to Ryan: Probation, I can't deal with that. Children's Aid until May or June at least, so there's nothing 1can do about that. And now she (CAS worker) knows I'm pregnant so she's holding that over my head. She's coming this Fn&y and she's always in my face. "Are you doing this? Are you doing that? Are you seeing Ryan?" ..if the kids see Ryan, then my kids are taken away. Carol also spoke often of the stress she was under, and how she had gone to a psychiatrist. She explains:

I've been going a few times to visit the psychiaûist. But 1don7t like the idea of psychiatrists wanting to pop you full of pills either...She' s put me on an anti-depressant nght now because 1 was at the point where 1 was doing a lot of crying. And for no reason. I'd be sitting in the T.V.room and al1 of a sudden tears would corne to my eyes. But it's just a fom, a way of it releasing fiom my body or else 1was going to explode.

Carol was not well. 1could tell it in her eyes that she was grasping for some support because the stress she dealt with daily was unbearable at times. Just as many of the others, she did not have the required supports given al1 the overlapping issues she was forced to deal with simultaneously.

IO8 Another area was the sicknesses that resuited fiom communal living. The children always seemed to have a flu virus, lice went around often, and the mothers cornplained that their children were always wming d o m with a variety of ilInesses since entering the

shelter. Diane was one of many that expressed concem: There's a lot of lice. I had a hard time gening rid of it. Right now the boys have rashes al1 over them. 1had pink eye. Yesterday there was a boy in here with ringworm on his face...people don? flush toilets. The boys have col& right now. To conclude, living with many mangers in a confined area is stressful. Getting accustomed to the food itself often becomes a major issue for the children. The rules, the limited resources such as the phone or the sharing ofrooms and facilities, a11 makes it harder to establish regular routines and maintain any semblance of privacy. While a few weeks of this lifestyle is bearable, as the time in the shelter moves along the institutional life has its impact. Farnily members begin to find it harder to cope both with each other and the institution as a whole.

JMEETINGSWrITH STAFF;

Two meetings were held with shelter staff to get feedback on the categories generated and the trends they witnessed in the shelter work Rather than going to a general staff

meeting, it was decided more could corne out of the weekly team meetings where there

were smaller groups. The meetings confirmed many of the insights gained from the women. Information provided by the staff gave the larger picture against which the

specific problems of the women c m be seen.

The teams were organized according to floors in the shelter. 1 met with the two floors that had provided participants for this study. My attendance was for the later part of the meeting only after staff had completed most of their normal business. The meetings

proved extremely helpful as staff shared many of their concem and experîences.

The staff told me that there was a definite increase in the lengths of stay since the social assistance cuts. They felt it was a lot more difficult to get out of the shelter system than it

used to be. They were extremely concemed that recidivism rates were increasing and would continue to increase. Families would be rnoving out into apartments that were inappropriate and where they were lying to the landlords as to the number of children they had. This often meant extreme overcrowding, and greatly increased an eventual

r e m to the shelter.

110

There was a huge increase in addictions in this shelter in the past few years. Staff found many residents particularly the younger women they saw, had been involved with both

dmgs and prostitution, often just pnor to entry. The h g of choice was usually crack cocaine and to a lesser extent alcohol. Although Mstated that this was simply fiom what they had found out as the residents rarely revealed that there was a problem in this

area. The vast majority did not ask for assistance with any addiction problems. When problems did aise with this population it lead to rules being broken, to eventual discharge, possible intervention from CAS, and in a few cases to treatment options. There were also the serious health problems in children resulting from fetal alcohol syndrome and "crack babies." (Among the women 1 intewiewed, addictions were discussed with Diane and rnentioned by Carol.)

Staff noticed that there were a lot of young women who seemed really confused and lacked any real goals in terms of getting out of the shelter system. Odier stafkountered by mentioning the scarcity ofjobs and felt this younger generation of poor people with

limited skills and education were actually maturing with virîually no possibility of meaningful employment. Employers required higher educational and skill levels than most shelter residents had. Even menial jobs required a grade twelve education or better. It seemed like these women would be destined to spend most of their lives in and out of

shelters. It was mentioned that there were some that were simply going fiom one shelter to the next and had become dependent on the system and institutionalized. They were simply getting accustomed to, yet lost within, the system. Given the length of stay

111

concerns of each shelter, each would eventually be referred on or get the family to move

on at some point. The problem here was that institutional requirements were being met, but the problems cuntinued and were in fact ~ m p o u n d e dby these multiple moves. , perhaps fit within this group.) (Diane, and to a lesser extent D o ~ acould

Shelter staff saw an increase in evictions in recent years. Even evictions from MTHA were up. They stated this was primarily due to the violence and unsafe living conditions in these projects. This study had found two such families. A family in the pilot left

MTHA due to safety concerns. Anna stated: "îheywerefree basing right by our door and the kids were right there." Carol mentioned that safety was also a major concem of hen.

In the project where they were living, dnigs were continually being sold right outside their unit. She complained: "The place wasn '1 safe no more."

There was also an increase in shelter residents with mental health problems. Recently they had a family in the shelter where every member was on medication for their mental health. Staff also saw recent increases in single rnothen where both the child and the mother had mental health problems. There was a concem expressed by many that

medical practitioners were handing out medication even more readily than in the pst.

This medication was "pushed instead of coping and Ife skills." Another problem is that there were fewer cornmunity mental health services remaining for families. Those that did exist had longer line ups that just a few yean ago. Gone were parent relief programs that may have given a mother, ofien the only caregiver with few supports, a break for a

112

&y h m one or more children with special needs. A h ,neighbourhood supports for children with mental health problems or disabilities were integrated or cut completely in recent years. Support groups as well were not as available for parents with children that had special needs because groups offered in hospitals and cummunity service agencies

were cut back or elirninated.

It was also mentioned that ofien the first to suffer fiom the cuts are the poor and homeless because they have fewer community contacts, are oflen transient, and they lack the skills at accessing services. These families are simply put on long waiting lists whether it be for mental health programs or housing. Staffmentioned that the doctors were not oflen as willing or as interested in acting as advocates for their patients to

ensure they had needed programs and supports, when faced with situations such as children with special needs. In one recent case they felt the intervention of the doctor

with the farnily may have worked at getting a young child into a mental health program.

Staff noticed an increase in children with developmental and leaming disabilities, and mental health problems. Again the concem here was that many of these children were not getting the services they needed and were often ending up just sitting around until they would eventually be able to access programs. Programs, support groups, and waiting lists were not as accessible if available at ail.

113

Staffreported that the presenting problem at admission into the shelter was not the only one. Usually there were more reasons as to why the fmily ended up homeless. One such factor was child abuse. Many shelter residents had been abused as children or had been neglected in families where the parents themselves were stmggling with meeting basic needs after having been displaced by the cunent economic restructuring. Such issues often corne out later. Whenever there is an incredible amount of stress, coping

mechanisms are stressed to the breaking point, and unresolved victimization resurfaces. This prevents people such as Diane in my study from resolving their problems. Some

staff expressed fhsûation that t h i s victirnization could be used as a c m

The shelter staff generally agreed there was more stress on their jobs now than a few years ago. The main differences being that residents now had fewer options in terms of

community resources, income supports, and housing possibilities. The lack of referral sources in the community meant that they were often the only support for people with a variety of complex problems. The shelter population really required more prolonged intervention than what was offered in the shelter. Staff did not always have the time or ability to solve everyone's problems, yet it was becoming more of an expectation that

they do so given there were fewer community supports available.

Regular contact and the ongoing utilization of supports that consisted mostly of family and some fiiends had suffered or shrunk as a result of the shelter stay. This was because

of the dislocation for both mothers and chldren caused by the move to the shelter, the

changing of schools, and the slow loss of contact with others fiomfrequent moves. Family and Fnends also reacted to the stigmatization of being in a shelter. Helen responded by deliberately not notifying family and fiiends where she was. Carol stated that it was hard for them to stay in touch "with the old crowd." Mary, who recently

retumed to Toronto, also put fnendships on hold. Emma even had threats fiom family over the custody of her son.

In the area of community supports, there were very few which could be readily tapped.

Many of the community seMces needed did not exist or were inaccessible due to waiting lists. Participants complained about these long waiting lists and about the decreased accessibility of needed programs. Staff also agreed that there were fewer and fewer resources out there to meet the growing and changing needs of this diverse group. Many needed counselling for themselves and/or their children m e r s may have needed

specialized mental health services, while a nurnber could have used m e r assistance with finding housing. Many of these needed seMces were more accessible a few yean

115

ago. Their disappearance and the long waiting lists are the result of govemment spending cuts.

1want to use the words of Carol, who clearly recognized the need for more assistance.

Referring to her participation in a CBC docurnentary on homeless fmilies the last time she was in a sheiter, she stated: 1jus wanted to get everything out in the open and Say: 'lou know

there are people out there. Help us. Put some programs in place that can help us rather than hurt us." I mean, al1 they're (the govemment) doing is driving us m e r under.

& The Revolviy Door Syndrome;

1 believe the statement about being driven " M e r under" to be tnie particularly of the

Iives of Carol and Diane. They were not really moving dong or benefiting fiom the shelter system, but instead were simply warehoused. Their fundamental problems penist and will continue to remain unresolved. They need greater intervention through life ski11 programs, job training or drug rehabilitation over a longer period. The three previous shelter stays of both Diane and Carol indicate that more intensive programs may be required They adrnitted to me that they wouid probably end up back in the shelter system again. They were becorning caught in a revolving door.

The stress faced by al1 these womea is largely k i n g ignored by îhe shelter system. They are calling out for help, but there is linle assistance to this point. They were saying "if

's

116

hatd. " or 1 feel Iike I'm "in a box", or we're like ''cr~bs in a bucket," but it is difficult really to understand what these women are experiencing. Imagine king in Diane's shoes.

She was abused at home as a child and had to live on the streets at an early age. She was recently working as a prostitute and had tumed to drugs in the past. She ended up with custody of her two boys o d y recently when her ex-husband went to jail. She is pregnant

and has morning sickness daily which carried on for the entire length of her last two pregnancies. She is currently the only caregiver for the two young boys. She admits they

are constantly acting out,that she has lost control over them and that she desperately needs some assistance in handling them. On top of this, she is living in a shelter. She shares a room witb two other families. She has no family or fiends except a boyfnend who has been abusive and whom she still wants to see for support. If the boys are caught

anywhere near him, however, they will be taken by the CAS. Diane is being told by the shelter to find a new address, but she does not have the confidence she is going to corne up with a place. She feels intimidated by landiords. Diane needs support to regain her self-confidence and rebuild her life on her own tenns, independent of Ryan, her boyfhend. The lure of ber life on the streets is present and presents an alternative she

may eventually take even though she risks losing custody of her children.

Diane is in a very dificult and complex situation and requires a great deal of extra support. There are few agencies available to assist her with parenting. She is on a waiting list with CAS to get such assistance, but may have to change to another list should she

get another worker with her next move. She was in fact wanting a longer period of

117 temporary accommodation and some further support, preferably in a less stressful environment.

Carol, like Diane is under a great deal of stress and feels boxed in by al1 her problems. Since the eviction fiom MTHA, Carol has been in two shelters for ten months, and was

living in an apartment she could not fiord for about eight months. Her son Charlie (diagnosed with ADHD) attempted suicide and is still not getting help. Two of her sons

have learning disabilities. Her eighteen year old son decided to leave. Carol has also struggled with addictions in the past.

These exarnples show that the shelter system has to be able to respond effectively to these and other women who fa11 through the cracks of the present system. While they may once have been able to survive and thrive in the community,shonly after becoming

homeless for the first tirne, their problems and the possible solutions became so complex that a short-term shelter stay would do little toward their resolution.

Both Carol and Diane are survivors. They recognize that they need M e r help. The present system is unable to respond to their needs however. Instead it becomes part of the

revolving door that will eventually debilitate al1 family members.

Participants with life circurnstances with unfavourable odds, were constantly searching

for a place to live. They were going everywhere and were k i n g rejected daily by iaquisitive landlords who had litde interest in them or their problems. Many felt they were in cornpetition with other shelter residents for the few available spaces that they

could afford. Even these places were often not open for them to rent. The apartments they were looking at were often overpriced and in very bad condition. MTHA housing and private apartments were ofien dangerous because of ongoing maintenance problems that lead to deterioration and inadequate security.

The key problem however was the lack of affordable housing. There will always be limited success in this area due to the incredible shortage of safe, affordable housing and the limited income provided by social assistance cheques. As long as social assistance

rates remain at current levels and fiordable housing does not exist due to low vacancy rates, high rents, governrnent cutbacks, and the elimination of provincial housing programs, we are going to have homeless families. Their nurnbers will probably increase.

Shelter stays will continually become longer and more fiequent; rents will increase m e r due to the demand for housing and the lifting of rent controls. Social assistance incomes already too low will simply not keep Pace with rent increases that are expected.

Diane and Carol need additional assistance and can be described as episodically homeless people who are rnoving toward chronic homelessness. 1believe both Helen and

Mary would most closely correspond to the description of situationally homeless. They are survivoa who can make it on their own. Helen is highly rnotivated, is completing career training, and has al1 her goals set. This is her first and last shelter stay. The system was made for people like Helen, and she is making good use of it despite the difficulties

she is facing. Mary by contrast has been in shelten before and may have to return again, the main reason for her homelessness is out of her control. She has had to run fiom an abusive ex-spouse who has been harassing her for years. Despite this, she and her daughters have the skills to begin again, and to struggle against al1 odds. She will find and continue to use highly developed support networks wherever she is. She will also

find both volunteer work and evenhially employment that will stabilize her situation.

Donna is in the rniddle of the two groups. She has the skills to suwive but is losing them.

She is in a situation that is not of her making, and she is finding it increasingly harder to get out of it. She is a victim of downsizing, yet she has the ability to return to her former independent lifestyle in the community, if she is simply given a chance with decent affordable housing. Shodd she find a decent place and develop some community supports, she will probably be able to get on with her life and with goals such as getting her son back. Given her recent past of bad luck with apartments, however she rnay well

120

be moving towards sporadic homelessness and following the unstable pattern refened to earlier of Diane and Carol-

This sîudy shows that the five families inte~ewedhave been seriously harmed by the social assistance cut, and that in many cases it was the main reason or one of the main reasons for becoming homeless. The reduction in social assistance essentially cut the

"food money" portion in half considering that more food money will be needed for rent. For Mary and her two daughters had $679 for food and $707 for rent before October 1995, a total of $1386. From October 1995 to the present, her family received $532 for food and $554 for rent, a total of $1086. Given that the rent has not decreased, should she

pay $750 to rent a two bedroom apartment, she would be left with just $336 for food and other expenses, less than half the $679 left over for food before October 1995!

No longer are families able to provide the basic necessities for their children. Food takes precedence over rent, yet the rent ensures stability. These families are in effect being denied the stable living environrnents that are essential for the development of support networks so essential to daily living. As we saw in this study, there were few remaining

support networks other than family and even these were severely strained Stability is sacnficed in favour of food to prevent the children from going hungry. The fmilies end up moving fiequently because they can't afford rents and Wear out their welcorne due to

121

fiequent stays at shelten and with fmily or fiiends. The more visits to shelten, the greater the fiustration level arnong staff as they reporteci feeling disappointed that no progress has k e n made toward maintainhg an address. Participants felt staff were pressuring them and blaming them for not being able to maintain stable housing.

For women such as Donna, the social assistance cuts meant moving out of a safe, affordable home into three unsafe homes where she and her children were in serious danger. At that point Donna and others like her suddenly fell into a whirlpool of homelessness and helplessness. With this transition she and her children were moving away from their identity of a functioning family to that of a family in crisis. Should they

not find stability, soon they will need additional assistance simply to be able to function, or they will continue to move in and out of the shelter system indefinitely. Many others in similar situations will be forced into this scenario.

Donna's story is similar to the stones of the other women and includes the four stages in the path to homelessness mentioned earlier by Mulroy and Lane (1992). A resource squeeze ( poverty and the social assistance cuts) led to her loss of permanent housing (the move to the shelter), then residential transience destabilized the family (the moves to three apartments and two sheltea), discrimination in the housing market constrains the housing choices available to them (Donna and oîhers have cornplained about the fiequent

rejectiow by landlords in a tight Toronto housing market) and multiple personal and farnily stresson continue to demoralize the family. Her current situation is that she is

122

wanting to get her son back, she has no firiends or supports, she has an 11 year old that is not doing well in his special school, she must deal with a huge Family Benefits overpayment, and she is trying desperately to get out of her predicament of living in a

shelter but cannot.

The cuts in assistance levels will make demands on other areas of the social safety net.

Donna, Diane, and Carol and theu families are al1 going to have a senes of problems due to the instability and the lack of housing they face. These problems will eventually have to be dealt with in some way by the larger community.

F. -

Children:

We cannot ignore the needs of the children in these families. These children are suffering permanent darnage due to the lack of stability. Their acting out is a logical response to this unfair treatment. Children cannot be uprooted on a regular basis without damaging results in their development. Diane's two young boys are making statements that they want help, they want out of the shelter, they want their da4 they want familiar surroundings with familiar people, and, ultimately, they want stability. Yet dad won3 be tbere for them until August, and, at that time, the boys themselves may be separated from one another. Mom may not find a place, and the fmily may end up moving on to another shelter. There is also a very real possibility that the CAS will intervene. Their lives are in a constant flux. Their mother wants to help, but she has many ovenvhelming problems of

123 her own. Her stress and her lack of selfconfidence in parenting are related phenornena and are similar to symptoms shown by mothers interviewed in the U.S.research mentioned earlier.

Most of the children with diagnosed problems were boys fiom ages eight to eleven. 1s this the age when the constant moving and problems over the years really start to catch

up with a child and become unbearable? This sample is small, but the statements by the mothers, the experiences 1 have had prirnarily with this age group, and the results of the US research seem to indicate a relationship between homelessness and the developmental conditions of these children. The results suggest that many homeless children are in need of psychiatrie help and have s h o w symptoms of depression, including a suicide attempt. These fmdings are similar to research by Whitman et al. (1 990)in this area.

The special programs required to assist some of the children in ths sample are extensive. Consideration of the extra resources required to nui such programs affords a glimpse of some of the hidden costs of homelessness. These children need to be bused ofien at great

distances, to smaller ratio classes or even one-on-one class room situations. It rnay be more humane and cheaper to provide greater stability through preventative methods more

geared to the maintenance of housing and increased assistance.

124

Charlie is already extremely violent, and he is only nine years old. He deserves better, he still deserves a chance, we can't give up on him. When I recently read the UN declaration

which states the right of al1 children to an education, 1 concludecf that 1 know at lest one boy in Toronto who is k i n g denied this basic right 1 shudder to predict what rnay

happen should he be denied the help he so urgently needs.

Diane's youngest son Andrew could not speak, and he was about tu tum five. A study refend to earlier mentioned higher rates of speech difficulties in homeless childrenWhat is going to become of this young boy? Why can't he speak? Why wasn't he getting the needed assistance? He may be retuming to his dad in six months if he does not end up

in CAS care. But how long would this stay with his dad last? What effect would subsequent moves have on this young boy? Diane understood that Andrew was being

moved about fiequently, and she was concemed, but not able to solve her son's problems when she was wrapped up in so many of her own In many respects, Diane is like many

of the young wornen whom both the staff and the literature refer to as having been

abused as children, lived on the streets, has been involved in prostitution and used dmgs and is now struggling to keep her family together in the face of innumerable obstacles.

DoMa's son wanted desperately to be with his mother, yet he remained in a situation that was described to me by Donna as unacceptable. He wanted to see his mother and

brothers and sistea, but she had yet to find a home. Would he get his wish of retuming

home? The anangement of sending him to his dad were not what he wanted. Now he

125

feels abandoned by his mother. Donna did well in her housing situation before the cuts, but has now found it impossible to find a place. What realistically were her odds of finding decent housing as a young, Mcan-Canadian single mother on welfare, with four children?

These children are soon going to be young adults, and rnany of them will be back in the shelter systern or in other institutions as their problems cm become inter-generational. An interesting example, was one young mother at the shelter who had been a fiend as a

young girl of Carol's oldest daughter when they lived in a rundown apartment in Parkdale. Now they happened to find themselves in the same shelter.

Al1 of the children had adjustment problerns. They found the move to the shelter, and the loss of ffiends and stability drfficult to handle. Younger children also regressed due to the

change, as was evident in the behaviour of Ana's toilet trained daughter. For the SCho01 age children in particular, the changes in their lives were traumatic. The older the child, the greater was the sense of loss and the more they exper-ience the shame of k i n g stigrnatized. Perhaps this is why Carol's son and Mary's daughter had decided to leave, or why Carol's eldest daughter was not attending school.

Given these adjustment problems and the ongoing lack of stability, special programming

and assistance for the children will have to be considered. The sheIters are oflen extremely different from former living spaces and prevent the family fiom fhctioning as

126

it did in the community. While it will be impossible to produce what they had previously, it would be helpful if the shelters were able to maintain the integrity of the family unit by allowing caregivers to maintain responsibility for their children They will need support when they lack parenting skills, but such assistance needs to sirengthen the parent-child

relationship and oEer privacy. The ultirnate goal of shelter life should be to make it less harmful for these children in crisis.

G Stress:

It might be that the stress experienced by Carol and Diane was so overwhelming that they

were not really able to get a place and move out of the shelter within the time pend suggested. It may be that there were other, more stabilizing steps that could be taken to ensure that they are ready and able to return to the community and thrive on their own. At this early point, it rnay be better to concentrate on other goals which lessen stressors

rather than on the goal of housing. These two rnothers have already been in the shelter

system for an extended penod and no doubt rnay continue should the underlying issues not be addressed, and supports and prograns frorn various agencies not be put in place.

POSALS FOR POLICY AND PRACITICE;

This chapter offers a variety of suggestions as to improvements to the particular shelters studied, to the shelter system as a whole and to the larger social issues that produced homelessness for participants.. The problems encountered by the women in this study are cornplex, and many of the solutions carmot easily be implemented. Like most social change, the advances are often slow and require years of advocacy and stmggle.

&

The Children:

Continuing with the discussion on children in shelters, it is important to look at changes that can be made in the shelters to make the stay of these children and their parents less stressfùl. More pnvate spaces and bedrooms in the shelters wodd allow the families in this study to maintain some of their independence. There also needs to be p a t e r coordination in the area of education to keep moves between schools to a minimum. One suggestion would be that the school system not move the children about so readily. It should also liaise with the child advocate fiom the shelter and the parents to make a smoother and more cornfortable transition to any new school. The role of the child advocate, a suppon worker for the children, as referred to in this study, is crucial. Al1 shelters should have counselling for the children as well as for adults. Assistance to children through the provision of daycare, advocacy programs, and help with school integration al1 need to be worked out among the parents, the child advocate and the

128

school. Daycare in the shelter is crucial, but this is lost upon leaving the shelter. It should be continued in the new commun@ until these families are established and able to

access programs there.

Mental health nurses should be available to assist children such as Charlie as we11 as

parents such as Carol to ensure that resources are accessed and support is given in this crucial time. Follow-up work with children with special needs should occur when the shelter works with the families afier discharge. Resources for the children need to be accessed in the community to ensure that children get the supports they need when moving out of the institution. Levels of assistance given to the children in the cornmunity should be at least similar to what was available to them in the sheher.

Second SQe Housing

One solution for Carol, Diane and D o ~ may a lie in the creation of second stage or interrnediary housing that allows families to stay in one place for a longer period before retuming to the community. Such housing would be geared for chronically homeless

(homeless more than one year) and some sporadically homeless (those altemating among sheltea, apartments and temporary stays with family) who are believed to be moving towards chronic homelessness. Both Diane and Carol could be termed sporadically homeless. Both, however, may end up becoming chronic, given their recent history of shelter system use. The situationally horneless (those homeless for the first time)

129 currently move through the shelter system dong with some of the sporadically homeless. 1 would put Donna into the category of sporadically homeless because she has moved

fiequently frorn place to place. Carol is also in this category because she has had two

shelter stays within eight months, and she has so many ovenvhelming problems. Carol and Diane both have extremely high stress ievels.

Carol and Diane could particularly benefit fkorn second stage housing. This option would offer them betîer and more independent accommodation than the shelter and maintain staff intervention so tbat there would be ongoing involvement by an individual caseworker designed to assin with the problems that made it difficult to maintain an address in the community. Group work would also be essential at this stage, because

pers would have the time to share issues and concerns. The work that could be done in such a setting would include access and use of a mental health day program for Carol's son where he would be able to remain for a longer period, counselling and the development of parenting skills for Carol, and counselling and support for Diane.

Although 1 think D o m and Mary cm do fine on their own in the community should adequate and affordable housing be fowid, the reality is that it is extremely dificult to

find such housing, particularly for Donna who is a young Afiican-Canadian with four children. Should housing be found, Doma would have more time and support to work at getîing her son back and to maintain her other son in a special needs school. Such a second stage program would also allow Mary time to reorganize her life after a crisis.

130 While the option of second stage housing is more expensive in the short terni, it may signrficantly reduce recidivism. It is expected that these women would be able to find what they need in the second stage so that they would be able to continue working on goals long after they have left the program. Such an intensive program should last on average about one year and would also include a more substantial follow up program in the commUNty than what is currently available.

We can see patticuiarly fiom the exarnples of Diane and Carol and others that the

problems and the solutions for these women are highly cornplex and involve a great deal of support and ongoing contact even afier the farnily moves into the community. This contact should ensure the maintenance of supports and the seeking out of new support services to assist with any continuing problems, including issues with income maintenance programs. Such action can be preventative so that disasten, such as the one with Carol's MTHA unit that initiated her cycle of homelessness and disintegration, c m

be prevented. Prograrns in the U.S.have found that follow-up is a key element in lowering shelter recidivism because support networks and ongoing contact with

community services can ensure that problems are k i n g solved as they occur and supports

cm be developed to deal with problems and difficulties as they arise.

131 Presently there is some follow up done in Toronto, including the main shelter used for the interviews but it is limited in duration and scope. There has not been any significant

h d i n g set aside for this kind of work It is sirnply assumed that al1 problems are solved the moment the family returns to the community. Unforiunately many needed supports

for Carol, Diane and Donna are simply not in place as yet. Some families including those

of Carol, Diane and Donna have grown so accustomed to the support offered by the shelter system that, when things do not go well, the shelter again becomes an option to fiee fiom their problems. In this way the cycle of dependency continues. A variety of services need to be available and accessible in the community to meet the varied needs of these fami1ies.

Preventative Proera ms to Avoid Homeiessness:

Second stage housing options are important, but resources also need to be put aside for preventative programs so that hornelessness may be avoided. Prompt action cm prevent a dive into the whirlpool of homelessness. Al1 participants in this study could have benefitted fiom such programs and for Helen, Donna and Carol, it could have prevented their being homeless.

One possibility would be to do this work at the level of the local welfare and FBA ofices, since their staffare usually the first who become aware of pending homelessness.

These ofices have traditionally sought ways to declare their clients ineligible for social

132

assistance, a way of operating which forces some families to enter shelters. While often operathg by the letter of the law with support fiom recent policy restrictions, such

methods remain short sighted and in the end will cost taxpayers more as families enter the shelter system. A small team could function in each welfare office to assess families that are on the verge of becoming horneless. They would have the resources to pay bills that would cause evictions of families and homelessness, acting as mediators with

landlords to prevent a disruptive and costly shelter entry. This innovation would require greater coordination between shelters and welfare offices, and also the special education of welfare staff.

E Shelter Soecialization;

Should these women's problerns have been identifjed earlier on, perhaps at the intake phase, and given greater resources, more appropriate shelter options could evolve. A

central intake system for shelten would allow for more organized preventative mesures for the womeo in this study. This cwrdinated effort among seMce providers could set

up a system to work with clients and support seMces with the goal of maintaining stable accommodation in the community through crisis intervention and follow up supports.

The individual shelters themselves could then be designed ta take the specific families they are best able to accommodate. The shorter stays of the situational homeless like Helen could be best handled by communal shelters such as the one in this study, while the other women who had repeated admittances wodd be directed immediately upon

133

admission to more intemediate or second stage facilities, depending on the severity of their disorganization and lack of coping skills.

Such a system for these women codd actually be implemented in Metro Toronto given the cunent motel progrms operated by Metro Community SeMces. While the motels

Iack space, programs such as that offered at Robertson Houses*Birkdale location or Family Residence are adequate for such an initiative. This system would require staff

training, the enhancement of facilities to include more common and programming spaces, Iower staff-client ratios, greater ernphasis on programming geared to the women's needs, more financial resources and increased resources for follow-up measures, which could be carried out by the sarne caseworkers who were involved

initially with the farnily.

Self-help prograrns such as those in England @aly 1996) that involve the maintenance of housing and employment training and educational programs could be offered through second stage housing that offers longer stays. Such programs must empower these families and foster self-suficiency. Interventions geared to needs could potentially

include literacy, hi& school courses, English as a second language, employment training* counselling, increased access to mental health and addictions programs, and self help in the area of employment. Such programs in second stage housing have the potential to

enhance the women's self-esteem and the ability develop skills and support networks to ensure growth and stability in the community. If we are interested in working toward

134

longer tem solutions for the participants in this study that will prevent an increase in homelessness, these programs are required now and represent an affordable, short to medium-tenn solution

Safe, Affordable Eousin~:

Beyond our discussion about restructuring shelters to include second stage housing, homelessness for these women remains fundamentally a housuig problem. If we had

better housing policies and practices in place, most of these women would not be in a shelter. Even if they did have to enter a shelter, as in the case of Mary, no doubt their stay would have k e n shorter and less destructive. Second stage housing is needed becaw of the present housing crisis and the damage inflicted by chronic homelessness, cornbined with the other crises in these women's lives. The probiem with this option is that it is

only meant to be a medium-terni solution of in a limited period of tirne. Though such

housing would be able to assist more chronic cases, longer-terni affordable housing should be available for these women and their children or there will be a backup of families unable to get beyond this second stage. This would prove costly and ineffective because the backlog would prevent both entry into the second stage system and a successful return to the commuaity.

The expansion of social housing that is safe and affordable remains the only lasting solution They will need better protection for tenants (instead of the removal of rent

135

controls) and legal support and inspections to ensure minimum property standards.They will also need programs such as the rent-geared-to-incorne housing m i t s that are lasting solutions which enable people to make a successful return to the comunity. This option provides stability, security, independence, a sense of self defined by one's permanent

space, and a chance at developing networks of support. If there were adequate housing resources combined with support services for participants such as those previously outiined, and should such semices be built into mixed, scatiered, projects, the need for shelters would decrease. Security of tenure in a subsidized unit, preferably wirhin mixed

income housing spread throughout the city, such as that provided currently by nonprofit, Cityhome, and cooperative housing programs in Metropditan Toronto, would be their best housing solution. The problern is that currently these groups are not developing new projects due to the withdrawal of govemment funding. Governments at both the federal and provincial level have announced that they want to get out of the construction of

social housing.

The federai govemment is currently attempting to devolve al1 responsibility for housing

to the provinces a move which would leave us without a national housing strategy and these participants with fewer opportunities. In Ontario responsibility would then be passed on to the municipal level, which has limited resources. We need to maintain national standards. Facilitating the provision of housing is an essential function of govemment. With the current shirking of these responsibilities there may well be many

136

more homeless people who will fa11 into similar situations to those of the women descnbed in this paper.

Along with housing, basic income is required by these families to provide adequate food. It is not enough to have a roof, if food is insuffi~cient.This Iack will eventually put housing at risk. My thesis describes how this occurred to these wornen when social assistance cuts came into effect in Ontario. Through an income reduction of 21-6percent, the arnount lefi for food for midy participants afier their rent had been paid ended up k i n g between thirty-five percent and sixty percent less depending on the rent the

families have to pay.

Given the above information, the solution would be to increase social assistance rates by thirty percent or at least to r e m to previous levels and then continue to increase at the

rate of the cost of living. The r e n d allowances may have to be boosted even m e r in expensive areas like Toronto. Such solutions are both possible and feasible, if there is the political will. It is clear that the provincial govemment is not currently headed in this direction. The needs of these poor families remain ignored-

a

The Current Political Ciimate:

With current national and provincial political trends, the solutions outlined above are improbable. Should the ùiadequacy of social assistance rates and the lack of a housing policy continue to be ignored, there will more homeless people as both lengths of stay and recidivism rates increase. The proposed downloading of social prograrns onto municipalities by the Hams govemment and the overall downsizing of government will create more families like those in this midy and more children with leaming disabilities, developmentai difficulties and mental health problems. There is no doubt that the impact

of such poverty and instability will produce new social problems that will eventually catch up with us and will need to be addressed. One example of a case where help may already be too late is Charlie's situation. Carol, Charlie's mother, although not speaking

of her son, clearly laid out how she saw the future. I end with her words: Well 1think that this new govemrnent better corne up with a lot of jobs. 1 mean how else are people going to survive. Because if not we're going to end up like New York or LA It is going to be rough. People are going to be robbing each other just to feed their children. 1can see it coming. You see so many people on the streets. And so much violence is happening. And it's becoming like violent crimes. It's no longer just non-violent, people out there (are) hitting people over the head.

CONCLUSION;

The research method used in this thesis represents an attempt at avoiding the traditional way homeless people have been viewed and studied. Using the experiences of

participants as the starting point has allowed a group of oppressed persons to speak out and be heard. This represents a move toward a new way of carrying out social work

research. Rather than pathologizing and endlessly blaming the homeless for their problems or 'dysfunctions,' going directly to the voices of these women has shown that homelessness is primarily a problem of material resources. We m u t move then fiom the

emphasis on control and sweillance of the homeless to support by offering real opporiunities to get out of the revolving door.

It was found that current residents in shelters are staying longer, reniming more often, and have very serious problems to manage. ïheir support systems and networks in the

community are shrinking or non-existent The morale of their children is deteriorating. Their income is insuscient to meet basic needs. They are fighting one another in a highly cornpetitive environment for the few remaining, run down apartment uni6 that are at the low end of the market. The quality of their housing has dropped significantly. Sheiter life has increased their stress levels whkh wiil have an impact on their physicai and mental health.

139

What has Ied to these cunent redities? 1share the assessrnent of the shelter staffthat the

reductions in GWA rates in October 1995, the lack of affordable housing, the low vacancy rate, the removal of assistance for the last month rent, and the reduction in mental health support programs, food banks and parent relief prognuns are al1 factors that have produced or furthered homelessness. These families find themselves in situations that are becorning increasingly more dificult to escape fiom.

Given this difficult situation, shelters and support groups need to look at the specific shelter populations who require distinctive solutions to their highly cornplex problems. Tiered programs to meet varied and complex needs, such as second stage housing need to

be explored. A centralized shelter intake, combined with extensive follow up seMces in the community ,the option of transitional housing for chronically and sporadically homeless families, and increased programming and support for those remaining in shelters could offer some results. Such a varied response may allow homeless families caught in the system the time and space to begin to develop support networks and to

access services required to gain independence and longer term stability.

Despite the possible successes of such ameliorative solutions, the problems of both income and housing remain and will continue to h a u t families moving fiom shelters into the current housing market. In addition to improving the shelter system itself, society therefore will also have to reform the larger social safety net. It is only by increasing the quantity of safe, affordable housing and increasing welfare and family benefit rates that

140

ultimately the five farnilies interviewed and thousands of others will be given a real chance to make a hture for themselves and their children. Preventative social support systems will have to be built to ensure that the tragedies of homelessness are not repeated. Failure to respond with the appropnate policies will produce further social hgmentation and division.

In many respects the experience of homelessness itself, the forced relations of families sharing rooms, the surveillance in communal shelters, children having severe educational and emotional problems, extreme stress that causes deterioration in mental health, violence, substance abuse, children acting out, hunger and continua1 transience can not really be separated. Al1 these factors are interrelated. These areas represent a continuum of realities of life on the margin of our society where there is no hope for a fuhire only stark present realities. This continuum of endless crisis and transience is producing a whole new social phenornena in Canada about which we only know and understand very little. We need then to develop a new vocabulary to more accurately explain these realities so these diverse experiences are comprehended. Allowing the voices of the homeless to be heard is an initial step in this direction

The strength of this study lies in the in-depth, detailed discussions with participants. The input of both staff and myself also allowed for m e r discussion and analysis. Limitations include its small sarnple and the need for further study of income, housing, children, and the impact of shelter life on homelessness. A subsequent study of welfae

141

rates and homelessness in a few years may reveal more of the impact of the cuts in social assistance rates.

This work was limited to two facilities. Further research could also include shelters for abused women and two parent families. Interviews with residents and staff fiom other shelters would probably enhance our knowledge about the experience of homelessness.

We m u t now begin to look at homelessness in a different way. Approaches need to

begin with and Suild upon the experiences of homeless families. Their experiences and the resultant findings indicate that homelessness is a social justice issue not simply a personai crisis. Cunent policies that are only increasing the nurnbers, the duration and fiequency of homelessness will need to understand and act upon this broader concem.

This study then c m only be a beginning for others to follow. It is however a first step in allowing people experiencing homelessness to speak. More research needs to be camed

out on this subject particulsrly with regard to developing federal, provincial and municipal standards which would set guidelines for assistance to low income and homeless persons. Our current policies are short sighted, will prove costly, and are bound to increase both the numben of homeless families and the problerns faced.

Should the trends evident in this study continue and the homeless population expands M e r , the past two years (1995-1997) will represent the formation period of what 1 have

142

referred to as a new underclass. The continued growth of this new group would have a

significant impact upon the fuhire of our city. It is only by a major rethinking of our shelter, social assistance and housing policies that we can move beyond this tragedy of

homelessness toward lasting solutions.C m n t public debates and homeless policies m u t now begin tu listen to the voices of homeless families.

Bassdc, Ellen. Social and Economic Hardships of Homeless and m e r Poor Women. American J o d of Orthopsychiatry, 63 (3), 1993.

Bassuk, Ellen, and Rubin, L. Homelesî Children a Neglected Population. American J o d of Orihopsychiahy, 57(1). 1990. B a s s a Ellen and Rosenburg, Lenore. Why Does Family Homelessness Occur? A CaseControl Study. American J o m I of Public Health. 78, 1988.

Bauman, D and Grigsby A, Understanding the Horneless: From Research to Action, The Hogg Fouîuiationfor Mental Healih, 1 988. Belcher, John R. Poverty, Homelessness and Racial Exclusion. Journal of Sociology and Socid WelfrE. 19 (4), Dec. 1992. Berck, Judith. No Place To Be: Voices of Homeless Children. Public We[fre, Spring, 1992.

Blau, Joel. The Invisible Poor. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. Bogdan, Robert, C., and KnoppBiklen, Sari. Qualitative Research Methods for Education. An Introduction to Theory and Merhods. Toronto: Allyn and Bacon, 1992. Boxhill, N.A. and Beaty, A.L. Mother/Child interaction arnong homeless women and their children in a public shelter in Atlanta Georgia. Child and Youth Services, 14, 1990. Buckner, J.C., Bassuk, E.L. and Zima, B.T. Mental Health Issues AfTecting Homeless Women: Implications for Intervention. Amerzcan Journal of 0rthopsychiab-y. 63 (3). 1993. Canada Mongage and Housing Corporation. CMHC Rental Market Survey-Toronto CMA, October, 1995. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, January 1996.

Chau, Ruby C.M. The hctions of negative aspects of welfare in capitalist societies: a case study of temporary accommodation for the homeless in Britain and housing policy for small households in Hong Kong, International Social Work, Vol. 38, 1995. City of Toronto Neighbourhoods Cornmittee. Tracking the Impacts of Provincial Cutbacks. City of Toronto Council, November, 1995.

City of Toronto. 1995 Cornmunity Agency Survey of Metropolitan Toronto. A project of the City of Toronto Planning and Development, Metro Comrnunity SeMces and the Social Planning Council of Metropolitan Toronto. Toronto, May, 1995. Clark, Tony. The Transnational Corporate Agenda Behind The Harris Regime. In D. Ralph et al M Mike Hsm's's Ontario Open For Business Closed To People. Halifax: Fernwood Press, 1997.

Cohen, Marcia B. Who Wants to Chair the Meeting? Group development and Leadership Patterns in a Community Action Group of Homeless People. Social Work With Groups. Vol. 17(%), 1994. Cohen, Marcia B. Overcoming Obstacles to Forming Empowerment Groups: A Consumer Advisory Board for Homeless Clients. Social Work. Vol. 39, No. 6, November, 1994. CuIhane, Demis. The Sundries of Shelter Reform: An Appraisal of Efforts to 'Manage' Homelessness. Sucid Service Review, September, 1993. Curcio, William. Mediation and Homelessness. Public Welfare, Spring, 1992. Dail, Paula W. The Psychosocial Context of Homeless Mothers with Young Children: Program and Policy Implications. Child We[lor, Vol. L m , No. 4, July-August, 1990. Daily Bread Food Bank. Can Welfare Recipients Pay Rent and Eat Too? Daily Bread Food Bank. Toronto, September, 1996. Daly, Paula W. The Psychosocial Context of Homeless Mothers with Young Children: Program and Policy Implications. Child WeZjiire, Vol. LXIX, no. 4, July-August, 1990. Daly, Gerald. Homeless: Policies, Strategies and Lives on the Street. New York: Routledge, 1996.

Dolbeare, Cushing, N. Homelessness and the Low Incorne Housing Cnsis JownczZ of SocioIogy and Social Welfare, 19, (4) December, 1992. Drupper, David and Halter, Anthony. Bamers in Educating Children fiom Horneless Shelters: Perspectives of School and Shelter Staff, Social Work in Educntion, Vol. 16, No. 1, Januaiy, 1994.

Fried, M, and Culhane D,. Paths in Homefessness: A View From the Street. In J. Frieâricks Aflordabfe Housing and the Homeless. New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1988.

m.)

Gottlieb, B. Social Support Strategies: Guidelines for Mental Health Practice. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1983. Gulati, Padimi, Policy and Homelessness. JoumI of Sociology and Social We&iare*19. ( 4 ) Dec. 1992. Generd Welfare Assistance Act, Section 1 4 and 12-3b.Government of Ontario PubZications. Toronto, Ontario, 1995. Hagen, J., and Ivanoff, A. A. Homeless Women: A High Risk Population. Afjra, 3(2), 1988.

Halter, Anthony. Homeless in Philadelphia: A Qualitative Study of the Impact of State Welfare Refonn on Individuals. Journal ofSociology and Social Welfore. 19. ( 4 ) Decernber, 1992. Haraway, Donna. Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective, Ferninisr Sudies. Vol. 14, No.3, 1988.

Hausman, B. and Hannem, C. Parenting in Homeless Families. The Double Crisis. American J o u d of Orthopsychiatry, 63, 1993. Huttman, Elizabeth, and Redmond, Sonjia. Women and Homelessness: Evidence of Need to Look Beyond Shelters to Long Term Social SeMce Assistance and Permanent Housing. Journal of Sociology and Social WelfBre, 19 (4), Dec. 1992.

Johnson, Alice K. Measurement and Methodology: Problems and Issues in Research on Homelessness. Social Work Research and Abstracts. National Association of Social Workers, Inc. Dec. 1989. Keigher, Sharon. Rediscovering the Asylum. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfoe* 1 9 (4), Dec. 1992. Kirby, Sandra, and McKenna, Kate. Experience-Research-SociaZChange. Methods From The Margins. G a m o n d Press, Toronto, 1989. Kitchen, Brigitte. Children and the Case for Distributive Justice between Generations in Canada. Chzld Weljore, Vol. LXXN #3, May-Jme, 1995. Kitchen, Brigitte. "Common Sense" Assaults on Families. In D.Ralph et al. Eds. Mike Hams's Ontario Open to Business Closed to People. Halifax: Femwood Press, 1997.

Kitchener-Waterloo Record. Child Abuse in Metropolitan Toronto. Thunday,March 27, 1997.

KoblinsS> Saliy, Morgan, Kari, and Anderson, Elaine. Afncan-American Homeless and Low -Incorne Housed Mothers: Cornparison of Parenting Practices. American J o m l of Orthopsychiatry,. 67(1). January, 1997. Lalonde, Linda. Tory Welfare Policies: A View From The b i d e . In D. Ralph et al. Eds. Mike Harris's Ontario Open To Business Closed to People. Halifax: Femwood Press, 1997.

Lindsey, Elizabeth W., Mothers' Perceptions of Factors Influencing the Restabilization of Homeless Farnilies. Families in Socieîy: The Journal of Conîemporary Humnn Services. April, 1996. Locke, Lawrence F., Spirduso, Waneen Wyrick and Silvennan, Stephen J. P r o p o d s That Work. 3rd Ed Newbury Park, Califomia: Sage Publicatiorû, 1993. Marlow, Christine.Research Methods. Belmont, California: Wadsworh Inc., 1993. McCheshey, Kay Young, Family Hornelessness: A Systematic Probiem. J o m I of Social Issues, 46(4', 1990. McChesney, Kay Young, A ReMew of the Empincal Literature on Contemporary Urban Horneless Farnilies. Social Service Review, September, 1995. McChesnesy, Kay Young, Absence of a Family Safety Net for Homeless Families. J o u d of Sociology and Social WeljBe, 19 (1 ), December, 1992. McClain, J. with Doyle, C. Women and Housing: Changing Needs und the Fadure of Policy. Onawa. Canadian Council of Social Development, 1983. McLarin, Kirnberly J., Giving Families A Fresh Start Public Weljare, Sumner, 1990. Metropolitan Toronto, No Place To Go: A Study on Homelessness in Metropolitan Toronto: Characteristics, Trends and Potential Solutions," Municipaliv of Metropolitun Toronto. Toronto, January, 1983. Metropditan Toronto Hostel SeMces Division. Hostel Standards and Guidelines. Community Services Department. Municipality of Metmpolitilan Toronto. Toronto, May, 1992.

Metropolitan Toronto Community Services Departmeni, Hostel Sem-cesDivision. Media Update. Metro Community Services, MmicipaIity of MetropoZitun Toronto. Toronto, November, 1995. Metropolitan Toronto, Hostel Services Division. Statistical Data Sheets. Metro Commmïty Services, MMrcipaIity of Melopolitan Toronto. Toronto, Novernber, 1 995. Metropolitan Toronto, Hostel SemecesDivision, Total Number of Hostel Users (Including the Emergency Weather Program), Meno Commmity Services, M m iciprility of Metropolitun Toronto. Toronto, January, 1 997. Metropolitan Toronto, Hostel Services Division, Statistical Report to the End of Febmary. Metro Commlmiry Services, Mmicipaky of MetropoZitan Toronto. Toronto, Aprii, 1997. Metropolitan Toronto, Report From the Evictions Sub-Committee of the Metro Advisory Cornmittee on Homeless and Socially Isolated Persons, Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, 1996. Metropolitan Toronto, Metro Context Strategies for 1997.CE0 Onice, Municipaliîy of Metropolitan Toronto, February, 1997. Mills, Crystal, and Ota, Hiro. Homeless Women with Minor Children in the Detroit Metropolitan Area. SociaZ WorR. November, 1989. Molnar, J., Rath, W., and Klien, T. Constantly Compromised: the Impact of Homelessness on Children. JournaZ of Social Issues, 46 ((4). 1990. Mulroy, Elizabeth and Lane, Terry, S., Housing Mordability, Stress and Single Mothers: Pathway to Homelessness. J o d of Sociology and Social Weljirre, 5 1 (4), Decernber, 1992.

Moscovitch, Allan. Social Assistance in the New Ontario. In D. Ralph, Andre et al. Eds. Mike Harris's Ontario Open To Business Closed to People. Halifêu: Fernwood Press, 1997.

Nord, Mark and Luloff A.E. Homeless Children and Their Families in New Hampshire: A Rural Perspective. Social Service Review, September, 1995. Oakley, AM. Interviewing women: a contradiction in terms, In Helen Roberts (Ed.), Doing Feminist Research. London: Routledge, 199 1.

Oberlander and Fallick Homelessness and the Homeless: Responses and Innovations. The Centrefor Humon Settlements, Faculty of Graduate Studies, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 1987. O ' C o ~ e l ,Anne. A Survey of Residents: nie Parkdale Cornmunity Audit Project Report #2. A Project of Parkdale Community Health Centre, Parkdale Multicultural Association, City of Toronto Public Health, St Christopher House, Sistering, and the Social Planning Council of Metroplitan Toronto. Social Planning Council of Metropoliicm Toronto, Toronto, March, 1997. O'Connel, Anne. A S w e y of Retailers: The Parkdale Cornmunity Audit Project Report # 1. A Project of Parkdale Comrnunity Health Cenire, Parkdale Multicultural Association,

City of Toronto Public Health, St Christopher House, Sistering, and the Social Planning Counci1 of Metrop l itan Toronto. Social P Z m ing Council ofMetropoZitan Toronto, Toronto, July, 1996.

Ontario Social Safety Network. Welfare Rate Cuts: The Real Issues, Backgrounder #2: Welfare Rates. Toronto: Ontario Social Sufity Nehvork 1995.

Ontario Social Safety Network. Ontario' s Welfare Rate Cuts, An Annivenary Report. Toronto: Ontario Social Su$iety Network, 1 997. Phillips, M., and Dechillo, N., Kronendelf, and Meddleton-Teter, V. Homeless Families SeMces Make A Difference. Social Casework, January, 1988. Ralph, D., A. Regimbald, and N. St-Amand. Mike Hamis's Ontario Open for Business Closed to People. Halifax: Femwood Publishing, 1997. Reinharz, Shulamit, Ferninisr Research Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. Resona, L., R. Parker, and P. Stolley. Ability Achievement, and Adjustment in Homeless Children. American J o m I of Orthopsychiatv. 6 1(2), April, 1991. Riessman, Catherine KoMer. Qmlitat ive Studies in Social Work Research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, 1994.

Rocha, Cynthia, Johnston, Nice K., McChesoey, Kay Young, and Butterfield William H. Predictors of Permanent Housing for Sheltered Families. Families in Society, January, 1996.

Rossi, P and Weimeb L. The American Homeless Family Shelter 'Systern'. Social Service Review, March, 1 995,

Schultz, B. J. and Saklofske, D.K Relationship Between Social Support and Selected Measwes of Psychological Well-Being. Psychologicul Reports, No. 53, 1983. Social Planning Council of Kitchener-Waterloo. Common Sense Revolution Impact Reports # 1-9. Kitchener: Social Planning Corncil of Kitchener-Waterloo. 1995. Social Planning Council of Metropditan Toronto. Child Poverty in Metroplitan Toronto: Report Card 1995. Toronto, Social Planning Council, 1996. Stack, C. Al1 our Kin,Strategies for Slwival in a Black Cornmunity. New York: Harper and Rowe, 1973. Statistics Canada. Canadian Social Trends Au-, 1990.

No. 17, Ottawa: Statistics Canada,

Stewart, Gil. And Stewart, John. Social Work with Homeless Families. British J o m Z of Social Work 22(3), 1992. Stoner, Madeleine R. Beyond Shelter: Policy Directions for the Prevention of Homelessness. Social Work Research and Abstracts, National Association of Social Workers, hc. December, 1989. Stretch, John J., and Kreuger, Larry W. Five Year Cohort Study of Homeless Families: A Joint Policy Research Venture. J o u r ~ofl Sociology and Social Werare, Vol. 19, No. 1, Decernber, 1992.

Travers, Nancy. New York Launches Two Pronged EEort: State Meets Ernergency Needs of Homeless While Creating Transitional Housing Models. Public Weijbre, Winter, 1989.

Whitman,Barbara, Accardo, Pasquale, Boyert, Mary, and Kendagor, Rita. Hornelessness and Cognitive Performance in Children: A Possible Link Social Work Vol. 35, No. 6, November, 1990. Ziefori, M., and Staunch-Brown, K. Ski11 Building for Effective Intervention With Homeless Families. Social Work Abstracts, December, 1989.

Ziesemer, Carol, Marcow Louise, and Manvell, Barbara. Homeless Children: Are niey DifCerent form Other Low-Incorne Children? Social Wo& Vol. 39, No.6, November, 1994.

150

&4lmmmu BASIC DATA FORM Nan~e:

Sex: ME Age:

Education:

Name of spouse:

Sex: WF Age:

Education:

Admission Date:

# of Children:

Ages and gender of Children: Last Address:

Rent:

#of Bedrwms:

How long did you live there?

Reason for leaving:

#of addresses in p s t two years:

# of addresses in past year:

h o m e in the pst y e x Cment Income:

Last/Employment: Birthplace:

Ifother than Canada, date entered country

First Language: English/ûther: Have you been to another shelter in the p s t : Yes 1 No WhereMrhen Are you currently in contact with your family? Are you currently in contact with fkiends?

Agencies that have helped you:

Additional Comments: