and reach thousands of daily visitors
10 FEBRUARY 2010
NO 1540
Homeless children
Resilience and hope
The experiences of homeless children often lead to continued
homelessness and/or deep poverty as an adult. Still, there are many
children who "make it" in the adult world. Why is that? Why can some
children, in the midst of chaos and insecurity, successfully weave their
way through the maze of confusion to successful adulthood? Developmental
studies have identified protective processes within child, family,
school, and community systems, that support the competence, that is the
resilience, of children deemed at-risk. Douglass (1996), Masten and
Sesma Jr. (1999), and Reed-Victor and Stronge (2002) all suggest that
resilience needs to be considered as a dynamic process that includes
internal and external factors, and the unique characteristics of
individuals and their contexts.
Douglass (1996) examined the linkages between risk and protective factors on the one hand and behavior related to school success (achievement and conduct) on the other. She noted five risks: (1) low education level of most parents, (2) single parent households, (3) abuse and violence, (4) hunger, poor physical and mental health, and (5) school achievement. She found that homeless children have multiple needs, few resources, high mobility and overwhelmed parents and that their school dropout rates were very high when parenting abilities were lacking. Among these children, she studied those who succeeded in spite of severe adversity. Douglass found that the children who developed good relationships with competent and caring adults and who had good cognitive abilities had fewer risk factors in their lives and more resources (both social and individual). She further noted that, as the number of risk factors in a child's life increases, so does the threat to the child's development and well being. She also found that by reducing risks, boosting resources, and facilitating a protective relationship with competent adults the child has more chance to survive the homeless experience.
Reed-Victor and Stronge (2002) recommend that educational programs recognize the child's assets as well as his or her needs. According to Reed-Victor and Stronge, strengthening natural supports in the family, school and community, and advocating for additional services and resources to fill gaps in the support systems all appear to increase the child's opportunity for success. Strategies that support students who are homeless include: increasing parenting skills, heightening parents' awareness of their children's educational needs, assisting parents with creating and maintaining emotional stability and helping parents with employment and vocational training. Also important are: providing school-based interventions such as improved enrollment procedures along with supports such as counseling and tutoring, and helping children to develop positive strategies for social engagement, building self-confidence, offering emotional support and opportunities for self-expression and supporting school staff to work closely with community agencies.
Menke (2000) looked at stresses and coping behaviors and compared the behaviors of children who are homeless but living in a shelter with children who were previously homeless and children who were never homeless but are poor. She found that some of the stressors unique to homeless children (e.g. the lack of freedom, the uncertainty of the situation, and the restrictive rules of the facilities in which they were staying) made it harder for them to seek out social support (that is, friends and parents to talk to). At the same time, Menke (2000) found that despite the stressors, children in homeless shelters, much like children who are not homeless or children who are poor, coped with their circumstances by playing, watching television, fighting, crying and walking away.
Nunez (1994) believes that the whole family must be considered when looking for strategies to support homeless children. Since children learn by modeling and parents are primary role models, parents must be included in models for learning. Nunez stresses the importance of parents learning the value and potential of education and understanding their own role in passing their values on to their children. He reviewed the American program, Homes for the Homeless (HFH), an innovative education, social and residential service to homeless families, which takes a family based approach to learning. Within this program, both children and parents are viewed as students and as teachers, and everyone learns to appreciate education as a way of life. Both parents and children have fun, take control of their learning, and see the relevance of education for their day to day existence. This approach, together with a continuum of social services, begins to move the family away from perpetuating the cycle of poverty and homelessness toward a more stable, less limited future.
Herth (1998), in her study of 60 homeless children (6 to 16 years old) who were residing in homeless shelters in one Midwestern state, questions the meaning of hope and the hoping process in homeless children. She observed the strategies shelter workers used to foster and maintain the children's hope. Five areas emerged as contributing to hope: (1) connectedness, the perceived sense of meaningful links with others including family members, friends, caregivers or role models; (2) internal resources, the ways in which children draw on their inner strengths to respond to the world around them; (3) cognitive strategies, especially those used to consciously transform perceptions into a positive frame; (4) energy, the physical and psychosocial vitality that leads to positive action or accomplishment; and having (5) a hope object, a "thing" that gives significant meaning such as a teddy bear or blanket, something that is the child's own possession and is permanent. Herth's findings suggest that resilience and hope,can be fostered by ensuring the positive participation of significant adults in children's lives; emphasizing potential rather than limitations; encouraging strengthening of inner resources, like courage and mental toughness while still fostering playfulness and humour; and remembering that each child is unique.
COLLEEN KASTING AND SIBYLLE ARTZ
Kasting, C. and Artz, S.
(2005). Homeless outreach projects for single parent families: What
happens to the children? Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies, 6,
1. pp. 36-38.
REFERENCES
Douglass, A. (1996). Rethinking the Effects of Homelessness on Children: Resiliency and Competency. Child Welfare, 75, 6. pp. 741.
Herth, K. (1998). Hope as seen through the eyes of homeless children. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28, 5. pp. 1053-1062.
Masten, A. and Sesma Jr., A. (1999). Risk and resilience among children homeless in Minneapolis. Reporter, 29, 1. pp.1-6
Menke, E.M. (2000). Comparison of the stressors and coping behaviors of homeless, previously homeless and never homeless poor children. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 21. pp. 691-710.
Nunez, R. (1994). Access to success: Meeting the educational needs of homeless children and families. Social Work in Education, 16, 1. pp.21-30.
Reed-Victor, E. and Stronge, J. (2002). Homeless students and resilience: Staff perspectives on individual and environmental factors. Journal of Children and Poverty, 8, 2. pp. 159-183.
