Advertisement

“The Apartment is for You, It’s Not for Anyone Else”: Managing Social Recovery and Risk on the Frontlines of Single-Adult Supportive Housing

  • Emmy TideringtonEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

This multi-method qualitative study examines frontline provider perspectives on consumer social relationships and barriers to social recovery in supportive housing programs for adults with serious mental illness. Thematic analyses show that guest and occupancy policies that enforce the “single” nature of single-adult supportive housing challenge consumer rights to self-determination in the realm of social recovery. Findings also highlight the ways in which providers act to reinforce and subvert these policies while mitigating risk in this service setting. Recommendations for enhancing the recovery orientation of supportive housing and implications for the design of the homeless service system are discussed.

Keywords

Mental health recovery Supportive housing Case management Qualitative 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH F31MH100772), as well as a fellowship from the New York University Global Research Initiative. The author would like to acknowledge Drs. Deborah Padgett and Victoria Stanhope and the study team from the larger parent study (NIMH R01MH084903).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The author reports no competing interests.

References

  1. Baer, J. S., Garrett, S. B., Beadnell, B., Wells, E. A., & Peterson, P. L. (2007). Brief motivational intervention with homeless adolescents: Evaluating effects on substance use and service utilization. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 21(4), 582.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Barrow, S., McMullin, L., Tripp, J., & Tsemberis, S. (2007). Consumer integration and self-determination in homelessness research, policy, planning, and services. Paper presented at the 2007 National Homelessness Conference, Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  3. Barrow, S. M., & Laborde, N. D. (2008). Invisible mothers: Parenting by homeless women separated from their children. Gender Issues, 25(3), 157–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Copeland, M. E. (2002). Wellness recovery action plan: A system for monitoring, reducing and eliminating uncomfortable or dangerous physical symptoms and emotional feelings. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 17(3–4), 127–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crystal, S. (1984). Homeless men and homeless women: The gender gap. Urban and Social Change Review, 17(2), 2–6.Google Scholar
  7. D’Ercole, A., & Struening, E. L. (1992). Victimization among homeless women: Implications for service delivery. Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 141–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Davidson, L., Rowe, M., Tondora, J., O’Connell, M. J., & Lawless, M. S. (2008). A practical guide to recovery-oriented practice: Tools for transforming mental health care. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  9. Deegan, P. E. (1996). Recovery as a journey of the heart. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 19(3), 91–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. DiBlasio, F. A., & Belcher, J. R. (1992). Keeping homeless families together: Examining their needs. Children and Youth Services Review, 14, 427–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Friedrich, R. M., Hollingsworth, B., Hradek, E., Friedrich, H. B., & Culp, K. R. (1999). Family and client perspectives on alternative residential settings for persons with severe mental illness. Psychiatric Services, 50, 509–514.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Gillis, L., Dickerson, G., & Hanson, J. (2010). Recovery and homeless services: New directions for the field. Open Health Services and Policy Journal, 3, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hawkins, R. L., & Abrams, C. (2007). Disappearing acts: The social networks of formerly homeless individuals with co-occurring disorders. Social Science and Medicine, 65, 2031–2042. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.06.019.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Kusenbach, M. (2003). Street phenomenology: The go-along as ethnographic research tool. Ethnography, 4(3), 455–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy, 30th Ann. Ed.: Dilemmas of the individual in public service. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  16. Locke, G., Khadduri, J., & O’Hara, A. (2007). Housing models. Washington, DC: National Symposium on Homelessness Research.Google Scholar
  17. Mezzina, R., Davidson, L., Borg, M., Marin, I., Topor, A., & Sells, D. (2006). The social nature of recovery. American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation, 9, 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nelson, G., Hall, G. B., Squire, D., & Walsh-Bower, R. T. (1992). Social network transactions of psychiatric patients. Social Science and Medicine, 34, 443–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. New York Real Property Law §§ 235-f.Google Scholar
  20. Padgett, D. K. (2016). Qualitative methods in social work research (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Padgett, D. K., Henwood, B., Abrams, C., & Drake, R. E. (2008). Social relationships among persons who have experienced serious mental illness, substance abuse, and homelessness: Implications for recovery. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 78(3), 333–339.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Padgett, D. K., Tiderington, E., Smith, B. T., Derejko, K. S., & Henwood, B. F. (2016). Complex recovery: Understanding the lives of formerly homeless adults with complex needs. Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless, 1–11.Google Scholar
  23. Parsell, C. (2015). Surveillance in supportive housing: Intrusion or autonomy? Urban Studies, 0042098015613205. doi: 10.1177/0042098015613205.
  24. Rog, D. J., Marshall, T., Dougherty, R. H., George, P., Daniels, A. S., Ghose, S. S., & Delphin-Rittmon, M. E. (2014). Permanent supportive housing: Assessing the evidence. Psychiatric Services, 65(3), 287–294.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Rosenheck, R., Bassuk, E., & Salomon, A. (1999). Special populations of homeless Americans. In Practical lessons: The 1998 National Symposium on Homelessness. Washington, DC: US Department of Housing and Urban Development and the US Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
  26. Saldaña, J. (2012). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2002). Reading qualitative studies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(1), 74–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sheedy, C. K., & Whitter, M. (2009). Guiding principles and elements of recovery-oriented systems of care: What do we know from the research? HHS Publication No. (SMA) 09–4439. Rockville, MD: Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.Google Scholar
  29. Shinn, M., & Weitzman, B. (1996). Homeless families are different. In J. Baumohl (Ed.), Homelessness in America: A reference book. National Coalition for the Homeless and Oryx Press.Google Scholar
  30. Siegel, C. E., Samuels, J., Tang, D., Berg, I., Jones, K., & Hopper, K. (2006). Tenant outcomes in supported housing and community residences in New York City. Psychiatric Services, 57, 982–991.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Smith, E. M., & North, C. S. (1994). Not all homeless women are alike: Effects of motherhood and the presence of children. Community Mental Health Journal, 30(6), 601–610.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Spaniol, L., Wewiorski, N. J., Gagne, C., & Anthony, W. A. (2002). The process of recovery from schizophrenia. International Review of Psychiatry, 14, 327–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stefancic, A. (2014). “If I stay by myself, I feel safer”: Dilemmas of social connectedness among persons with psychiatric disabilities in Housing First. Retrieved from Columbia University Academic Commons, doi: 10.7916/D83B5XSS.
  34. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2003). Blueprint for change: Ending chronic homelessness for persons with serious mental illness and co-occurring substance use disorders. (DHHS Pub. No. SMA04-3870). Rockville, MD: Center for Mental Health Services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.Google Scholar
  35. Tiderington, E. (2015a). “We always think you’re here permanently”: The paradox of “permanent” housing and other barriers to recovery-oriented practice in supportive housing services. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. doi: 10.1007/s10488-015-0707-0.Google Scholar
  36. Tiderington, E. (2015b). The dilemmas of permanency and accountability: A qualitative investigation of barriers to and facilitators of recovery-oriented practice in supportive housing (Doctoral dissertation). Retreived from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 3721212).Google Scholar
  37. Topor, A., Borg, M., Mezzina, R., Sells, D., Marin, I., & Davidson, L. (2006). Others: The role of family, friends, and professionals in the recovery process. American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation, 9(1), 17–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tsai, J., Mares, A. S., & Rosenheck, R. A. (2012). Does housing chronically homeless adults lead to social integration? Psychiatric Services, 63(5), 427–434. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201100047.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Tsemberis, S. (1999). From streets to homes: An innovative approach to supported housing for homeless adults with psychiatric disabilities. Journal of Community Psychology, 27(2), 225–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tsemberis, S. (2010). Housing first: Ending homelessness promoting recovery and reducing costs in I. In G. Ellen & B. O’Flaherty (Eds.), How to house the homeless. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  41. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2003). The President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Achieving the promise: Transforming mental health care in America. Final Report. (DHHS Pub. No. SMA-03-3832). Rockville, MD: Author.Google Scholar
  42. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2004). National consensus statement on mental health recovery (Brochure). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Retrieved from http://store.samhsa.gov/shin/content/SMA05-4129/SMA05-4129.pdf. Accessed 2 Aug 2016.
  43. Whitley, R., & Drake, R. E. (2010). Recovery: A dimensional approach. Psychiatric Services, 61(10), 1248–1250.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Yanos, P., Rosenfield, S., & Horwitz, A. (2001). Negative and supportive social interactions and quality of life among persons diagnosed with severe mental illness. Community Mental Health Journal, 37, 405–419.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Yanos, P. T., Barrow, S. M., & Tsemberis, S. (2004). Community integration in the early phase of housing among homeless persons diagnosed with severe mental illness: Successes and challenges. Community Mental Health Journal, 40(2), 133–150.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Zlotnick, C., Tam, T., & Bradley, K. (2007). Impact of adulthood trauma on homeless mothers. Community Mental Health Journal, 43(1), 13–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Social WorkRutgers, The State University of New JerseyNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations