> Welfare changes intensify hardship
Welfare changes intensify hardship
Contact:
Terra Poirier, 604.801.5121 ext. 229, terra@policyalternatives.ca (to arrange interviews with researchers)
Terra Poirier, 604.801.5121 ext. 229, terra@policyalternatives.ca (to arrange interviews with researchers)
April 22, 2008
A new report says that British Columbia’s welfare benefits are so low,
and the rules governing them so inflexible, that they are contributing
to homelessness, prostitution and women staying in abusive
relationships.
The report criticizes the provincial government for promoting a massive reduction in its welfare caseload between 1995 and 2005 as a good news story.
Jane Pulkingham, a professor and chair of Sociology and Anthropology, and two SFU graduates co-authored Living on Welfare in BC: Experiences of Long-Term “Expected to Work” Recipients.
“We urge the provincial government to change its overarching goals, away from a narrow focus on welfare caseload reduction and move instead to the broader goals of poverty reduction and elimination, and health promotion,” concludes Pulkingham.
The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) and the Raise the Rates Coalition released the report, which followed the lives of 62 welfare recipients in Vancouver, Victoria and Kelowna for two years.
In the end, the researchers were able to keep track of the lives of only 45 participants — a strong retention rate, say the researchers, for a study of this kind.
The following were among the study’s key findings:
Seven people were cut off welfare in the course of the study. All of them were homeless (and at least two became homeless as a direct consequence of being cut off).
Twelve people went off welfare voluntarily. The fact that most had stable housing to begin with underscores the need to have stable housing to get off welfare say the authors.
Four out of 40 women in the study said that they engaged in prostitution because tougher welfare rules had resulted in one of three scenarios. They were cut off assistance, had to wait three weeks for benefits to be re-started or had their monthly welfare payment reduced by $100.
Four of 12 women in intimate relationships said that their partners abused them. Three of the four said they stayed in abusive relationships for financial reasons.
Twenty-nine people remained on welfare by the end of the study. The vast majority had been inappropriately categorized in the “Expected to Work” welfare category for too long. Twenty of the 29 were ultimately re-categorized from being employable to being in one of three other categories: expected to work with a medical condition, person with disabilities or a person with multiple barriers to employment.
The report criticizes the provincial government for promoting a massive reduction in its welfare caseload between 1995 and 2005 as a good news story.
Jane Pulkingham, a professor and chair of Sociology and Anthropology, and two SFU graduates co-authored Living on Welfare in BC: Experiences of Long-Term “Expected to Work” Recipients.
“We urge the provincial government to change its overarching goals, away from a narrow focus on welfare caseload reduction and move instead to the broader goals of poverty reduction and elimination, and health promotion,” concludes Pulkingham.
The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) and the Raise the Rates Coalition released the report, which followed the lives of 62 welfare recipients in Vancouver, Victoria and Kelowna for two years.
In the end, the researchers were able to keep track of the lives of only 45 participants — a strong retention rate, say the researchers, for a study of this kind.
The following were among the study’s key findings:
Seven people were cut off welfare in the course of the study. All of them were homeless (and at least two became homeless as a direct consequence of being cut off).
Twelve people went off welfare voluntarily. The fact that most had stable housing to begin with underscores the need to have stable housing to get off welfare say the authors.
Four out of 40 women in the study said that they engaged in prostitution because tougher welfare rules had resulted in one of three scenarios. They were cut off assistance, had to wait three weeks for benefits to be re-started or had their monthly welfare payment reduced by $100.
Four of 12 women in intimate relationships said that their partners abused them. Three of the four said they stayed in abusive relationships for financial reasons.
Twenty-nine people remained on welfare by the end of the study. The vast majority had been inappropriately categorized in the “Expected to Work” welfare category for too long. Twenty of the 29 were ultimately re-categorized from being employable to being in one of three other categories: expected to work with a medical condition, person with disabilities or a person with multiple barriers to employment.
Backgrounder: Welfare changes intensify hardship
The researchers investigated the fate of society’s most marginalized members under the new welfare rules, comparing the experiences of those who stayed on welfare with those who left voluntarily and those who were cut off.
The recipients were expected to work even though more than half of them reported having a mental or physical disability that limited their daily activity. Many were also addicted to drugs and/or alcohol. At the start of the study, they had been on welfare for a minimum of 15 months and about 40 per cent of them had been homeless in the six-month period leading up to the study.
SFU Master of Arts graduates Jewelles Smith (women’s studies) and Sylvia Parusel (sociology) were working on their degrees during the study and helped keep track of its participants. Along with students at the University of Victoria and UBC-Okanagan, they contacted the participants monthly and interviewed them every six months to evaluate how they were fairing.
Parusel, who is now working on her doctorate in sociology at SFU, says, “It was a very emotional experience that went way beyond studying statistics behind a desk. Keeping up with these people at drop-in centres and finding them on the street was no easy task. Often we were the only stable fixtures in their lives.”
This report is a product of the Economic Security Project, a joint CCPA-SFU initiative.
Parusel, Smith and Pulkingham are Vancouver residents.
— 30 —
The researchers investigated the fate of society’s most marginalized members under the new welfare rules, comparing the experiences of those who stayed on welfare with those who left voluntarily and those who were cut off.
The recipients were expected to work even though more than half of them reported having a mental or physical disability that limited their daily activity. Many were also addicted to drugs and/or alcohol. At the start of the study, they had been on welfare for a minimum of 15 months and about 40 per cent of them had been homeless in the six-month period leading up to the study.
SFU Master of Arts graduates Jewelles Smith (women’s studies) and Sylvia Parusel (sociology) were working on their degrees during the study and helped keep track of its participants. Along with students at the University of Victoria and UBC-Okanagan, they contacted the participants monthly and interviewed them every six months to evaluate how they were fairing.
Parusel, who is now working on her doctorate in sociology at SFU, says, “It was a very emotional experience that went way beyond studying statistics behind a desk. Keeping up with these people at drop-in centres and finding them on the street was no easy task. Often we were the only stable fixtures in their lives.”
This report is a product of the Economic Security Project, a joint CCPA-SFU initiative.
Parusel, Smith and Pulkingham are Vancouver residents.
— 30 —