Debating Statistics on Social Isolation is a Distraction

 

By Kendall Worth

To start at the beginning: I have been making the case for years now that social isolation is a HUGE problem for members of my community, - the people of HRM living on income assistance (IA).

Social isolation is both an effect and a cause of marginalization. It is often related to the personal challenges that these individuals face such as mental health issues, visible and invisible disabilities, etc. In the face of the social stigma associated with poverty and “living on welfare”, social isolation can then become a self-reinforcing reality that actually worsens that individual’s situation. I have discussed this issue at length, most recently in BLOGs here and here.

Despite the challenges faced by such individuals, there is still a regular criticism that people in my community need to “pull ourselves up by our bootstraps”. This suggestion is often made by better-off residents of our province, with the implied criticism that IA recipients are satisfied with their lives, idly receiving public benefits. This feeds into the argument that the Government should NOT increase basic benefits (currently at $1,005/month) because this will only motivate other “idlers” to quite working and apply for public benefits.   

I am sure that most people can see the foolishness of this argument. Given today’s cost of living, who would voluntarily choose to live on an annual income of $12,000??!

But in today’s BLOG I want to underline that there are many differences between the individuals who make up the community of IA recipients in HRM: we are a diverse group in almost every sense, beyond the common bond that we are ALL poor and struggling.

With regards to the specific problem of social isolation, I find it helpful to think of our community in terms of three distinct sub-groups. These are not fixed or closed boxes, as many people move from one group to another at different times in their lives. These sub-groups are: 

·       Group#1 – individuals who are deeply marginalized, often struggling daily with issues of addictions or mental health, such that they are unable at the current moment to think in terms of social relationships and networks.

·       Group#2 –  individuals who are in recovery but still highly vulnerable, who are actively working on healing and therapy to improve their well-being, and may be interested to build friendships and supportive social networks, but are still at risk.

·       Group#3 –  individuals who have established some stability in their personal lives, are coping to some degree with their life in poverty, and are willing and able to build social relations and networks which contributes to improved well-being.

I am not aware of any formal statistical analysis of the IA community in Nova Scotia, and how people might be distributed across these three groups. However, in my lived experience, including my years as a journalist and advocate member of this community, I would guess that no more that 20% of our community would fall into the third category.

Readers should note that my “analysis” has been contested by others, who do not agree with my 80 / 20 estimate. These objections have come from friends and members of my community as well as my different editors over the years. There are some who contest the accuracy of my estimate.  And there are others who don’t dispute the numbers but are concerned that it implies that I am writing off the 80% of people in Groups 1 and 2 as “lost causes”.

This is certainly not my intention: I simply want to underline that there are BIG differences and WIDE variations between people in my community. And not all intervention strategies or programs will fit with ALL IA recipients.  

I fully understand and appreciate that there may be a host of different reasons for people to become socially isolated. For some, it may be a reflection of deep social anxieties, which in turn may be rooted in a personal history of abuse or trauma. Alternatively, there may be challenges related to invisible disabilities or mental health and behavioural issues.

There are many, many reasons for people to retreat into self-restricting “comfort zones” and not unusual for some to begin describing themselves as “natural introverts” to provide a sort of public justification for their isolation. I have written about these issues before, here and here. 

The bottom line is that while those people in Group 3, - the smaller subset of people on IA who are able to maintain social relations with family and friends, - we should NOT assume that this is possible for all. One size does NOT fit all in our community and those in Groups 1 and 2 (the vast majority in my estimation) require programs and interventions that are responsive to their specific, complex – and sometimes unique needs.

One additional, complicating factor is that while all recipients of Income Assistance live in poverty, it is those who fall into Groups 1 and 2 who are most often and most significantly the targets of social stigma. Their personal challenges and situation are more obvious to those they meet and engage with, in both public and private settings. Sometimes this can result in difficult, even traumatic experiences.  

I want to underline that this stigma does not come from the professionals with whom IA recipients engage with regularly. My experience has been that doctors, psychiatrists, social workers, and counsellors are generally quite empathetic and understanding of their IA clients, and the complex web of issues they are dealing with.

Rather, it is family members, friends and the public at large that are the sources of most social stigma, which only serves to drive the targeted individuals into even greater social isolation and provoke further mental health issues such as depression.

The bottom line is that I do not have actual hard data to support my 80 / 20 analysis. And I do not think it useful to argue whether it is closer to 60%, 75% or whatever. My basic point is that a significant majority of people on Income Assistance are struggling on a daily basis with issues of mental health and addictions that greatly limit their abilities to live “normal”, healthy lives and maintain the social relations needed to get through another difficult day. 

A first person survey of IA recipients would provide a much better picture of their lives and situations. Indeed, some years back I had suggested that this would be a good initiative for BRAG, the Benefits Reform Action Group to take. For better or worse, BRAG did not take up this proposal, - there was a concern that IA recipients would shy away from BRAG if we tried to initiate these sorts of conversations at our usual meeting places like food banks and soup kitchens.

The conundrum that I face in trying to focus the attention of agencies and policy-makers on social isolation as a critical problem in our community is that no agency will address a social issue through investment of resources and programs until they have clear, quantified evidence of the problem to be solved. But gathering evidence on social isolation is HUGELY difficult to compile because individuals living in social isolation – almost by definition - are reluctant to share their stories. These statistics are not something you can easily compile like through a survey or questionnaire.

Maybe there are less intrusive ways of gathering solid evidence on the prevalence and impact of social isolation on people living in poverty? It would be great if some professional researchers – perhaps through the School of Social Work – could do some work on this issue.  WE NEED HARD DATA, NOW!

A Concluding Thought

My BLOG last week focused on the calendar, as we head into December with all the seasonal opportunities for social gatherings, - and all the related anxieties and sadness that dominate this time of the year for so many people living in poverty.

Many of those “lucky” people in Group 3 of my analysis will have the opportunity to engage socially with others over the holiday season, without fear of stigma or shame related to their status as “IA recipient”.  But for the great majority of people in my community, the month of December will be a time to lay low and stay isolated, to manage the social and financial stresses of the season away from both community festivities and private gatherings.

I do not think that this is a healthy approach for these individuals and it should not be acceptable in our society. We need to find a better way of reaching out and supporting the so-called “80%” as full members of our community.  They may not currently be capable of pulling themselves up by their bootstraps, but they do have the right to a decent life within a caring and sharing community!  

  

Kendall Worth is an award-winning anti-poverty activist who lives with disabilities and tries to make ends meet on income assistance.