Services in the shadows: practitioners' experiences with the challenges of working in homelessness

Öz

Homelessness is a multidimensional phenomenon encompassing physiological, psychological, spatial, and existential deprivations, extending beyond a mere physical housing problem. This complex structure causes practitioners working in the field of homelessness to confront a wide array of structural and practical challenges on the ground. The objective of this study is to thoroughly examine the subjective experiences of professional and volunteer practitioners providing direct services regarding the field challenges they encounter. Adopting a qualitative research methodology, the study utilized a phenomenological research design. The study group consists of 16 participants selected through purposive sampling. Data were collected via a semi-structured interview form, and the subsequent findings were subjected to content analysis employing an inductive approach. The research findings demonstrate that the challenges experienced by practitioners in the field center around three main themes: structural, field-dynamic-related, and professional. On the structural dimension, legislative loopholes stemming from identification and residency issues, the inadequacy and transient nature of services, inter-agency collaboration problems, and the capacity limitations of NGOs are prominent. Within the context of field dynamics, practical impediments such as the inability to reach the homeless, individuals' attachment to the street or the practitioner, addictions and crime, the timelessness of the being in street, and trust and security issues were identified. In the professional sense, challenges such as unpreparedness for street work, the field integration process, and secondary trauma emerged. These data indicate that the phenomenon of homelessness and its corresponding interventions in Türkiye are constrained within a framework caught between legal gaps, institutional problems, and street-specific dynamics. Consequently, to enhance the efficacy of combating homelessness in Türkiye, it is imperative not only to quantitatively increase physical housing provisions but also to institute structural reforms related to the field, bolster the professional competencies of practitioners, and develop permanent, sustainable social policies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Homelessness
• social work
• social policy
• qualitative research

Gölgede hizmetler: Evsizlik alanında çalışmanın zorlukları üzerine uygulayıcıların deneyimleri

Öz

Evsizlik, fiziksel barınma sorununun ötesinde fizyolojik, psikolojik, mekânsal ve varoluşsal yoksunlukları barındıran çok boyutlu bir olgudur. Bu karmaşık yapı, evsizlik alanında çalışan uygulayıcıların sahada çok çeşitli yapısal ve pratik zorluklarla karşılaşmasına neden olmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, evsizlik alanında doğrudan hizmet sunan profesyonel ve gönüllü uygulayıcıların sahada karşılaştıkları zorluklara ilişkin öznel deneyimlerini derinlemesine incelemektir. Nitel araştırma yöntemi benimsenen çalışmada, fenomenolojik araştırma deseni kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubunu, amaçlı örnekleme yöntemiyle seçilmiş 16 katılımcı oluşturmaktadır. Veriler, yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formu aracılığıyla toplanmış ve elde edilen bulgular tümevarımcı bir yaklaşımla içerik analizine tabi tutulmuştur. Araştırma bulguları, uygulayıcıların sahada deneyimlediği zorlukların yapısal, saha dinamiklerine bağlı ve mesleki olmak üzere üç ana tema etrafında şekillendiğini göstermektedir: Yapısal boyutta kimlik ve ikametgâh sorunlarından kaynaklı mevzuat boşlukları, hizmetlerin yetersizliği ve geçici nitelikte olması, kurumlar arası iş birliği sorunu ve STK'ların kapasite sınırlılıkları öne çıkmaktadır. Saha dinamikleri bağlamında ise evsizlere ulaşamama, bireylerin sokağa veya uygulayıcıya bağlanması, bağımlılıklar ve suç, sokağın zamansızlığı, güven ve güvenlik problemleri gibi pratik engeller tespit edilmiştir. Mesleki anlamda ise sokakta çalışmaya hazır olmama, sahaya entegrasyon süreci ve ikincil travma gibi zorluklar öne çıkmıştır. Bu veriler Türkiye’de evsizlik olgusunun ve bu alandaki uygulamaların yasal boşluklar, kurumsal problemler ve sokağa özgü dinamikler arasında sıkışmış bir yapıda olduğunu göstermektedir. Dolayısıyla ülkemizde evsizlikle mücadelenin etkinliğini arttırmak adına yalnızca fiziksel barınma imkanlarının niceliksel artışıyla değil aynı zamanda alana ilişkin yapısal reformların yapılması, uygulayıcıların mesleki yetkinliklerinin desteklenmesi ve kalıcı, sürdürülebilir sosyal politikaların geliştirilmesi önemlidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Evsizlik
• sosyal hizmet
• sosyal politika
• nitel araştırma

Kaynakça

1. Ahmed, A., Madoc-Jones, I., Gibbons, A., Jones, K., Rogers, M., & Wilding, M. (2020). Challenges to implementing the new homelessness prevention agenda in Wales. Social Policy and Society, 19(1), 157–169.
2. Akyıldız, Y. (2017). Dünyada ve Türkiye’de evsizlik sorunu ve çeşitli uygulamalar. LAÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(1), 67–91.
3. Akyıldız, Y. (2022). Evsiz bireylerin sosyal hayatı üzerine nitel bir araştırma: “Türkiye örneği”. Kent Akademisi, 15(4), 1502–1521.
4. Amore, K., Baker, M., & Howden-Chapman, P. (2011). The ETHOS definition and classification of homelessness: An analysis. European Journal of Homelessness, 5(2), 19–37.
5. Anderson, I., Filipovič Hrast, M., & Finnerty, J. (2016). Researching homelessness: Challenging exclusion. Social Inclusion, 4(4), 1–4.
6. Ayano, G., Tsegay, L., Abraha, M., & Yohannes, K. (2019). Suicidal ideation and attempt among homeless people: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatric Quarterly, 90(4), 829–842.
7. Aynacı, C., & Genç, Y. (2024). Evsizlerin barınma evi deneyimleri: “İnsan önemsendiğini görmek istiyor”. İstanbul University Journal of Sociology, 44(2), 487–525.
8. Baltacı, A. (2018). Nitel araştırmalarda örnekleme yöntemleri ve örnek hacmi sorunsalı üzerine kavramsal bir inceleme. Bitlis Eren Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(1), 231–274.

9. Batterham, D. (2019). Defining “at-risk of homelessness”: Re-connecting causes, mechanisms and risk. Housing, Theory and Society, 36(1), 1–24.
10. Campbell, D. J. T., O’Neill, B. G., Gibson, K., & Thurston, W. E. (2015). Primary healthcare needs and barriers to care among Calgary’s homeless populations. BMC Family Practice, 16, Article 139.
11. Chamberlain, C., & MacKenzie, D. (1992). Understanding contemporary homelessness: Issues of definition and meaning. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 27(4), 274–297.
12. Creswell, J. W. (2016). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri: Beş yaklaşıma göre nitel araştırma ve araştırma deseni. Siyasal Kitabevi.
13. Culhane, D. P., & Metraux, S. (2008). Rearranging the deck chairs or reallocating the lifeboats? Homelessness assistance and its alternatives. Journal of the American Planning Association, 74(1), 111–121.
14. Doğan, Y. B. (2019). Evsizlik kuramları ve nedensellik: Eleştirel bir yaklaşım. Sosyoloji Divanı Sosyoloji Dergisi, 7(13), 179–202.
15. Doucette-Préville, J. (2015). The challenge of homelessness to spatial practices. OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development, 8(4), 111–118.
16. Edgar, B. (2009). European review of statistics on homelessness. European Federation of National Organisations Working with the Homeless.
17. Ensign, J., & Panke, A. (2002). Barriers and bridges to care: Voices of homeless female adolescent youth in Seattle, Washington, USA. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 37(2), 166–172.
18. Evans, R. D., & Forsyth, C. J. (2004). Risk factors, endurance of victimization, and survival strategies: The impact of the structural location of men and women on their experiences within homeless milieus. Sociological Spectrum, 24(4), 479–505.
19. Fitzpatrick, S. (2005). Explaining homelessness: A critical realist perspective. Housing, Theory and Society, 22(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14036090510034563
20. Genç, Y., Kara, H. Z., Alsancak, F., Kuzgun, S., & Yüce, E. C. (2022). The phenomenon of homelessness and the psychosocial problems of the homeless. Sakarya University Journal of Education, 12(2), 390–416.
21. Genç, Y., Yıldız, H., Aynacı, C., Atalay, Z., & Kara, H. Z. (2026). Metaphorical analysis of social worker candidates’ perceptions of homeless people. International Social Work. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208728261424202
22. Gowan, T. (2010). Hobos, hustlers, and backsliders: Homeless in San Francisco. University of Minnesota Press.
23. Gürel, M. (2024). Evsizlikten kurtulmada barınma evlerinin rolü ve önemi. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi, 44(2), 449–486.
24. Henwood, B. F., & Aykanian, A. (2020). Advancing social work education to meet the grand challenge of ending homelessness. Journal of Social Work Education, 56(sup1), S1–S3.
25. Hersberger, J. (2005). The homeless and information needs and services. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 44(3), 199–202.
26. Hopper, K., Jost, J., Hay, T., Welber, S., & Haugland, G. (1997). Homelessness, severe mental illness, and the institutional circuit. Psychiatric Services, 48(5), 659–665.
27. Hussey, H. (2016). Expanding ID card access for LGBT homeless youth. Center for American Progress.
28. Hwang, S. W., & Henderson, M. J. (2010). Health care utilization in homeless people: Translating research into policy and practice. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
29. İlhan, N., & Ergün, A. (2010). Evsizler ve toplum sağlığı. Sosyal Politika Çalışmaları Dergisi, 20(20), 79–90.
30. Johnsen, S., Cloke, P., & May, J. (2005). Day centres for homeless people: Spaces of care or fear? Social & Cultural Geography, 6(6), 787–811.
31. Karaca, M., Gazi, M. A., & Çakı, C. (2019). 21. yüzyılın sosyal güvenlik sorunu olarak evsizler: “Evsizler”i konu alan reklam kampanyaları üzerine göstergebilimsel bir inceleme. Akdeniz Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, (32), 505–527.
32. Karaman, H. (2024). Sokağa ulaşmanın metodolojisi: Sosyal hizmet teorisinden sokak çalışması. Sosyal Sağlık Dergisi, 4(2), 51–68.
33. Kryda, A. D., & Compton, M. T. (2009). Mistrust of outreach workers and lack of confidence in available services among individuals who are chronically street homeless. Community Mental Health Journal, 45(2), 144–150.
34. Küçük, M. (2018). Evsizlik ve evsizliği açıklayan teoriler. İdealkent, 9(24), 515–535.
35. Larkin, H., Henwood, B., Fogel, S. J., Aykanian, A., Briar-Lawson, K. H., Donaldson, L. P., & Streeter, C. L. (2016). Responding to the grand challenge to end homelessness: The national homelessness social work initiative. Families in Society, 97(3), 153–159.
36. Lee, B. A., Tyler, K. A., & Wright, J. D. (2010). The new homelessness revisited. Annual Review of Sociology, 36, 501–521.
37. Levinson, D., & Ross, M. (2007). Homelessness handbook. Berkshire Publishing Group.
38. Magwood, O., Leki, V. Y., Kpade, V., Saad, A., Alkhateeb, Q., Gebremeskel, A., ... Pottie, K. (2019). Common trust and personal safety issues: A systematic review on the acceptability of health and social interventions for persons with lived experience of homelessness. PLOS ONE, 14(12), Article e0226306. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226306
39. Miller, K., Scott, C. R., Stage, C., & Birkholt, M. (1995). Communication and coordination in an interorganizational system: Service provision for the urban homeless. Communication Research, 22(6), 679–699.
40. National Alliance to End Homelessness. (2000). A plan, not a dream: How to end homelessness in ten years. National Alliance to End Homelessness.
41. Nooe, R. M., & Patterson, D. A. (2010). The ecology of homelessness. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 20(2), 105–152.
42. North, C. S., Eyrich-Garg, K. M., Pollio, D. E., & Thirthalli, J. (2010). A prospective study of substance use and housing stability in a homeless population. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 45, 1055–1062.
43. Olukoju, O. (2017). Causes of homelessness and ways to end and prevent homelessness [Yüksek lisans tezi, Häme University of Applied Sciences].
44. Peters, L., Hobson, C. W., & Samuel, V. (2022). A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies that investigate the emotional experiences of staff working in homeless settings. Health & Social Care in the Community, 30(1), 58–72.
45. Pleace, N., Teller, N., & Quilgars, D. J. (2011). Social housing allocation and homelessness: EOH comparative studies on homelessness. European Observatory on Homelessness.
46. Prigerson, H. G., Desai, R. A., Liu-Mares, W., & Rosenheck, R. A. (2003). Suicidal ideation and suicide attempts in homeless mentally ill persons: Age-specific risks of substance abuse. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 38, 213–219.
47. Ravenhill, M. (2016). The culture of homelessness. Routledge.
48. Saur, T. E. (2019). STAY—Emergency accommodation for homeless people [Master’s thesis, The Oslo School of Architecture and Design].
49. Simmel, G. (2009). Bireysellik ve kültür (T. Birkan, Çev.). Metis Yayınları.
50. Somerville, P. (2013). Understanding homelessness. Housing, Theory and Society, 30(4), 384–415.
51. Tipple, G., & Speak, S. (2005). Definitions of homelessness in developing countries. Habitat International, 29(2), 337–352.
52. Tipple, G., & Speak, S. (2009). The hidden millions: Homelessness in developing countries. Routledge.
53. Torchalla, I., Strehlau, V., Li, K., & Krausz, M. (2011). Substance use and predictors of substance dependence in homeless women. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 118(2–3), 173–179.
54. Toro, P. A. (2007). Toward an international understanding of homelessness. Journal of Social Issues, 63(3), 461–481.
55. Tsemberis, S., Gulcur, L., & Nakae, M. (2004). Housing First, consumer choice, and harm reduction for homeless individuals with a dual diagnosis. American Journal of Public Health, 94(4), 651–656. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.94.4.651
56. Tsemberis, S., & Rosenheck, R. (2008). Implementing evidence-based practices for people who are homeless with severe mental illness. In Handbook of homelessness (pp. 191–208). Springer.
57. Turner, D. W. (2010). Qualitative interview design: A practical guide for novice investigators. The Qualitative Report, 15(3), 754–760. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2010.1178
58. Tutty, L. M., Bradshaw, C., & Schiff, J. W. (2009). Risks and assets for homelessness prevention: A literature review for the Calgary Homeless Foundation. Calgary Homeless Foundation.
59. Waegemakers Schiff, J., & Lane, A. M. (2019). PTSD symptoms, vicarious traumatization, and burnout in front line workers in the homeless sector. Community Mental Health Journal, 55, 454–462.
60. Wagner, D. (2018). No longer homeless: How the ex-homeless get and stay off the streets. Rowman & Littlefield.
61. Wirth, T., Mette, J., Nienhaus, A., Schillmöller, Z., Harth, V., & Mache, S. (2019). “This isn’t just about things, it’s about people and their future”: A qualitative analysis of the working conditions and strains of social workers in refugee and homeless aid. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(20), Article 3858.
62. Wlodarczyk, D., & Prentice, R. (1988). Health issues of homeless persons. Western Journal of Medicine, 148(6), 717–719.
63. Wright, N. M., Tompkins, C. N., Oldham, N. S., & Kay, D. J. (2004). Homelessness and health: What can be done in general practice? Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 97(4), 170–173.
64. Zakrison, T. L., Hamel, P. A., & Hwang, S. W. (2004). Homeless people’s trust and interactions with police and paramedics. Journal of Urban Health, 81(4), 596–605.
65. Zufferey, C. (2016). Homelessness and social work: An intersectional approach. Routledge.