Introduction
Minority homelessness in London is an article by Kusminder Chahal that looks at the critical issue of homelessness in London, the vulnerable groups and the health risks they are exposed to. The article provides comprehensive information on the topic of study citing some of the research findings that were found. However, as the author notes from the research findings, they were biased and hence not providing true information on the state of homelessness in London. Most of the research techniques used could not allow the collection of correct information as it was more based on what was physical rather than the real scenario.
Meaning of homelessness
Homelessness is defined as state of not having a permanent place that a person can call their own. The definition that is given according to Daly 1996 is narrow and is only based on the number of people that mostly live on streets simply because they do not have a physical shelter. We learn that even though a person can have a place where they go to every evening after their day’s activities, it may not necessarily constitute a home. There are also issues of who should own a home in London, which has been narrowed down to the natives or the whites. This has therefore made the research to imply that most of the homeless people in London are whites. In real sense, blacks, Caribbean blacks and other ethnic communities suffer more from the issues of homelessness compared to whites.
Healthcare and homelessness
The issue of healthcare is also synonymous with homelessness. This is because of the poor living conditions that minority homeless communities are exposed to. Their level of income coupled with other social factors such as racism also hinder them from acquiring quality healthcare services. The minority ethnic homeless in London’s health issues are mainly stress related yet this is not due to their homelessness. They are faced with other family issues, which they lack the mechanism to effectively deal with. This therefore implies that even if they are given homes, this will not completely solve their issues. They suffer self-esteem issues, which ultimately hinder them from making certain decisions. Most of them seem to have accepted their fate and hence not making the personal efforts of getting out of the situation (Hayden, 1992).
The white homeless individuals also have their own reasons of not owning a home. This may be due to their age where they feel they can no longer stay with their parents. They will hence prefer to find refuge somewhere else than share a roof with the rest of their relatives. In analyzing those who are homeless and those who are not, the data does not include those who live in hostels, share a smaller house and those who are hosted as refugees or asylum seekers. The data only majors on those who literally do not have a roof over their heads and are mainly found on the streets. As we analyse the article, we shall be looking at the strengths and weaknesses of the article, the information provided both by the author, and data collected.
Validity of information given
Considering the data given in the article, we realise that there is a lot of information that has not been given. The author clearly stated that the data that was used was biased on the grounds of skin colour, gender and ethnicity. This therefore means that especially the government or any other organisation that seeks information on the same cannot rely on the data given. However, there was no better way of conducting the research, as it had to be based on evidence. The figures that were given were accurate in terms of giving evidence on the number of homeless people in London. For the other part, which is considered, biased, there is no clear evidence and as much as it is the true picture, it cannot be verified. For example, from the data, the largest population of the homeless in London are whites. This is contrary to what the author found out and realised that there was in fact a large number of blacks and Caribbean that were homeless compared to the rest.
Numerical data and facts
The difference between the research that was presented on data and that which was physically carried out, apart from the varying figures, is the assumption, which it was based on. The information on the data may have been based on assumptions that the people supposed to own homes in London were the natives and not those who may have migrated to the land for various reasons. This therefore implies that the black Africans, black Caribbean, Indians and the likes where only there on a temporal basis and hence not eligible to be put on the data. This is the main reason why they were not included in the main data even though they lived in refugee camps, hostels or crowded houses they probably did not own (Home Office, 1992).
The basis on which homelessness was rated may also have been on the country of origin and if the ancestors were born and brought up in land. Irrespective of whether the individuals migrated there on a permanent or a temporal basis, the research method chose to assume that they were not permanent residents. After analysing data on the homeless population, there was a separate study for those who were considered asylum seekers, living in hostels or shared a home with either a friend or a relative Home (Office, 1992). This therefore reveals the intend of the research to distinguish between the different groups and classes of people.
The issues of healthcare and homelessness have been critically handled to imply that homeless people are more vulnerable to health issues compared to those who have homes. Some of the reasons such as racism, overcrowding, poor living standards, and joblessness and family issues intensify such risk factors. However, there are varying reasons on what may promote ill health on a homeless person. This implies that homelessness may not actually be the root cause of such health issues. Looking at the number of whites that are homeless, we realise that despite their state, they have access to quality healthcare services. Their state of homelessness may simply be a choice like a young man who decides he cannot stay with his parents. Homelessness does not necessarily imply that one has been deprived but that they do not have a residence they can call their own.
On the other hand, health issues that face the homeless such as stress related diseases can also occur to those who have homes. This is because some of the issues such as family problems, racism, joblessness and poor living conditions also occur to those who have homes. This mainly depends on where they are located, their race and accessibility to social amenities. Others who may be homeless, for instance those mentioned by the author as bed and breakfast guests and those who live in hostels could be in good financial positions (Davies & Lyle, 1996). Their reason for being homeless could be various assignments that prompted them to migrate to their current residences. When defining homelessness and vulnerability to health issues, it is important to differentiate between financial ability and inability, as well as voluntary or involuntary homelessness.
Discussion:
Strengths
Some of the strengths displayed by the article include the ability to distinguish homelessness based on permanent and temporal residence. The data that revealed that whites faced more homelessness issues was because they were permanent residents compared to African blacks and Caribbean blacks who were likely to be in the country on temporal basis (Daly, 1996). There was also the basis of classifying the homeless based on whether they were asylum seekers or stayed in hostels. I considered this the best classification as refugees could easily return to their countries of origin and those staying in hostels acquiring homes and therefore not necessarily being classified as those without homes in London.
The research was convinced that the whites who stayed on the streets genuinely did not have homes as nobody could just voluntarily accept to stay on the streets. The classification put the government in a better position to know the exact number of London residents that did not have homes and hence assisting them. The classification is also important in minimizing on the rate of illegal immigrants being comfortable in the land. Understanding that a nation has minimum resources to take care of its people is basic in ensuring the provision of basic facilities. This also gives the government the option of ensuring that those who are not residents go back to their native lands once their assignments and issues are sorted.
Mental health and its relation to homelessness is also an issue that has been well analysed by the study. Irrespective of whether the homeless are asylum seekers or residents of London, we realise that not having a home can be a constant bother. For instance, an asylum seeker will not be at peace as long as they do not have a home. There is that constant reminder of the fact that they will have to go back to their countries of residence despite the reasons that made them seek refuge elsewhere. No matter how comfortable a person may try to be, realising that where they stay is not a permanent home and they could be kicked out is likely to disturb them. This may be slightly different from a person with a home even if they have other issues (Hutson & Liddiard, 1994). They will know that as long as they are guaranteed of such a home, then other issues are temporal and not permanent.
Weaknesses
The main weakness of the article is on failing to give accurate information on other ethnic communities apart from the whites who were permanent residents of London and genuinely did not have homes. There are cases of immigrants and even asylum seekers who have no idea of where their country of origin is due to certain historic factors. Assuming that such people may not necessarily be citizens basing on their ethnicity is wrong. Even though it is not easy to know the number of immigrants to the country, it is always easy to tell those who are there on temporal basis. For instance, there are those who are in London for specific assignments and once they are done, they will go back (Anderson, 1992). This may also include refugees who are actually permitted into the land. Having the figures and subtracting them from the residents would have given a clear figure of other ethnic communities that deserved to own homes.
The other weakness identified is on the relationship between homelessness and healthcare. We realise that there are many issues that may lead to poor health, which may not necessarily relate to homelessness. The article has generally based its assumption on the fact that ill health is rampart among the homeless because they do not have proper facilities. From our analysis we realised that even those with homes are prone to similar issues that face the homeless and vice versa. There are incidences of lifestyle diseases that are more dangerous than any other ailments. Unfortunately, this affects the higher class that may be having homes. Even though they may have the resources to access medical facilities, they will not be guaranteed perfect health (Connelly & Crown, 1994). It is therefore important to include preventive measures of certain diseases rather than assuming that the homeless are most vulnerable.
Conclusions
I consider the article a good piece of research materials despite the loopholes that it had. The author only needed to organize it appropriately and not rely much on assumptions rather than facts. In cases where the research had to be used to sought out the issues of homelessness in London, then the solution could have been biased as the report itself. It is a high time that developed nations such as London appreciated the fact that many more people are seeking permanent residence in their land and hence the need to be included in accommodation procedures. Even though most of them come in search of greener pastures, they do not only burden the country but also contribute to its development project.
When considering a population that has to be used for such studies, it will be important to have facts rather than depend on assumptions. It will be wrong to give an implication that the main people than need intervention in terms of health care are the homeless and ignoring others. Even though the study was focusing on homelessness, there are other root causes of homelessness that could facilitate perfect solution for the issue rather than just lack of a home. If the research had to be distinguish between the whites and other ethnic communities that did not own homes, then percentages and the reason of their homelessness should have been stated clearly.
Reference list
Anderson, J. (1992). Housing Policy and Street Homelessness in Britain in Housing Studies, Vol., No. 1 pp.17-28
Connelly, J & Crown, J (1994) Homelessness and Ill Health: Report of a working party of the Royal College of Physicians (RCP: London)
Daly, G. (1996) Homeless: Policies, Strategies & Lives on the Street (Routledge: 1996)
Davies, J & Lyle, S (1996) Homelessness amongst Young Black and Minority Ethnic People in England (University of Leeds/FBHO/CHAR: Leeds)
Hayden, C. (1992). Bed & Breakfast Blues, Health Service Journal, October, pp 22-25
Home Office, (1992) Asylum Statistics: United kingdom 1990-91, Statistical Bulletin Issue 12/92, 27 June
Hutson, S & Liddiard, M (1994) Youth Homelessness: The Construction of a Social Issue (Macmillan: London)
