Homelessness and Social Work

An Intersectional Approach

Carole Zufferey

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781317510871
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Medicine
• Subtopic: Health Care Delivery

Drawing on intersectional theorising, Homelessness and Social Work highlights the diversities and complexities of homelessness and social work research, policy and practice. It invites social work students, practitioners, policy makers and academics to re-examine the subject by exploring how homelessness and social work are constituted through intersecting and unequal power relations.

The causes of homelessness are frequently associated with individualist explanations, without examining the broader political and intersecting social inequalities that shape how social problems such as homelessness are constructed and responded to by social workers. In reflecting on factors such as Indigeneity, race, ethnicity, gender, class, age, sexuality, ability and other markers of identity the author seeks to:

• construct a new intersectional framework for understanding social work and homelessness;

• provide a critical analysis of social work responses to homelessness;

• challenge how homelessness is represented in social work research, social policy and social work practice; and

• incorporate the stories of people experiencing homelessness.

The book will be of interest to undergraduate and higher research degree students in the fields of intersectionality, homelessness, sociology, public policy and social work.

1Introduction

Homelessness is a topical issue generating substantial attention in Western countries. While there is considerable research on the subject, little has been written on intersectional social work approaches to homelessness. Homelessness is complex and diverse because it intersects with other social issues (such as gendered violence), and with multiple social markers that include gender, class, race, sexuality and ability. As well, understandings of both homelessness and social work are contested, and vary according to different countries and organisational contexts. Complicating matters further, both service users and providers are constituted by the complex interplay of these multiple social locations.

This book is the first to promote an intersectional approach for social workers addressing homelessness. It builds upon my recent chapters in edited books on feminist research and practice in social work (see Wahab et al., 2015; Wendt and Moulding, 2016). I use a critical and social constructionist epistemology, to explore how homelessness and social work are constituted through intersecting and unequal power relations. Following the work of social work scholars Hulko (2015) and Murphy et al. (2009), I advocate for adopting an intersectional approach that incorporates reflections on both oppression and privilege. This project is not situated exclusively within a particular school of thought, such as a structural or post-structural feminism. My intersectional approach in this book combines and draws on both critical/structural and post-structural ideas and theoretical perspectives. I argue that engaging with both structural and post-structural thought enables a more comprehensive and complex analysis of the topic of homelessness. It is this multi-faceted analysis that can then assist social workers to attend to the diversities of homelessness, and to advocate for ‘the homeless’ using new knowledge, research methods and practices. I also draw on Winker and Degele’s (2011) conceptualisation of intersectionality that highlights the intersection of social structures, institutionalised organisational practices, multiple identities, cultural symbols and discursive representations of social problems. My intersectional social work approach has been developed through researching the perspectives of people from diverse social locations who experience homelessness, and of social workers who work with them, linking their subjective experiences (the micro), with social structures and institutionalised practices (the mezzo and the macro).

My argument in this book is that intersectionality provides a new way of understanding homelessness and social work research, social policy and social work practice. I examine how homelessness is constituted through unequal and intersecting power relations in social processes and social identity categorisations (or social locations), related to Indigeneity, race, ethnicity, gender, class, age, sexuality, ability and other markers of identity. I also explore how social work and responses to homelessness are constituted, by reflecting on social workers’ own positions of power and often invisible privileges (and oppressions). The social locations of social workers can relate to white race privilege, class, ability, being employed, educated or other markers of privileged identities, as well as unequal power relations in client–worker relationships and social work processes. Therefore, in this book I highlight the intersecting diversities and complexities of homelessness and social work research, policy and practice, by proposing an intersectional social work approach.

The complexities of intersectionality

The scope of intersectionality is contested and debated. Intersectional theorists have particularly drawn upon structuralist approaches to identity (or subjectivity) ‘as informed by various systems of oppression relating to race, class, gender and sexuality’ (McKibbin et al., 2015, p. 99). Intersectionality is a study of intersections between different systems of discrimination and a way of thinking about multiple identities and interconnected oppressions/privileges in both men and women’s lives (Crenshaw, 1991; Mehrotra, 2010; Hulko, 2015). This approach highlights multi-dimensional intersections related to for example, gender, sexuality, race/skin colour, ethnicity, nation/state, class, culture, ability, age, sedentariness, origin, wealth, religion, geographical locations and social development (Lutz et al., 2011). However, there is slippage ‘between structuralist and post-structuralist ontologies’ in intersectional literature, causing some confusion about ‘the relationship between post-structuralist feminism, postcolonial feminism and intersectionality’ (McKibbin et al., 2015, p. 100). Social work and feminist scholars such as Murphy et al. (2009) and McKibbin et al. (2015) take different epistemological positions towards intersectionality. Unlike Murphy et al.’s (2009) more structuralist approach, McKibbin et al. (2015, p. 101) argue for a post-structural orientation to intersectionality as a ‘discourse’. They argue that post-structural feminist orientations open up more possibilities for analyses of social problems, including men’s violence against women. However, in this book, I argue that both theoretical perspectives can contribute to social work approaches to homelessness, depending on the purpose of the political project. These contestations, including Lykke’s (2010) ‘post-constructionist’ theorising of intersectionality, are further discussed in the next chapter.

Whilst acknowledging the critiques of intersectionality as providing a ‘handy catchall phrase’ (Phoenix and Pattynama, 2006, p. 187), I argue that an intersectional approach can contribute to new ways of reflecting on homelessness and social work. Intersectionality is useful for analysing the various ways in which different social divisions and power relations are enmeshed and constructed. It allows for a more complex, fluid, multilayered analysis of diverse social identities (or subjectivities) and social locations, and for a more thorough reflexive exploration of how social processes and relationships intersect and continue to uphold social inequalities (Damant et al., 2008; Lykke, 2010). Intersectionality can provide a new social work approach that makes visible the ‘multiple positioning that constitutes everyday life and the power relations’ (Phoenix and Pattynama, 2006, p. 187), and contributes to shaping the complexities of social work and homelessness. It can also be a powerful tool for social workers to examine their own privileges (and oppressions).

Similar to Hulko’s (2009, p. 52) vision for intersectionality, my hope for this book is that it will help social workers and social work students ‘appreciate that they can be both oppressors and the oppressed at the same time’. For example, we can be aware of our ‘marginal social status’ (such as Aboriginal ancestry or ethno-cultural background), yet not have considered our ‘social-class position’ (Hulko, 2009, p. 52). However, it is also important to note that some intersectional oppressions/privileges can change over time and in different social contexts. Thus, we cannot homogenise the ways political projects affect different people (Yuval Davis, 2006; 2012). In regards to homelessness, this approach would involve not sliding into essentialism, such as pointing out the characteristics of ‘the homeless’, and reductionism, such as arguing that there is one cause of homelessness.

In this book, I aim to rethink how the ‘problem’ of homelessness is understood and addressed by social workers. I am not arguing that social work is the only discipline that has a claim to the issue, as many different professions are involved in responding to homelessness. However, this book draws on my own research and expertise, which is in the field of social work and homelessness. I come to this work with experience as a social work practitioner in multi-disciplinary and multi-cultural teams in Australia and the UK that included responding to the diversity of homelessness and other social issues, such as the wellbeing and protection of children, disability, ageing and mental health. For over 15 years I have been researching homelessness and social work, particularly in the Australian context. More recently, I have been engaged in exploring the relevance of intersectionality to social work and homelessness (Zufferey, 2009; 2015; 2016b).

There is one book on intersectionality and social work (Murphy et al., 2009) but no previous books have combined a focus on intersectionality, social work and homelessness. The assumptions that underpin intersectionality are consistent with those of social work, as they are about social change, building coalitions and working to upholding social justice and human rights. Intersectional analyses are useful in the fields of homelessness and social work by:

•placing the lived experiences of marginalised groups at the centre of the development of theory and research (Hulko, 2015), such as making visible the diverse perspectives of people experiencing homelessness;

•being ‘majority inclusive’ and thus, enabling a reflection on constructions of privilege and privileging practices (Christensen and Jensen, 2012), such as social workers’ reflecting on our own privileges (Hulko, 2015);

•exploring the complexities of individual and group identities, while highlighting the ways in which diversity within groups is often ignored and/or homogenised (Dhamoon, 2011), including by not homogenising ‘the homeless experience’;

•demonstrating how social inequality and oppression manifest in interconnected domains of power relations (Thornton Dill and Zambrana, 2009; Thornton Dill and Kohlman, 2012), including power relations relevant to social workers responding to people experiencing homelessness; and

•promoting social justice and social change, such as through social work advocacy, research, policy, practice and education (Murphy et al., 2009).

In this book I draw on these theoretical and methodological complexities, which distinguishes it from other work in the fields of social work and homelessness.

The complexities of homelessness

Homelessness is also a contested concept. Homelessness is frequently constructed as ‘rough sleeping’ or ‘houselessness’. These housing-based definitions of homelessness assume that ‘houselessness’ is the problem and housing is the solution (Tomas and Dittmar, 1995; Zufferey, 2016a). Such normative definitions and understandings of homelessness in Western countries often fail to incorporate multiple and diverse perspectives of home and homelessness (Zufferey, 2016a; 2016b). Also, the relevance of Western definitions of homelessness for developing countries has been questioned (Tipple and Speak, 2009). Whilst it is important for social workers to advocate for access to safe and affordable housing, it is also important to make visible alternative perspectives and experiences of homelessness. Homelessness is inextricably connected to intersecting sites of disadvantage and inequality, which include global and local issues, Western global domination, class elitism, unequal gender and power relations, homophobia and white race privilege. Intersectional analyses enable social work researchers, policy makers and practitioners to examine how these diverse inequalities intersect in social processes and contribute to shaping the experiences and subjectivities of men and women who are defined as homeless.

Moreover, power relations constitute social work processes that can reproduce social inequalities, so it is also important to research the perspectives of both people who experience homelessness, and social workers who respond to homelessness. For example, social work research, policy and educational practices often involve defining and homogenising ‘marginalised’ or ‘vulnerable’ population groups. Likewise, social work practices tend to construct ‘clients’ who experience homelessness as the homogenous ‘other’ who are in ‘need’ of social work ‘intervention’ (Zufferey and Kerr, 2004). As well, social-policy-making processes constitute social ‘problems’ (such as homelessness) in particular ways (Bacchi, 2009). Intersectional analyses can make these social processes and multiple and intersecting power inequalities more visible, expanding on how social workers engage with socially constructed problems such as homelessness.

Whilst homelessness is a complex and emerging area of research for social workers, it is not a new phenomenon. Homelessness has long been a multidimensional human rights issue. The United Nations (UN) General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 (Article 25), which states that everyone has the right to a standard of living that is adequate for their health and wellbeing, including access to food, clothing, housing and medical care. Worldwide, there are over 100 million people without shelter; at least 1.6 billion people who lack adequate housing, and one in four people who live in housing situations that can affect their health and safety (Habitat, 2015), many of whom are women and children. Global definitions of homelessness have tended to focus on people being literally homeless (without shelter), with few possessions, ‘sleeping in the streets, in doorways or on piers, or in any other space, on a more or less random basis’. ¹ More recently, in 2016, the special United Nations Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate Housing, Leilani Farha, provided a three-dimensional definition of homelessness anchored in human rights and social inequality. She suggests that the first definitional dimension highlights ‘the absence of home in terms of both its physical structure and its social aspects’; the second dimension focuses on ‘systemic discrimination and social exclusion’; and the third dimension acknowledges that people are ‘resilient in the struggle for survival and dignity and potential agents of change as rights holders’ (UNHR, 2016, p. 1). Consistent with the United Nations, I also posit that homelessness is connected to systemic and structural patterns of discrimination that disproportionately affect people on the basis of gender, age, cultural background, ability, poverty, sexuality, migration and refugee status, each in diffe...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Information
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Homelessness and social work: An intersectional approach
• 3 Social work research and homelessness
• 4 Social policy and homelessness
• 5 Social work practice and homelessness
• 6 Lived experiences of homelessness
• 7 Conclusion
• Index