Adolescent Women's Perspectives of Homelessness in the Canadian North

Janet Le Camp

H.B.Sc., University of Guelph, 1993

Thesis Submitted In Partial Fulfillment Of
The Requirements For The Degree Of
Master Of Science
in
Community Health Science

The University of Northern British Columbia
April 2006

Janet Le Camp, 2006

1^1

Library and
Archives Canada

Bibliothèque et
Archives Canada

Published Heritage
Branch

Direction du
Patrimoine de l'édition

395 Wellington Street
Ottawa ON K1A 0N4
Canada

395, rue Wellington
Ottawa ON K1A 0N4
Canada
Your file Votre référence
ISBN: 978-0-494-28358-5
Our file Notre référence
ISBN: 978-0-494-28358-5

NOTICE:
The author has granted a non­
exclusive license allowing Library
and Archives Canada to reproduce,
publish, archive, preserve, conserve,
communicate to the public by
telecommunication or on the Internet,
loan, distribute and sell theses
worldwide, for commercial or non­
commercial purposes, in microform,
paper, electronic and/or any other
formats.

AVIS:
L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive
permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives
Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver,
sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public
par télécommunication ou par l'Internet, prêter,
distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans
le monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres,
sur support microforme, papier, électronique
et/ou autres formats.

The author retains copyright
ownership and moral rights in
this thesis. Neither the thesis
nor substantial extracts from it
may be printed or otherwise
reproduced without the author's
permission.

L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur
et des droits moraux qui protège cette thèse.
Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de
celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement
reproduits sans son autorisation.

In compliance with the Canadian
Privacy Act some supporting
forms may have been removed
from this thesis.

Conformément à la loi canadienne
sur la protection de la vie privée,
quelques formulaires secondaires
ont été enlevés de cette thèse.

While these forms may be included
in the document page count,
their removal does not represent
any loss of content from the
thesis.

Bien que ces formulaires
aient inclus dans la pagination,
il n'y aura aucun contenu manquant.

Canada

11

Abstract
Youth homelessness in Canada has been highlighted in the media as a growing
problem. Research with homeless youth, while limited, has illuminated the heterogeneity
of the youth homeless population, and identified a number of factors that challenge
researchers. As well, youth homelessness research specific to the Canadian north is
extremely limited, and adolescent homeless women in the north have been overlooked as
an individual population. Data collected in many jurisdictions with adult and male
homeless populations has been generalized to young women. The purpose of this study
was to explore the perceptions and experiences of adolescent homeless women in
Whitehorse, Yukon. The study design was qualitative and utilized in-depth semi-structured
interviews and a focus group for data collection. The foundations of the study were
grounded in structural social work theory and approached from a feminist perspective. The
goal of the study was to develop an understanding of how adolescent women experience
homelessness, how the young women believe adolescent women’s homelessness should be
addressed, and to provide recommendations that may lead to social change in Whitehorse.

Ill
Acknowledgements

Thank you to the young women who participated in this study. Your willingness to
share your stories made the study possible, and your honesty and trust provided an
invaluable contribution to adolescent women’s homelessness research.
Thank you to my supervisor, Dr. Kwong Tang, for your time and commitment to
this project.

IV

Table o f C ontents

Chapter 1 In trod uction............................................................................................................1
Whitehorse Adolescent Homelessness.................................................................................................................... 3
Purpose of Study.................................................................................................................................................. 4
Significance of Study.............................................................................................................................................6

Chapter 2 Literature R ev iew ............................................................................................... 10
Counting Homeless Youth...................................................................................................................................11
Defining Homelessness........................................................................................................................................12
Profile ofHomeless Youth in Canada..................................................................................................................15
Population Characteristics...................................................................................................................................16
Health and Well-Being.......................................................................................................................................19
Criminalization................................................................................................................................................. 21
Causes of Homelessness...................................................................................................................................... 22
Gender Issues..................................................................................................................................................... 25
Northern Pesearch............................................................................................................................................. 27
Interventions...................................................................................................................................................... 28
Pecommendationsfor Interventions..................................................................................................................... 31
A Pecapitulation............................................................................................................................................... 35

Chapter 3 T heoretical Approach to U nderstanding H o m elessn ess...................... 36
Youth Homelessness Theories............................................................................................................................. 37
Trauma theory............................................................................................................................................... 37
Pisk amplification.......................................................................................................................................... 37
Multicausalpsychosocial model...................................................................................................................... 38
Poverty and child development......................................................................................................................... 38
Intergenerational homelessness theory............................................................................................................... 40
Theoretical Frameworkfor Present Study........................................................................................................... 41
Socialpower................................................................................................................................................... 41
Youth homelessness as a socialproblem............................................................................................................42
Social change...................................................................................................................................................44
Healthy community.........................................................................................................................................44
Structural Social work theory and social change...............................................................................................45
Feminist theory and social change.................................................................................................................... 46
Implicationsfor adolescent women's homelessness.............................................................................................47
Theoryfor present research...............................................................................................................................48

Chapter 4 Youth H o m elessn ess in C ontext................................................................... 49
U N Convention................................................................................................................................................. 49
U N Convention in Canada........................................................................................................................... 49
International Setting and Canada...................................................................................................................... 51
The Canadian North......................................................................................................................................... 52
Whitehorse Key Informant Peports..................................................................................................................... 55
Federal Pesponsibility........................................................................................................................................ 56
Whitehorse Commitment.................................................................................................................................... 59
Short Summary................................................................................................................................................. 61

Chapter 5 M ethod ology........................................................................................................ 62
Pesearch Goals.................................................................................................................................................. 62

Design................................................................................................................................................................62
Sampling............................................................................................................................................................63
Individual Interviews and Focus Group.............................................................................................................. 65
Kesearch Questions............................................................................................................................................ 65
Analysis.............................................................................................................................................................66
Rigour................................................................................................................................................................67
Researcher Bias and Values............................................................................................................................... 68
Ethical Issues and Risk to Participants.............................................................................................................. 69
C h ap ter 6 A n a ly s is ............................................................................................................................ 72
Individual Interview Results................................................................................................................................75
Focus Group Results.......................................................................................................................................... 81
C h ap ter 7 D is c u s s io n a n d C o n c lu s io n ................................................................................... 92
Theoretical Framework...................................................................................................................................... 92
Youth Flomelessness Research............................................................................................................................ 93
limitations of This Study.................................................................................................................................. 94
Research Rationale............................................................................................................................................. 95
Social Change.................................................................................................................................................... 96
Comparison of Demographic Information............................................................................................................ 98
Participant Experiences and Perceptions.......................................................................................................... 100
Policy Recommendations.................................................................................................................................. 107
.................................................................................................................................109
......................................................................................................................................//O
Research recommendations........................................................................................................................... 112
Policy Recommendationsfor Whitehorse........................................................................................................... 113
References............................................................................................................................................... 118
Appendix A - Summary of Key Youth H om elessness Studies.....................................................131
Appendix B - Key Informant Questions...........................................................................................138
Appendix C - UNBC Research Ethics Board Approval.............................................................. 139
Appendix D - Participant Recruitment Poster.............................................................................. 140
Appendix E - Interview Questionnaire............................................................................................ 141
Appendix F - Participant Information Sheet...................................................................................142
Appendix G - Interview Consent Form ............................................................................................143

VI

List of Tables
Table 1 - Summary o f Participant D em ographic Inform ation

72

Table 2 - Individual Interview Results

76

Table 3 - Focus groups them es and coding

82

Adolescent Women’s Perspectives of Homelessness in the Canadian North
Chapter 1 Introduction
A ccording to N ovae, Serge, Eberle, and Brow n (2002), there is general consensus am ong
researchers that hom elessness m ay be relative or absolute. M any perceive hom elessness as a
continuum ranging from absolute to relative (Higgitt et al., 2003). A bsolute hom elessness is defined as
an absence o f physical shelter or “houselessness” (Novae et al., 2002), including lack o f a place to sleep
and to which mail may be delivered. H iggitt et al. (2003) define absolute hom elessness as a com plete
lack o f long-term shelter. Relative hom elessness is defined as insecure, inappropriate, inadequate, or
unstable housing (Novae et al., 2002; H iggitt et al., 2003). I t includes couch surfing, staying w ith
friends or extended family, and short-term rentals. Lack o f personal safety and access to em ploym ent,
education, and health care are com ponents o f relative hom elessness (Charette, 1991 as cited in N ovae,
et al., 2002). Robert, Pauze, and Fournier (2005) differentiate betw een absolute and hidden, o r relative,
hom elessness by focusing on w hether youth utilize their social netw orks or pubhc places in their
experiences o f hom elessness.
Since the m id 1990s, the G overnm ent o f Canada has recognized that hom elessness cannot be
ignored, and that it is the responsibility o f b o th governm ent and com m unities to, at a m inim um ,
alleviate the conditions o f hom elessness, and at best, to address the ro o t causes and reduce o r eliminate
it. This has com e about through the increased awareness o f the Canadian public about hom elessness,
and the growing global focus on hom elessness. T he Canadian Pubhc H ealth A ssociation (1997) claims
that hom elessness has em erged into a position o f prom inence and is a fundam ental health issue for
Canadians. This position is reflected in actions o f advocacy groups, and n o n governm ent agencies. F or
example, the Canadian H ousing and Renewal A ssociation (CHRA) reports that advocacy groups have

pressured the Canadian governm ent to double rent supplem ents and to provide new social housing.
Also, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) pressured the Canadian governm ent to
increase the budget for social housing (CCPA, 2000 as cited in N ovae et al., 2002).
T he CH RA and the Status o f W om en Canada (Novae, 2002) and the Canadian M ortgage and
H ousing C orporation (CMHC) (Novae, Brow n, & B ourbonnais, 1996; N ovae, Brow n, & Gallant,
1999; Serge, 1999; K raus, Eberle, & Serge, 2001) have supported research in the area o f Canadian
hom elessness. T he research projects com pleted through these institutions in the past nine years have
focused on young w om en's hom elessness, youth hom elessness, adult w om en and hom elessness, and
best practices addressing hom elessness (see A ppendix A w hich provides a Summary o f Key Y outh
H om elessness Studies in N o rth Am erica along w ith the key findings).
In D ecem ber 1999, the federal governm ent announced its com m itm ent in the form o f $753
million tow ard the alleviation and prevention o f hom elessness in Canada (Kraus et al., 2001). O f this
am ount, $59 million was allocated to youth under Canada's Y outh E m ploym ent Strategy, and $43
million was allocated to the Shelter E nhancem ent Program over 4 years, w hich included an expansion
o f the program to include youth shelters and second stage housing. As well, $305 tm lhon was
com m itted to the Supporting Com m unities Partnership Initiative, which has resulted in 113
com m unity based projects geared tow ard identifying needs and developing strategies to address
hom elessness. This project has included a num ber o f initiatives for youth hom elessness in particular,
including research projects.
T he N ational R eport on Investm ents and Accom pHshm ents (G overnm ent o f Canada, n.d.)
reports that this initiative resulted in 9000 new, perm anent beds. This rep o rt states that 725 different
sheltering facihties and 403 different support facihties w ere constructed, renovated, or enhanced.
Som e 203 housing units, including shelters, supportive, transitional and affordable w ere created. In

addition, 3,600 support services were either created or enhanced. A thousand different capacity
projects were established and 29 knowledge and research activities were com pleted at b o th national
and regional levels.
A ccording to the G overnm ent o f Canada’s N ational H om elessness Initiative website
(h t t p : / /w w w .hom elessness.gc.ca/initiave/ index e.asp.b the Canadian G overnm ent has renew ed the
N ational H om elessness Initiative for an additional three years, and with a financial com m itm ent o f
$405 million. T he purpose o f the ongoing initiative is to support com m unities to im plem ent m easures
to assist hom eless individuals and families in achieving and m aintaining self-sufficiency.

T he W hitehorse Planning G roup on H om elessness is a group o f com m unity stakeholders w ho
are w orking together to address W hitehorse hom elessness (W hitehorse Planning G roup on
H om elessness, 2001). T he group was form ed in 2000 to im plem ent the federal hom elessness initiative
in W hitehorse. In the sum m er o f 2000, com m unity stakeholders m et w ith federal officials to begin the
process o f com m unity collaboration in the area o f W hitehorse hom elessness. In Septem ber 2000, the
official W hitehorse Planning G roup on H om elessness was form ed and took the lead on developing a
com m unity plan for W hitehorse. T he group consists o f representatives from the federal and territorial
governm ents, the city, the non-govem m ent sector, and from First N ation agencies. M em bership
includes such groups and agencies as the Y ukon A nti Poverty Coalition, Y ukon H ousing Corporation,
the City o f W hitehorse, the Council o f Y ukon First N ations, Y ukon Territorial G overnm ent (Health
and Social Services; Justice), the Salvation Army, the Fetal A lcohol Syndrom e Society Y ukon, and
Y ukon Family Services A ssociation (The W hitehorse Planning G roup on H om elessness, 2001).
According to the W hitehorse C om m unity Plan on H om elessness, the com m unity has a
num ber o f services to offer to youth (W hitehorse Planning G roup on H om elessness, 2001). T hese are

predom inandy in the areas o f training, counselling (during norm al business hours), youth w ebsites, a
youth addictions w orker’s presence in three schools, governm ent services for youth in care and for
youth w ho are on the case load o f a social w orker w ith H ealth and Social Services, special projects (i.e.
Y outh Shaping the Future), and two youth centres (day and evening services). They have identified that
welfare services, housing and financial assistance, a safe house, a residence for teen m others attending
school, services for children o f near hom elessness, and services for youth in care are services that are
required for youth under the age o f 19 years. These recom m endations were based on a com bination o f
research and consultation w ith stakeholders and the com m unity. Hom eless youth input was obtained
through H ouse and H om e —A Study o f W hitehorse Y outh at Risk o f H om elessness (M cDowell and
M adsen, 2001).

Purpose of Study
Despite the recent research, intervention, and prevention projects targeted tow ard Canadian
hom elessness, hom elessness in general continues to be an ongoing concern in Canadian com m unities.
Higgitt et al. (2003) rep o rt that although w e do n o t know how m any youth are hom eless, the num ber
o f young people w ithout adequate housing is a grow ing concern. In a recent Canadian study involving
street youth in W innipeg, M anitoba (Higgitt et al.), researchers found that serious gaps in services and
problem s with present services exist, and m any youth fall through the cracks o f our social safety net.
Systems m eant to support youth and families, and provide interventions, fail to m eet the needs o f
youth experiencing neglect, abuse, and family conflicts, resulting in an ongoing stream o f youth to the
street.
T he issue o f hom elessness locally was highhghted during a cold snap in W hitehorse in late
January 2005 (C H O N -FM 12:30 p.m. N ew s, January 13,2005). T w o staff m em bers from the N o Fixed
Address O utreach V an were interviewed about the cold w eather and the im pact on hom elessness in

W hitehorse. B oth interviewees described high num bers o f youth on the streets, accessing the van’s
services. O ne o f the O utreach V an staff m em bers noted that although there has been talk o f a youth
shelter in W hitehorse for years, nothing has been done. H e stated that the need exists, and that youth
are engaging in couch surfing, they are participating in survival sex, and living w ith abuse.
Cam pbell and Frymire (2005) rep o rt that in W hitehorse, there is a lack o f awareness about
hom elessness issues, particularly in regard to youth, families and children. They also state that Uttle
evidence can be seen o f the visible hom eless, and no knowledge exists o f them . A lthough northern
quantitative data is lacking, H iggitt et al. (2003) note that in Calgary, the incidence o f youth
hom elessness is increasing, an increasing num ber o f youth are chronically hom eless, and the age at
w hich youth becom e hom eless is decreasing.
W hitehorse is an isolated northern city o f approxim ately 22,000 people, located in the Y ukon
Territory. For this smdy, program s that adolescent hom eless w om en consider to be im portant,
effective, and w orthw hile are o f particular interest. T he intended goal for this research project is to
provide research findings that m ake a difference, and to help m ove the W hitehorse com m unity tow ard
hom elessness prevention and intervention action through increased awareness and social change.
T he prim ary purpose o f this study is to determ ine w hat W hitehorse adolescent w om en, w ho
are or w ho have been hom eless, perceive the b est solutions to their hom elessness to be, and to m ake
recom m endations for services based on this inform ation. A pplied research may be used to illuminate a
societal concern, and to provide inform ation that m ay then be used in program developm ent (Patton,
1990). T hrough the process o f this investigation, adolescent w om en will be provided w ith a voice and
an opporm nity to com m unicate their knowledge and opinions. T h e inform ation obtained from this
study wiU provide a base for recom m endations for com m unity services, fum re research, and social
action.

T he W hitehorse Planning G roup on H om elessness and H um an Resources D evelopm ent
Canada (HRDC) com m issioned the N o rth ern Research Institute to conduct a W hitehorse based study
on youth hom elessness in 2001. T h e prim ary purpose o f this smdy was to increase the level o f
understanding about youth hom elessness in W hitehorse (M cDowell & M adsen, 2001). T he question
o f how to im prove the Hving sim ations o f the hom eless youth in W hitehorse was addressed in two
questions in the final section o f M cDowell and M adsen's 2001 survey. T he questions were “w hat kind
o f services w ould you use, if they were available?” and “W hat services do you presendy use?” . T he
participants o f this survey included m en and w om en betw een the age o f 13 and 29 years o f age. Thus,
the perceptions and needs o f adolescent hom eless w om en w ere n o t clearly identified through this
smdy.
In 2001, this researcher conducted an exploratory smdy (Le Cam p, 2001) for the purpose o f
ascertaining service providers’ perceptions o f the W hitehorse com m unity’s adolescent w om en’s
hom elessness issue. T he participants included four service providers, including one staff m em ber from
each o f the local w om en’s transition hom e, the w om en’s center, a youth center, as well as a youth
outreach worker. These participants were unanim ous in their conviction that adolescent w om en's
hom elessness is a serious issue in W hitehorse. T he data collected in this smdy suggests links betw een
the need to leave hom e because o f violence, a lack o f services in our com m unity, and the developm ent
o f a vulnerable population at high risk for victim ization and exploitation due to hom elessness.
T he interest in young w om en’s hom elessness arose through experiences and observations as
an employee at the Y ukon W om en's T ransition H om e in W hitehorse (2001). It becam e apparent to
the researcher that although emergency shelter was provided for w om en aged 19 years and older if they
w ere potential victims o f violence, younger w om en unaccom panied by an adult did n o t have access to

overnight em etgency shelter in order to escape violence. U nder special circum stances, the Y ukon
W om en’s T ransition H om e provides services to young w om en under the age o f 19 years (B. Powick,
personal com m unication, N ovem ber 15, 2005). H ow ever, the transition hom e m ust be very cautious
in providing shelter services to youth under the age o f 19 as these services are n o t supported by the
Y ukon Children’s Act, and there are serious liability issues. Their only real choices appeared to be
friends, family, or the street. T he lack o f safe alternatives puts young w om en at high risk o f
victim ization and ill health.
T he focus on adolescent w om en, as opposed to youth in general, is a result o f this researcher's
interest in w om en's issues. Results from studies that have utilized male participants, and used
traditional research m ethods, have been generalized to w om en. As a result, w om en's ways o f know ing
and telling their stories have n o t been well utilized, and therefore, w om en's experiences have n o t been
well docum ented in m any areas. Reinharz (1992) confirm s that it is widely accepted that w om en’s
realities are different than m en’s. O th er researchers also state that traditional research has not
adequately captured the content and quality o f w om en’s lives and experiences (Campbell & Schram ,
1995). As well, Reinharz points out that changes in consciousness arise am ong relatively powerless
groups through fem inist based research w hen they may examine their situation in a new light. T hus,
providing adolescent w om en w ith a voice m ay result in increased awareness, in addition to m ore
accurate identification and descriptions o f potentially effective program s. T herefore, this study is
undertaken specifically for young w om en, to explore their experiences in ways that wiU enable them to
tell their stories as completely and honestly as possible to provide the com m unity w ith im proved
understanding o f the issues facing young w om en w ho experience hom elessness, and w hat effective
solutions m ight be.

Recently, G ehm ait, Cochtane, and B olton (2004) com pleted a reseatch project on W hitehorse
poverty that culm inated in the production o f a video endtled "2 Cents W orth". A significant focus o f
their video is hom elessness, and they estim ate th at there are approxim ately 15 to 24 hom eless people in
W hitehorse on any given day. This num ber refers to “absolute" hom elessness, and is based on their
conclusion derived from estimates o f local service providers. W hitehorse currently has one hom eless
shelter w hich has ten beds, and local experts interview ed in this film w ere clear that in their opinions,
this shelter cannot m eet the existing and em erging need in this community. W hile the purpose o f the
video appears to be to raise awareness o f the hom elessness issues in W hitehorse, provide insights into
the extent o f the issue, and increase understanding o f relative hom elessness, it is clearly n o t intended as
a quantitative study o f the problem .
T he research proposed herein will break new ground as it wiU be “intervention research” ,
designed to address significant gaps in b o th know ledge and research in W hitehorse w ith regard to the
potential solutions o f adolescent w om en's hom elessness, from the perspective o f adolescent hom eless
w om en. T he people o f W hitehorse, as a com m unity, have been unable to effectively address
adolescent w om en's hom elessness because, at least in part, o f a lack o f knowledge o f w hat these young
w om en need in the way o f services. In order to m ove from a research focus to an
intervention/im plem entation focus, we need to have a solid understanding o f w hat services m ight
actually be successful in our comm unity. A n im portant m easure o f success wiU be how well utilized
each intervention is for specific populations, and w hether positive outcom es can be identified for
young w om en w ho access services.
Currendy, our society - instead o f our com m unity —tends to take action against hom eless
youth as opposed to action for hom eless youth. H om eless youth are crim inahzed (W hitbeck, H oyt, &
Ackley, 1997), or institutionalized (Corrado, O dgers, & C ohen, 2000), because they desire to escape

abusive o f conflict laden hom es. Running away, exchanging sex fo t food of shelter, and substance
abuse are n o t crimes b u t sym ptom s o f a larger problem . W e have child protection laws, and w ith these
laws, we justify rem oving children from the street and putting them back in their families, or in other
families o r institutions. Child protection is a structure o f control - w here a few people have control
over the individual, the family, and the com m unity (M cKnight, 1997). T he issue o f control and
participation in the generation o f solutions has been no ted by youth in other jurisdictions to be o f high
im portance and to be relevant to the success o f interventions (CMHC, 2002b; K arabanow , 2003).
In order to support W hitehorse adolescent w om en w ho are either experiencing hom elessness
or are at risk o f hom elessness, we need to ascertain w hat com m unity services they envision as
prospective solutions. Y outh m ust be provided w ith a m eaningful choice o f services that they consider
useful to them , and they m ust n o t be forced to place them selves "in care" in order to access services. If
the services are n o t accessible and appropriate, they will n o t be utilized, and the youth hom eless
population wUl continue to increase. W ithout this clear and effective support, youth wiU continue to
m ake second best choices that p ut them at risk, while protecting them selves from dangers elsewhere.
By becom ing aware o f potentially effective solutions identified by hom eless adolescent
w om en, com m unity m em bers can make inform ed choices and m ake social change happen. This smdy
will provide inform ation and insights that wiU enable the com m unity to effectively address the issue o f
adolescent w om en's hom elessness. This will be accom plished by asking the population experiencing
the problem to provide constructive solutions to the problem .

10

Chapter 2 Literature Review
D u e to the difficulties in counting a largely invisible and highly m obile population, accurate
statistics on the num ber o f hom eless adolescents in Canada do n o t exist. A num ber o f cities have m ade
estimates based on data garnered from shelters, however, the accuracy o f this quantitative inform ation
is highly questionable given that m any underage youth avoid official services (R obert et al., 2005). O n
the other hand, qualitative research describing the hom elessness experiences o f youth, although
limited, has provided insights into m any o f the issues and concerns related to youth hom elessness.
A m erican research on youth hom elessness suffers similar lim itations to the Canadian research, b u t is
useful all the same. T he experiences o f youth and im pacts o f hom elessness sm died in A m erican
settings by necessity are generalized to the Canadian population to supplem ent the paucity o f Canadian
research.
Systematic research w ith this population is difficult because the definition o f hom elessness
varies am ongst researchers and the participants them selves, and because hom eless youth are a m obile
and largely invisible population. Issues that have been perceived by researchers to be relevant include
health and well-being (Yates, M acKenzie, Pennbridge, & Cohen, 1988), risk factors and resiliencies
(Rew, Taylor-Seehafer, Thom as, & Yockey, 2001; Ringwalt, G reene, R obertson, & M cPheeters, 1998),
crim inalization and instim tionalization (Corrado et al., 2000), events precipitating the hom elessness
condition and causes o f hom elessness (Janus, A rcham bault, & Brown, 1995; W hitbeck et al., 1997),
gender issues (MacLean, Em bry, & Cauce, 1999; Ryan, Kilm er, Cause, W atanabe, & H oyt, 2000;
W hitbeck, H oyt, Yoder, Cauce, & Paradise, 2001), and n orthern and rural factors (W hitbeck &
Simm ons, 1990; K rause et al., 2001). AU in aU, the m ajority o f N o rth Am erican research examines
isolated factors o f youth hom elessness outside the context o f society and w ithout explanatory
fram eworks.

11

Reseatchefs have typically included hom eless youth in theit teseatch as participants. W ith
respect to research focused on developing recom m endations for solutions and interventions, however,
the opinions o f youth have n o t been the prim ary focus o f the research. Researchers tend to develop
theit ow n recom m endations, a process w hich the youth are n o t normally engaged in. T h e purpose o f
this study is to determ ine w hat W hitehorse hom eless adolescent w om en perceive the best solutions to
adolescent w om en's hom elessness to be. T hus, the participants wiU be asked to generate solutions.

Counting Homeless Youth
A ccording to the N ovae, Serge, Eberle, & Brow n (2002), Canadian statistics relating to youth
hom elessness are scarce. K raus et al. (2001) rep o rt that while there is no accurate num ber o f Canadian
hom eless youth, key inform ants o f the Canadian 2001 E nvironm ental Scan on Y outh H om elessness
rep o rt that they are observing a rising trend. T here is an absence o f systematic data on youth
hom elessness in particular, and quantitative research has focused primarily on shelter use in Canadian
cities (Novae et al., 1996). Roberts et al. (2005) rep o rt that research that utiUzes participants accessed
through hom eless services excludes a significant num ber o f youth w ho experience hidden
hom elessness. In term s o f num ber, a study done by Caputo, Weiler, and A nderson (1997), T he Street
Lifestyle Smdy, cited an early estimate by R adford et al. (1989) w hich estim ated that there are
approxim ately 150,000 runaway youth in Canada.
In term s o f gender distribution. N ovae et al. (2002) rep o rt that the lim ited research that does
exist indicates that young w om en m ake up a third to a half o f the hom eless youth population in
Canada. Kraus et al. (2001) state that the num ber o f adolescent hom eless w om en is on the rise. T he
N ational M issing Children Services (2001; as cited in Higgitt et al., 2003) state that the majority o f
reported runaways under the age o f 18 are female.

12

T he lack o f systematic data is n o t the only problem w ith youth hom elessness research. N ovae
et al. (1996) p o in t o u t that Canadian statistics are problem atic because they are n o t representative o f
the w hole hom eless population (which covers b o th absolute and invisible hom elessness) as they focus
predom inantly on those individuals using shelters.
Likewise, Am erican researchers beheve that the num bers o f hom eless youth in the U nited
States are growing (Cauce, 2000), and the Institute o f M edicine (1988, as cited in Cauce & M organ,
1994) advise that youth are the m ost understudied hom eless group. Recently, V an Leeuwen (2004)
found that the num ber o f street youth in D enver C olorado has increased by m ore than one hundred
percent over five years. These trends may be generaUzed to the Canadian situation as well because our
social issues do n o t differ significantly from those in the U nited States, and Canadian hom eless youth
have similar Hfe experiences as youth in the U nited States.
T he prim ary reason for the lack o f systematic, rehable data regarding the num ber o f hom eless
youth is related to the characteristics o f the population itself. B oth Canadian and A m erican researchers
state that hom eless youth are a difficult-to-foUow and m obile population (M cDowell & M adsen, 2001;
PoUio & T hom pson, 2000). They are largely a "hidden population" w ho are n o t typically found in
shelters, are visually indistinguishable from other youth, and above all, they avoid researchers
(M cDowell & M adsen, 2001; Ringwalt et al., 1998). PoUio, T hom pson, and N o rth (2000) note as well
that youth are difficult to track, and have received lim ited research attention. Ringwalt et al. found that
hom eless youth actually avoid contact w ith shelters, m edical services, poHce, and service providers,
w hich clearly limits the usefulness o f any data originating from these sources.

Defining Homekssness
A nother com phcation related to the m easurem ent o f hom elessness is how hom elessness can
be defined, and w hat it m eans. H om elessness research that has been conducted over the past

13

twenty-five years has utilized inconsistent definitions o f hom elessness —from definitions
encom passing only absolute hom elessness, to definitions encom passing a variety o f com binations o f
absolute and relative hom elessness, to definitions th at are totally inclusive o f absolute and relative
hom elessness, and those at risk o f hom elessness (Peressini & M cD onald, 2000). M urray (1990, as cited
in Peressini and M cD onald, 2000) rep o rt that the U nited N ations considers that people are hom eless
w hen they either have no hom e and live outdoors o r in shelters, or they hve in hom es that do n o t m eet
U N basic standards. A ccording to M urray, basic U N standards include access to safe w ater and
sanitation, affordable price, secure tenancy, personal safety, and access to health care and employment.
Lack o f consistency in our definitions is problem atic. I f hom elessness is m easured based on
the num ber o f individuals using shelters, then the groups w ho are staying w ith friends or extended
famihes, hving in substandard or overcrow ded housing, or on the streets b u t n o t accessing services,
win n o t be included. Underage youth avoid official services because they do n o t w ant to be reported to
the authorities (Robert et al, 2005), and therefore, shelter statistics are a very unrehable indication o f
the extent o f youth hom elessness in any city. This claim is substantiated by data. F o r example,
according to Statistics Canada (2001), no hom eless youth utihzed a shelter in W hitehorse during 2001.
H ow ever, according to scholars like M cD ow ell and M adsen (2001), there w ere definitely a num ber o f
hom eless youth hving in W hitehorse during 2001.
A ccording to Stewart et al’s (2004) study for the Social Support Research Program o f the
U niversity o f Alberta, youth are hom eless if they:
o

H ave no hom e at ah and are hving on the streets;

o

Are hving in a place that was n o t intended to be housing o r n o t a suitable long
term residence; or

14

o

Are at risk o f becom ing hom eless through losing their hom e, being discharged
from an institution/facility w ith now here to go; or

o

T hrough loss o f incom e support.

I f hom elessness is defined n o t by physical characteristics, h u t by em otional qualities, then how
hom elessness is m easured ought to he changed. A ccording to N ovae et al. (1996), w om en attach
different meanings to the concept o f "hom e". T hese concepts o f hom e include, h u t are n o t lim ited to,
em otional and physical weU-heing, loving and caring social relationships, and personal control and
privacy. H om elessness, then, is defined by the absence, or p o o r quahty, o f these characteristics.
Viewed from this perspective, hom elessness m ay he the solution to the problem o f housing or hom e
(Tomas & D ittm ar, 1995). I f a person leaves hom e in order to avoid abuse, for example, then
hom elessness is the solution to the problem .
Ringwalt et al. (1998) state that estim ates o f A m erican hom eless subpopulation size are usually
based on researching the num ber and characteristics o f a hom eless group at a given p o in t in tim e, and
that these estimates tend to be biased tow ard various groups. F o r example, they state that this m ethod
o f analyzing youth hom elessness leads to estimates o f average duration that are biased upw ard, and
estimates o f prevalence incidence that are biased downward. Since hom elessness am ong youth is m uch
m ore episodic than chronic (Robertson, 1991 and Institute o f Medicine, 1988, as cited in Ringwalt et
al., 1998), snapshots cannot reveal the true picture. Ringwalt et al. (1998) further argue that m easuring
youth hom elessness using longitudinal m ethods w ould provide a m uch m ore accurate picture o f the
extent o f youth hom elessness than w ould cross sectional m ethods. N ovae et al. (2002) also state that
cross sectional research m ethods miss the cycles o f youth hom elessness, and over represent those
youth w ho are hom eless for longer periods. Schewitzer and H ier (1994) also contend that longitudinal
studies are required in order to fully u nderstand the extent and characteristics o f youth hom elessness.

15

Profile o f Homeless Youth in Canada
Miller, D onahue, Este, and H ofer (2004) rep o rt that homeless adolescents are a very diverse
group, and providing a typical profile is difficult. They classify hom eless youth into two groups, those
w ho are runners (and do n o t return hom e) and in-and-outers (those w ho ru n as a coping m echanism
and rem rn hom e episodically). Thus, youth hom elessness is a solution to problem s. A ccording to
Bridgm an (2001), classifications o f hom eless youth include runaways, throw-a-ways, system kids, and
street kids (sleeping rough). W right (1997; cited in Peressini & M cD onald, 2000) confirm s that the
hom eless are a group o f subpopulations w ith specialized needs, requiring speciahzed program s,
services, and policies. Again, hom elessness is described as a solution to problem atic youth experience.
H aber and T o ro (2004) report that adolescents are the single age group m ost at risk o f
experiencing hom elessness. A ccording to a G overnm ent o f Canada 2003 report entitled “Y outh
Profile T o ro n to /Y o rk Service Delivery Sector” , youth under the age o f 18 is one o f the two fastest
grow ing groups in the hom eless population, and three quarters o f the hom eless youth do n o t utihze the
shelter system in T oronto. Callaghan (1990) reports on a study that found that there are betw een
20,000 and 25,000 hom eless youth in T o ro n to , o f w hich half are betw een the ages o f 12 and 18 years.
Callaghan (1990) states that the need to secure g ood long-term housing is their m ost pressing concern;
they are unable to establish them selves in w ork, school, or hom e life w ithout stable housing; and they
experience discrim ination because o f their age, lim ited incom e, and lim ited Hfe experience. W hüe
hom eless youth are widely perceived to abuse substances. Mallet, Rosenthal, and Keys (2005) rep o rt
that just over half the youth involved in a recent study confirm ed that substance use was a factor in
leading to their hom elessness, and a quarter o f the sample indicated that they began to use substances
after they becam e homeless. G iven the prevalence o f substance use am ong hom eless youth, it w ould

16

undoubtedly play a role in the ability to youth to secure em ploym ent, attend school, and m aintain
secure housing.
In their study o f youth hom elessness in Calgary, Miller et al. (2004) found that m o st youth felt
a sense o f optim ism , and that their hom elessness was tem porary. In fact, according to Peressini and
M cD onald (2000), hom elessness is a fluid and dynamic process, which occurs and reoccurs over time.
These researchers argue that the majority o f the hom eless population com m ence w ith short hom eless
episodes, and proceed to longer and longer periods o f hom elessness until they becom e chronically
hom eless. T he longer people rem ain on the street, the m ore likely they are to rem ain hom eless (Dear &
W olch, 1987; Jencks, 1994 as cited in Peressini & M cD onald, 2000).

Population Characteristics
A ccording to T he Street Lifestyle R eport (Health Canada, 1997), the lower age o f street youth
has been identified as 12 years, while the upper age m ay be considered to be 24 years. C om pared to
m ale hom eless youth, female hom eless youth are m ore likely to be on the younger end o f the
continuum . Researchers found that youth betw een the ages o f 12 and 17 m ade up 24% o f the hom eless
in Calgary, and that 31% o f these youth w ere female (Calgary H om eless Foundation, 2002, as cited by
Miller et al., 2004).
H agan and M cCarthy (1990, as cited in CM H C, 1999) found that T o ro n to street youth leave
hom e, on average, at the age o f 13 years. In a m ore recent study, Tyler, H oyt, W hitbeck, and Cauce
(2001) found that Am erican children w ho leave hom e at a young age run away num erous times, and
m ay develop a pattern w here they return hom e for b rief periods and then run again. B oth Canadian
and Am erican youth w ho are exposed to the streets at a young age often spend m ore tim e on the
streets, form ties w ith deviant peers, and engage in criminal street netw orks (Hagan & M cCarthy, 1997;
W hitbeck & H oyt, 1999, as cited in Tyler et al., 2001). Street youth frequently develop social

17

relationships, becom e m em bers o f street families, and carry w eapons in order to obtain som e degree o f
safety (Novae et al., 1999).
Researchers o f a study in Canada rep o rt that famihes o f street youth are likely to have been
disrupted, resulting in the youth Hving in foster or group hom es (Novae et al., 1999). This is confirm ed
by R obert et al. (2005) in their smdy o f youth w ho were under the care o f the youth protection system
at the tim e o f the smdy, and youth w ho were under care o f the youth protection system at som e other
p o in t in their Hves. As weU, num erous Am erican smdies (Kurtz, Jarvis, & Jurtz, 1991; Koegel,
M elamid, & Burnam , 1995; H erm an & Susser 1997) state that m any hom eless youth have histories o f
o u t o f hom e care. These findings are supported by other hterature w hich suggests that, in general,
hom eless youth typically com e from conflict-laden, violent, and dysfunctional hom es (Schweitzer &
H ier 1994; Janus et al., 1995; W hitbeck et al., 1997; Cauce, 2000). In the U nited States, W hitbeck et al.
conducted a smdy to determ ine if hom eless youth reports o f neglect and abuse in their hom es were
biased o r even false. In interviews w ith parents o f hom eless youth, they found that the neglect and
abuse that were reported by the youth were substantiated. R ecent Canadian research confirm s that
very high levels o f childhood abuses are com m on in runaway and hom eless youths' histories (Novae et
al., 2002). Countless researchers have verified that hom eless youth have experienced abuse and neglect
in their hom es, and that they are vulnerable to a num ber o f problem s once they are on the street.
Chen, W hitbeck, and H oyt (2004) rep o rt that a history o f sexual abuse puts adolescent
hom eless w om en at higher risk for chronic chug use and adult hom elessness. NoeU, Rohde, Seeley, and
O chs (2001) Hnk early sexual abuse w ith later victim ization, and found that a significant am ount o f
sexual activity am ong adolescent hom eless w om en was involuntary. As weU, Rosenthal and MaUett
(2003) found that 58.3% o f hom eless adolescent w om en sm died reported having unw anted sex out o f
fear, or because they were unable to refuse due to being under the influence o f dm gs o r alcohol.

18

W hitbeck et al. (1997) te p o rt that high levels o f family violence and parental rejection, and
critical levels o f physical and sexual abuse occurred in the hom es o f hom eless youth interviewed. K urtz
et al. (1991) observe family, personal, and school problem s am ong hom eless youth. M acLean et al.
(1999) rep o rt high levels o f victim ization and psychological m aladjustm ent. W hitbeck et al. (2001)
rep o rt that hom eless youth are p u t into a deviant subculm re. W hitbeck et al. (1999) state that learning
to survive on the street involves learning to be antisocial, and th at interactions reinforce low self
concepts. Researchers hke B row ne and Finkelhor (1986) and C onte (1985) (as cited in Cauce and
M organ, 1994) suggest that hom eless youth are at high risk for fear, anxiety, depression, post-traum atic
reactions, sexual problem s, drug and alcohol abuse, p o o r school adjustm ent, and delinquent acting-out
and aggressive behaviours. E m otional and behavioural problem s, along w ith substance abuse and
physical health problem s, are n o t uncom m on in this population (Cauce & M organ, 1994).
H om eless adolescents are also at high risk o f suicide. R otheram -B orus (1993) found that m ore
than a third o f the hom eless youth sm died had attem pted suicide in the past, and that m any had
attem pted suicide in the m o n th preceding entering a youth hom elessness program . K idd and K rai
(2003), in a smdy examining suicide and prostim tion, found that a day w ithout food and shelter was
often described as the breaking point for the participants, leading to suicidal behaviour.
In spite o f the predisposition tow ard em otional and behavioural problem s that traum atic hom e
events and subsequent street experiences may instill in youth, positive outcom es are n o t unheard o f in
som e simations. M cCarthy, Hagan, and M artin (2002) argue that youth friendships can augm ent or
replace the intimacy, support and other resources typically provided by famihes. They found that street
family associations, also know n as "fictive kin" or "fictive street famihes", generate social capital that
results in reduced victimization. These researchers define social capital as having tw o intertw ined
com ponents: relationships and intangible resources o f trust, reciprocity, and sohdarity. In their 2002

19

study, M cCarthy et al. found that fictive street famihes generally im proved hom eless youths' abilities to
procure shelter, food, and incom e, in addition to providing protection from victim ization.

Health and Well-Being
Everything about hom elessness degrades health (Wright, 1990). In fact, according to W right
(1990), no other socially defined risk factor appears to have greater im pact on a person's physical
well-being. W right further contends that in extrem e cases, hom elessness can be fatal. This is proven in
som e recent studies, such as a Q uebec study w hich found that the m ortahty rate am ong a group o f
hom eless youth was 13 times higher than for youth in the general population (Regie régionale, 1998, as
cited in N ovae et al., 2002).
H om elessness greafiy im pacts w hether a person is able to access adequate health care. W right
(1990) states that the transient and m obile nature o f the A m erican hom eless population makes
continuous contact difficult; the average hom eless person does n o t m aintain an appointm ent diary,
resulting in unkept appointm ents and irregularly ingested m edications; and hom eless individuals are
often un trusting and fearful o f health care settings and the appearance o f anything official. Adolescents
m ay lack parental perm ission to access health care, and they are typically unable to follow up w ith
prescribed treatm ents w hen they do 0ackson & McSwane, 1992). Lack o f transportation and
disrespectful treatm ent by health care providers are additional barriers to health care access as reported
by W ojm sik & W hite (1998).
Rew (2002) explains further that expending energy to cope w ith traum atic hfe situations and
survival reduces the tim e and energy available for preventative activities such as im m unizations and
annual health check ups. In fact, she states that youth may n o t perceive that they have a long future to
be concerned about. This was confirm ed in a recent rep o rt o f a M ontreal smdy (Ubelacker, 2004),
w here the researchers found that hom elessness itself is a predictor o f early death for youth.

20

N o rth and Sm ith (1993) and Benda (1991) (as cited in PoUio, M cD onald, & N o rth , 1996)
rep o rt that the differences betw een needs perceived by the hom eless individuals and needs identified
by the system are barriers to appropriate service provision. In addition to inadequate m atching
betw een perceived needs and available services, health care services in the U nited States are
fragm ented (Rew, 2002). Jackson and M cSwane (1992) rep o rt that in general, health care for the
hom eless is crisis oriented rather than preventive. In addition, the hom eless youth experience biased
attitudes on the p art o f caregivers that reflect a belief that the hom eless are unw orthy o f high quahty
care (Jackson & McSwane, 1992).
A nother factor that appears to be significant to youth well-being is affiliation w ith society, or
social connectedness (Cohen et al., 1992, Blankertz et al., 1992, M orse et al., 1994, as cited in PoUio et
al., 1996). Rew (2002) studied the relationships betw een sexual abuse, social connectedness, and
loneliness w ith perceived well-being and health status. T he evidence she found suggests that hom eless
youth w ith histories o f sexual abuse perceive them selves to be less socially connected, and that social
connectedness is inversely related to loneliness, and positively related to well-being. Overall, well-being
and health status were found to be lower am ong hom eless youth than am ong youth w ho were n o t
homeless.
Research has show n that hom eless individuals com m only feel that no one cares, have a low
sense o f self-worth, and have a sense o f lim ited control over their hves (Kinzel, 1991). K arabanow
(2003) confirm s these findings through his Canadian research, in which youth reported feehngs o f
being alone, o f having little purpose, o f feeling alienated and marginalized, and o f perceptions that
m o st people saw them as thieves, criminals, and the dregs o f society. EarUer, Jackson and McSwane
(1992) reported that hom eless persons m ay be viewed as dirty, frightening, and crazy. T hese thoughts,
feehngs, and experiences directly im pact physical well-being as health seeking behaviours and

21

m otivation for self-care are negatively influenced by real and perceived exclusion and discrim ination.
W ell-being is also im pacted by environm ental conditions com m only experienced by hom eless
individuals. F o r example, nutritional deficiencies, traum a, and persistent exposure to dam pness aU
contribute to p o o r health (Kinzel, 1991).
Ironically, iU health is also a reflection o f subsistence strategies that hom eless youth are know n
to adopt for survival purposes (Tyler et al., 2001). T he difficulties that hom eless youth experience
finding food and shelter are well docum ented (M cCarthy & H agan, 1992; Ringwalt et al., 1998). These
youth are often sexually exploited, and m any exchange sex for basic necessities in order to survive,
leading to high safety risks (W hitbeck & Simons, 1990) and high health risks (Yates et al., 1988).
A ccording to M cKay (2004), in Canadian street youth, chlamydia rates w ere nine times higher than in
Canadian housed youth. O th er know n health risks include H IV , Hepatitis B and C, tuberculosis
(Kraus et al., 2001) and depression, suicide, and m ental health problem s (Yates et al., 1988).
A nother barrier to health care services for hom eless youth w ho suffer from psychological and
psychiatric problem s may result from challenging behaviour. A ccording to Pawsey and Fuller (1993),
youth may miss out on help for their challenging behaviours, and at the same time, these behaviours
exclude them from accessing other services. Tyler et al. (2001) p oint out that street youth relationships
w ith deviant individuals also contribute to iU health, and that youth w ith behavioural problem s may fall
into these relationships through lack o f acceptance by other groups. T he base level o f risk that an
individual faces is heightened simply by proxim ity to offenders (Sampson & Lauritsen, 1990).

A ccording to Tyler et al. (2001), subsistence strategies include selling drugs, prostitution,
robbery, and defrauding (conning) people. Som e Canadian studies confirm that the majority o f street
youth are involved in delinquent activities such as burglary and stealing (Novae et al., 2002). A lthough

22

studies telating hom elessness to the criminal justice system are virtually nonexistent (Novae et al.,
2002), our society tends to treat m ost subsistence strategies that youth engage in as crimes, and to
punish the perpetrators accordingly. W hitbeck et al. (1997) state that Am erican law enforcem ent and
parent advocacy groups share this view. H ow ever, if hom elessness is actually defined as the solution to
a problem (such as abuse or intense conflict in the hom e) as m any researchers propose (Kurtz et al.
1991; Janus et al., 1995; N ovae et al. 2002; K arabanow , 2003), then society is punishing victims o f
abuses for attem pting to solve their problem s. A nother aspect o f crim inahzation is the tendency o f
Canadian courts to protect young w om en by putting them in custody, as opposed to using custody for
the protection o f society (Corrado et al., 2000).
Panhandling is a com m on practice for hom eless individuals, and criminalizing the Canadian
p o o r by criminalizing this activity has recendy been supported in m ore than one Canadian jurisdiction.
O ntario passed legislation in 2000 to criminahze m any form s o f sohcitation, and the business district in
V ancouver has recendy been advocating adopdon o f similar legislation (Vonn, 2004) in the form o f
Bill M 202 —2004 (Legislative Session: 5* Session, 37th Parham ent, 2004). V onn (2004), policy
director o f the British Colum bia Civü Liberties A ssociation, argues that panhandling is a charitable
solicitation, and that laws are already in place to address com m on nuisance, harassm ent, causing a
disturbance, intim idation and mischief. H e also points out that this law, w hich w ould criminalize
panhandling, is designed to be applied in a discrirninatory m anner, and that it prom otes legal inequity.

Causes ofHomekssness
N o rth Am erican researchers have considered b o th individual and societal factors in the search
for the causes o f adolescent hom elessness. M any researchers and com m unity m em bers have focused
on them es o f delinquency, individual deviance and pathology, and blam ing the victim (Bridgman,
2001). This individualized m odel emphasizes the role th at personal pathology, disabilities, and

23

lim itations play in contributing to hom elessness (Petessini & M cD onald, 2000). A nother school o f
thought brings the focus onto a societal level w here hum an spirit, com m unity, and wellness com bine
to produce an array o f outcom es (Cadell, K arabanow , & Sanchez, 2001). Peressini and M cD onald
(2000) describe this as a structural m odel o f hom elessness, in w hich a num ber o f structural systems
im pact susceptibihty to hom elessness. These include poverty and unem ploym ent, avaüabihty o f social
housing, social welfare and health care cut backs.
W hat we do n o t know about Canadian hom elessness far outweighs w hat we do know
(Peressini & M cD onald, 2000). Peressini and M cD onald contend that this is largely due to the fact that
w e do n o t have a systematic database that w ould allow testing o f theoretical perspectives. As well, w hat
seems to be consistent throughout a significant am ount o f the youth hom elessness research is a lack o f
theoretical underpinnings (H aber & T oro, 2004). Additionally, R obert et al (2005) also point out that
the m ajority o f research projects do n o t use a control group, and therefore, risk factors leading to
youth hom elessness have been difficult to identify accurately.
Canadian researchers point to gentrification (Jackson & McSwane, 1992; M urphy 2000) and
deinstitutionahzation (Murphy, 2000) as direct causes o f hom elessness. K raus et al. (2001) and M urphy
blam e hom elessness on lack o f affordable housing and poverty. K oegel et al., (1995) and T osi (1999, as
cited in N ovae et al., 2002) theorize that hom elessness is caused by structural, macro-level forces such
as those causing poverty, and biographical, m icro-level risk factors such as m ental health and personal
histories. N ovae et al. (2002) rep o rt that Canadian analysts have identified m ajor factors that im pact
youth hom elessness, including how long the youth rem ains in the parents' hom e, length o f time in
school, high unem ploym ent rates (and m arginal em ploym ent opportunities for youth), as well as a lack
o f available, affordable housing.

24

Mallet et al. (2005) have identified four pathways that youth may follow to hom elessness and
w hich are linked to alcohol and drug use. T he youth may engage in drug o r alcohol use, w hich may
result in family conflict and lead to hom elessness. O r, the youth may experience family conflict, engage
in drug or alcohol use, and then experience hom elessness. Alternatively, the youth may experience
family conflict, leave hom e, and then engage in alcohol o r drug use. Finally, another m em ber o f the
family m ay engage in alcohol or drug use, causing family confhct, and the youth m ay then experience
hom elessness. T hese researchers point out that hom eless youth are widely perceived to use and abuse
alcohol and drugs, and that this behaviour is a cause o f hom elessness. In reahty, however, it may be a
coping strategy.
N um erous researchers have also confirm ed th at hom elessness is a solution to a num ber o f
m icro level factors such as lack o f safety (Novae et al., 2002), abuse and neglect (Kurtz et al. 1991; Tyler
et al., 2001), and hom ophobia (Rew et al., 2001). T h e m icro-level forces are proclaim ed to leave
individuals vulnerable to the structural forces. H iggitt et al. (2003) rep o rt that youth becom e hom eless
because o f the failure o f m ultiple systems, including b u t n o t Hmited to the family and community.
R obert et al (2005) support this in their argum ent that hom eless youth may b e rejected by their
famihes, and then by youth protection agencies w hich label the youth as having behavioural disorders.
T hus, they becom e undesirables in our society, in need o f reform and discipline, w hen in fact they were
the victims.
W hile our society is short on provision o f services for hom eless youth, the Hterature (as cited
th roughout this paper) is n o t lacking in theories o f the causes and risk factors for hom elessness.
C hildhood abuse and neglect appear to be am ong the prim ary precipitating factors. H iggitt et al.
(2003), in a recent Canadian study, found that the child protection system in m any cases failed the
participants w hen the youth were experiencing family conflict, neglect, or abuse. H erm an and Susser

25

(1997) propose that the com bination o f lack o f cate and childhood abuse ate ditecdy associated w ith a
dramatically elevated risk o f adult hom elessness. In addition, they state that childhood neglect and
abuse actually cause hom elessness in a social context that allows the existence o f w idespread
hom elessness. K arabanow (2003) reports that "escaping" or "graduating" from child welfare
institutions accounts for part o f the youth hom elessness problem . T he U nited States G eneral
A ccounting Office (1989, as cited in Rotheram -B orus, Parra, Cantwell, G w adz, and M urphy, 1996)
reports that half the youth w ho run away have been in foster care and appear to be attem pting to leave
a p o o r placem ent. H aber and T o ro (2004) add that adolescents w ho are "aging out" o f the foster care
system seem to be at very high risk o f hom elessness as transitional program s are n o t provided.
Research conducted by K oegel et al. (1995) confirm s that systemic changes that w ould enable
children to grow up in healthy and stable hom es are needed in order to significantly alleviate youth
hom elessness. Prevention o f hom elessness could occur at m ore than one level. F o r example, providing
youth w ith skills, em ploym ent, and housing is one m ethod. Interventions o r support for families and
children prior to a runaway sim ation is another. In Canada, an example o f a structural change that
w ould prom ote m ore positive family dynamics w ould be the adoption o f the U nited N ations
C onvention o f the Rights o f the Child, as reported by Tang (2003). N either the federal n o r provincial
governm ents have passed legislation that w ould facilitate recognition o f the rights o f children to be
free o f physical punishm ent. E ven if this change w ere to occur, the family supports necessary to m ake
it a positive change, as opposed to a punitive change, w ould have to be p u t in place.

Gender Issues
T he prevention and intervention o f hom elessness should be considered in a gender specific
context, as girls and boys have different experiences in the hom e and o n the street. H oyt, Ryan, and
Cauce (1999), in studying w hether proxim ity to criminal activity leads to increased rates o f

26

victim ization, found that female hom eless youth w ho participated in interventions experienced a
m ajor reduction in victim ization. This finding was n o t consistent w ith male hom eless youth in the
study, indicating that in addition to having differing needs and experiences, different interventions may
have different success rates depending on gender.
In regard to experiences, the results o f an A m erican study conducted by Ryan et al. (2000)
suggest that young w om en may be m ore vulnerable to m altreatm ent than males, b o th in the prevalence
o f abuse and in the psychological im pact o f the abuse. Cauce (2000) and Tyler et al. (2001) found that
A m erican girls reported m uch higher rates o f childhood sexual abuse in the hom e and on the streets
than did boys. Janus et al. (1995) also report that girls are at greater risk o f abuse in the hom e than are
boys. Further, NoeU et al. (2001) found a clear association betw een being sexually abused as a
pre-adolescent and experiencing sexual coercion as an adolescent, and a significant am ount o f
involuntary sex am ong hom eless adolescent w om en. Y oung hom eless w om en are also at higher risk
for attem pted suicide (Rosenthal & Mallett, 2003).
M acLean et al. (1999) found that girls are m ore likely to run away from hom e than are boys.
O nce on the street, girls are m ore than 20 times m ore likely than boys to engage in survival sex (Ryan
et al., 2000). It is n o t surprising then that Kipke, Simon, M ontgom ery, Unger, and Iversen (1997)
found that girls are m ore likely than boys to be victims o f sexual assault on the street. W ardhaugh
(2000, as cited in N ovae et al., 2002) explains that young w om en m ust disappear on the streets in order
to survive, while yotmg m en visibly occupy the streets and public spaces.
N ovae et al. (2002) rep o rt that in m any Canadian hom es, there are higher expectations for girls
than boys in the areas o f responsibility and standards o f conduct. This puts additional pressure on
young w om en, setting the stage for family conflict.

27

l^orthem Ikesearch
There are no published Canadian studies that have focused on the perspectives o f youth in
relation to support and service needs (Stewart et al, 2004). A nd in the Canadian north, there is a
noticeable lack o f youth hom elessness research in general. O ver the past few years, there have been
two W hitehorse-based studies focused on youth hom elessness. In 2001, M cD ow ell and M adsen
com pleted a youth hom elessness survey in W hitehorse w hich included 47 participants. This survey
revealed that hom eless youth in W hitehorse are a diverse and heterogeneous population and that the
m ajority o f hom eless youth in W hitehorse are considered to experience “relative” hom elessness. T he
researchers found that adolescents aged 16 to 19 years do n o t have their needs m et by the social
welfare system and that teenagers w ith children are n o t eligible for residential facihties. Som e youth
had few legal m eans to earn m oney to m eet basic needs, w hich p u t them into a position o f having to
resort to high risk behaviour in order to survive. Finally, youth w ithout stable hom es reported
difficulties attending school due to lack o f parental support and problem s w ith transportation.
M cDowell and M adsen (2001) state that the hom eless youth in W hitehorse are vulnerable
because they are hving away from hom e, on the street, and “couch surfing” (using their social
netw ork), and because o f the factors that led to the hom elessness. Their survey revealed that youth are
hom eless because they are running from hom es w here they experienced violence, excessive use o f
drugs and alcohol, and physical or sexual abuse. Som e youth have been neglected or asked to leave by
their parents or guardians.
In N ovem ber 2005, the W hitehorse Planning G roup on H om elessness released a second
rep o rt on W hitehorse youth hom elessness entitled, “R oom to Grow: A M ade-in-Y ukon M odel o f
Service for H om eless Y outh” (Finton & K ram er, 2005). K ram er (personal com m unication, July 5,
2005) states that the focus o f this study was to develop workable housing and service dehvery m odels

28

based on com m unity inputs, and that the ovetall goal o f this ptoject was to produce a concrete plan to
address youth hom elessness in W hitehorse. T he rep o rt reinforces the com m unity’s need to address
youth hom elessness in W hitehorse, and the need to address relative hom elessness as conditions in the
n o rth force youth to go underground, particularly in the colder m onths. F inton and K ram er identify
two m odels that they state w ould have high probabilities o f success: a com prehensive m odel to
provide a full range o f services over the long term , and an essentials m odel to m eet im m ediate need in
the short term. As well, this study identified five core services that are needed to address youth
hom elessness in W hitehorse: emergency shelter; transitional and semi perm anent housing; perm anent
supported housing; affordable independent housing; and a wide range o f support services provided by
a coalition o f services. As well, the rep o rt highlights core approaches for effective service delivery:
long-term collaborative vision w ith increm ental steps; youth centred problem solving and planning; a
range o f services to m eet diverse needs; non-judgm ental, persistent, caring service provider behaviour;
relationships and collaboration betw een agencies; and sustainable and creative funding arrangem ents.
W hile this report prom otes services that m eet im m ediate needs, it also prom otes social action through
youth em pow erm ent and coahtion building (MuUaly, 1997).

A ccording to Levine, T oro, and Perkins (1993), services for the hom eless in the U nited States
have focused on developing shelters and other emergency services that do n o t address ro o t causes, and
m any services are actually targeted tow ard groups showing particular deficits such as m ental illness and
substance abuse. Brooks, M ilbum , R otheram -B orus, and W hite (2003) state that som e areas o f the
U nited States are rich in services, and som e are woefully lacking due to lack o f resources. Services tend
to be centralized, w ith smaller and larger agencies offering different types o f services. These
researchers point o ut that differences in types o f service may actually be beneficial as there are diverse

29

needs am ong hom eless youth, however, the shortage o f services are very detrimental. Levine et al.
caution that professionally based emergency services are very costly and may n o t reach a substantial
p ro portion o f the homeless.
Cauce and M organ (1994) assert that hom eless youth in the U nited States face a
non-responsive service system and piecemeal interventions. Reid and Klee (1999) confirm that a lack
o f coordination and inconsistency betw een services also negatively im pact the quality o f services
available to youth. Y outh shelters are reportedly dangerous places and are under accessed (G reen &
Ringwalt, 1997). PoUio et al. (1996) state that differences betw een needs perceived by cHents and
system, m istrust o f service providers, population heterogeneity, disaffiliation from society, and
services limiting individual freedom negatively im pact utilization and success o f youth hom elessness
interventions.
In a study for the Canadian M ortgage and H ousing C orporation (CM HC, 2002a), researchers
conducted case smdies on 12 hom eless services across Canada. T he agencies studied provide services
to an array o f subpopulations, including youth services. T he types o f services include emergency
shelters, drop-ins, supported housing, and education, training and counselhng. T he focus o f the smdy
was to ascertain w hether program user involvem ent in service provision w ould increase opporm nities
for personal grow th and social action. T h e smdy found that program users are seldom involved at the
B oard level, and for this reason, are n o t meaningfully involved in policy, consultation, or planning. N o r
are program users involved to any significant degree in research and evaluation. Acm al w ork was
found to be the m o st com m on type o f involvem ent in service provision. A num ber o f service agencies
involve service users in building design o r developm ent, creative activities, com m unity projects (such
as fundraising), and training.

30

T here is another line o f inquiry. K arabanow (2002) states that there is little research regarding
the types o f organizations that exist to help the street youth population, b u t th at by understanding how
individual agencies work, and how agencies w ork together, the com m unity may ascertain w hether the
population in question is acmally being helped w ithin the system. H e reports that youth shelters have
b een characterized as helpful and needed services, and points out that how agencies w ork together to
m eet the needs o f the hom eless will determ ine how well the com m unity actually m eet those needs.
E ven if the com m unity is providing services, if the environm ent is n o t one o f cooperation and genuine
concern, then the com m unity action w ould be com prom ised.
K arabanow (1999) explains that interventions reflect ideologies about youth hom elessness.
F o r example, hom elessness may be considered a pathology, w here the focus is on the individual youth
as causing her ow n hom elessness. This ideology may lead to crim inahzation for subsistence strategies.
H om elessness may also be viewed as a horrific condition from w hich youth m ust be rem oved and
protected. This attitude also m aintains pathology as the ro o t cause. O n the other hand, hom eless youth
m ay be viewed as "norm al", b u t hving a hfe th at reflects societal inequities and difficult hfe
circumstance. K arabanow (1999) conducted a case study o f a particularly successful M ontreal street
kid agency in w hich in-depth interviews were held w ith eight front line w orkers, two supervisors, the
executive director, and the founder. K arabanow found that this program was based on a com m unity
developm ent perspective, w ith a focus on norm ahzing youth hom elessness and building on the
strengths o f the program users, and he attributed the success o f the agency to the em pow erm ent and
acceptance o f the youth.
Bridgm an (2001) conducted a study on the developm ent o f a dem onstration project for
hom eless youth in T oronto. This project was also based on an approach o f em pow erm ent and
acceptance and was designed to provide transitional housing in addition to training and em ploym ent

31

oppottunities fo t hom eless youth. T he training is expected to benefit the youth over the long term
because it provides opportunities for career developm ent, n o t just m inim um wage jobs for the
duration o f the placem ent.

Recommendationsfor Interventions
F o r n o rth ern regions, Finton and K ram er (2005) articulate a vision w hich includes a holistic
service m odel to address underlying needs contributing to hom elessness, along w ith a com prehensive
m odel providing a continuum o f services to m eet a com prehensive range o f needs. A key factor o f
b o th m odels is the approach under w hich they are intended to be im plem ented. F or example, a
collaboration o f com m unity stakeholders, a youth-centred problem solving and planning m ethod, and
a harm reduction and accepting approach are integral com ponents in successfully addressing short and
long term needs.
A ccording to H aber and T oro (2004), long term needs require even m ore attention than
im m ediate needs, and are also m ore difficult to address. As well, they state that treatm ent and
prevention are points along the same continuum , and interventions should be targeted tow ard
com m unities, in addition to individuals. H aber and T o ro further argue that by m eeting short term
needs only, we are contributing to the hom elessness issue. T ransition and long term services are
required to acmally alleviate hom elessness. As noted by a significant num ber o f researchers, hom eless
youth are a diverse population w ith diverse needs (Brooks et al., 2003; Mallet, Rosenthal, Myers,
M üburn, & Rotheram -B orus, 2004; H aber & T oro, 2004) and therefore individuahzed services, or at
the least, a variety o f services, are needed.
W hitbeck et al. (2001) rep o rt that those m o st in harm 's way are the m o st challenging to engage,
and the least accessible youth are those m ost likely to be at greatest risk. Levine et al. (1993) state that
self help program s m n by the hom eless them selves can be cost effective and accessible to a wide array

32

o f hom eless persons and that institutions, including residential youth treatm ent facilities, should be
avoided. C om m unity based care has been found to be the best hope o f success for children (Levine et

al, 1993).
Canadian researchers have also found that involving the hom eless in the solutions to
hom elessness provides real opportunities for personal grow th and positive change (CM HC 2002a). In
a Canadian study, researchers identified innovative housing projects for youth, located in the U nited
States, France, and G reat Britain, and examined the factors th at m ade these projects successful
(CM HC, 2002b). T h e researchers identified com m on factors th at they deem critical to intervention
success, including the following:
•

project m ust be centred on youth and their needs

•

youth m ust dem onstrate their desire to do som ething about their situation

•

service provision m ust be global (i.e. range from shelters to long term em pow erm ent)

•

relationships o f trust are critical

•

individuahzed services are im portant (reflecting heterogeneous nature o f population)

•

an evaluation process m ust be built in

•

program s m ust be com m unity based, and include neighbourhood, em ploym ent, and
education

•

family m ediation services should be available

•

agencies/com m unity m ust w ork in cooperation; existing services utüized

•

large decentralized services should be avoided

•

ordinary housing distributed throughout the com m unity is the preference

CM H C (2002b) reports that researchers found that support services for youth are n o ted as
being a critical com ponent in providing solutions for hom elessness. They rep o rt that hom eless youth

33

have identified fo u t types o f help as being critical: com passion; rules and boundaries, with
consequences for inappropriate behaviour; practical assistance such as food, housing, and m oney; and
professional intervention. T he youth identified the need for relationships as being o f im perative
im portance, and in addition to the com m only accepted needs such as safe and affordable housing,
opporm nity to develop life skills, and access to services such as training and education, the studies also
show ed the need for social ties. Participation and control issues were seen by the youth as im portant.
Kraus et al. (2001) confirm that a continuum o f housing and support services, a fuU range o f
housing options and support program s, m ore program s and services, and m ore affordable housing are
essential. They also confirm that m odels that enable youth to rem ain in one housing option as they
progress through the continuum o f services and stages are im portant. M easures to prevent
hom elessness, such as family m ediation, confhct resolution, helping youth stay in school, recreation
centres, and family and children support are also identified as significant com ponents.
In K arabanow 's 2003 report, he articulates that services for street youth that are successful
have provided youth w ith a space w here they can feel safe, cared for, and part o f a comm unity. A n
environm ent w here youth can gain courage, strength, resihency, and w here citizenship instead o f
pathology is reinforced is needed for hom eless youth. K arabanow (1999; 2002) advises that how we
approach the issue o f youth hom elessness, and how well agencies w ork together are the critical factors
in service provision for hom eless youth. Agencies m ust n o t stand alone, and b o th the ideology and
spirit o f each com m unity m ust reflect cooperation and respect for the strengths o f the population
being served. V an Leeuw en (2004) supports the n otion that governm ent, n o n governm ent, and private
agencies m ust collaborate to successfully rem ove youth from the street on a perm anent basis.
A num ber o f researchers have also identified the im portance o f providing on site services
(Jackson & McSwain, 1992) and to strategically locate the services (Levine et al. 1993). K arabanow

34

(1999) describes a successful project where a youth shelter becam e a part o f the street culture - the
shelter came to the youth as opposed to the youth having to leave their environm ent to go to the
shelter. This project was based on the ideology o f accepting the youth w here they are, as opposed to
m oving them to w here society thinks they should be.
A lthough family m ediation is an im portant service, program s that "restore" youth to their
famihes m ust be avoided Ja n u s et al., 1995). M any youth have left their famihes for safety reasons, or
at the very least, because they did n o t feel com fortable. T herefore, while m ediation services are
im portant, program s that rem rn youth to the environm ent from which they have escaped w ould be
avoided by m any youth. As weU, ensuring that services provide equitable access to ah youth, regardless
o f gender or sexual orientation, is essential (O'Brien, Travers, & BeU, 1993). N ovae et al. (2002) also
p oint out that services m ust recognize and respect the distinctive needs o f female youth.
Tim ing o f interventions is another factor to consider. Proactive interventions before youth are
weU estabhshed on the street provide a better chance for youth to avoid prolonged hom elessness (Reid
& Klee, 1999). M cCarthy et al. (2002) report that youth build relationships involving tm st and
reciprocity with other hom eless individuals and groups. Tim ing is im portant because once youth have
estabhshed these relationships, they may be resistant to interventions w here they wih need to develop
new relationships w ith people w hom they do n o t yet trust.
A h in ah, the research and N o rth Am erican professional experience indicate th at although
im m ediate needs m ust be m et, long term needs m ust be addressed if youth hom elessness is going to be
aheviated (Haber & T oro, 2004). G overnm ents and com m unity agencies m ust cohaborate to m eet the
needs o f hom eless youth (Van Leeuwen, 2004), and we m ust m eet they youth w here they are and
ensure that they are included in com m unity (Karabanow, 1999). As weh, w e m ust address accessibility

35

issues, ensure that services provide equitable access (Janus et al., 1995), and m eet the needs o f all
sectors o f the hom elessness population, including adolescent wom en.

T he literature review conducted for the purpose o f this paper reveals that adolescent
hom elessness in Canada is a significant problem , and it is n o t going away - in fact it is on the rise.
H om elessness puts youth at risk for iU health, victim ization, and crirninalization, and m any youth
resort to dangerous subsistence strategies to survive. Issues relating specifically to hom eless adolescent
w om en include high rates o f sexual and physical abuse in their families o f origin and high rates o f
victim ization on the street. In order to survive, m any adolescent hom eless w om en are forced to
participate in survival sex, prostitution, and other illegal activities such as selling drugs. T h e risks that
these young w om en face due to survival strategies, environm ental factors, and lack o f structure place
them at very high risk for victim ization and iU health.
Social action is needed to address the ro o t o f the problem - otherwise, we are simply applying
band-aids to child abuse and neglect issues, and to poverty. Social change may begin w hen we learn
w hat the youth w ho have experienced hom elessness in our com m unity believe the com m unity should
be doing to support adolescent hom eless w om en. This research may provide a solid base o f
understanding from w hich our com m unity can collectively begin to take action.

36

Chapter 3 Theoretical Approach to Understanding Homelessness

In order to effectively address adolescent hom elessness, we require approaches that result in
social and structural changes, as opposed to approaches that m erely result in provision o f safety nets.
E ach approach to understanding and addressing hom elessness is based on a theory o f w hy and how
youth becom e homeless. Theoretical approaches may differ in w hether they assum e the perspective o f
individual or collective responsibility, w hether they are based on m acro or m icro causes, and w hether
they favour a top dow n or b o tto m up approach to intervention. They may also differ significantly in
fundam ental political belief systems. A num ber o f approaches and perspectives have been utilized in
N o rth A m erican research, and this chapter provides a sum m ary o f these. T he theories range from
traum a theory, an individuahstic approach, to m ore hoHstic and collective approaches such as
ecological theory. T he chapter concludes w ith a description o f the theory on w hich this study is based.
Traum a theory proposes that psychological traum as experienced in Hfe predispose youth to
hom elessness, and exacerbate the experience o f hom elessness w hen it occurs (G oodm an, Saxe, &
Harvey, 1991). Risk ampHfication is a theory proposed by W hitbeck et al. (2001), and according to this
theory, children w ho experience abuse at an early age are set on a trajectory that wtU predispose them
to hom elessness as adolescents. Schweitzer and H ier (1994) argue that a m ulticausal m odel for
explaining adolescent hom elessness is m o st appropriate. They beheve that early Hfe stage deprivations
are associated w ith adolescent hom elessness. StiH other researchers argue that poverty and child
developm ent are linked, and that these are strong contributing factors to adolescent hom elessness
(H aber & T oro, 2004). Intergenerational theory links o u t o f hom e care children to increased risk o f
hom elessness at later stages in Hfe (Haber & T oro, 2004). FinaUy, ecological theory proposes that a
m ultim de o f social issues contribute to adolescent hom elessness (H aber & T oro, 2004). A detailed
description o f each theory foUows herewith.

37

Youth Hopelessness Theories

G oodm an et al. (1991) argue that psychological traum a theory is a useful perspective for
understanding the experience o f hom elessness. Psychological traum a is a set o f responses to
extraordinary, emotionally overwhelming, and personally uncontrollable Hfe events (Figley, 1985b and
V an der Kolk, 1987a, as cited in G oodm an et al., 1991), and hom elessness m ay actually exacerbate
sym ptom s o f psychological traum a am ong individuals w ho have histories o f victim ization (G oodm an
et al., 1991). N o t only may personal history have produced traum a and p u t an individual at risk for
hom elessness, b u t the event(s) o f becom ing hom eless and the condition o f hom elessness are b o th
likely to produce traum a as well. These researchers rep o rt that sym ptom s o f psychological traum a
include those grouped under po st traum atic stress disorder as well as substance abuse, self-mutilation,
intolerance o f intimacy, a general sense o f helplessness, and social disaffiHation. They also explain that
psychological traum a damages one's sense o f trust, safety, and security. In sum, traum a theory
supports the contention that significantly reducing traum a in the Hves o f children (before they becom e
hom eless) w ould have a substantial positive im pact on the prevalence o f youth hom elessness.

W hitbeck et al. (2001) propose that a risk ampHfication m odel is useful in explaining w hat
happens to youth on the streets. They argue that early abuse by caretakers increases the likelihood o f
deviant behaviours while the adolescents are on their ow n, and that participation in deviant behaviours
places adolescents at risk for street victimization. In addition, they posm late that negative chains o f
events develop m om entum over tim e and becom e difficult to change - putting youth on a trajectory
for deviant behaviours. Research has show n that patterns estabhshed by coercive/abusive caretakers

38

are particularly insidious (Finkellior & Asidgian, 1996 and Straus & GeUes, 1990, as cited in W hitbeck
et al., 2001).
Theoretically linking lifestyle exposure and hfe course developm ent w ith youth hom elessness
provides a base for understanding behaviour and risks o f adolescents w ho are hom eless. This in turn
enables relevant prevention and intervention strategies to be conceived and designed. As supported by
traum a theory, early intervention prior to hom elessness is the key.

Multicausalpsychosocial model.
This m odel argues that em otional, social and cultural deprivation is associated w ith
hom elessness in adolescents (Schweitzer & H ier, 1994). These deprivations include lack o f adequate
w arm th and affection, inadequate fostering o f interpersonal skills in the hom e, and an environm ent
w hich fails to encourage personal grow th and developm ent. Empirically, Schweitzer and H ier found
th at parents o f hom eless adolescents were perceived as less caring than parents o f housed participants,
that hom eless adolescents rated their famihes higher on confhct and lower on cohesion than did
housed participants, and that hom eless adolescents perceived their family environm ents as relatively
unstim ulating.
A ccording to this m odel o f understanding youth hom elessness, experiences o f physical and
sexual abuse are n o t nam ed specificaUy. H ow ever, the m odel clearly identifies aspects o f hom e hfe that
contribute to youth hom elessness, and the tim ing o f intervention according to this m odel is no
different than w hat has been identified through traum a and risk am phfication theories.

A ccording to H aber and T oro (2004), there is a positive correlation betw een family incom e
and child developm ent and outcom es. They cite smdies that show that parents hving in poverty have
fewer resources to devote to their children (Becker & Thom as, 1986), and that quahty o f parenting is

39

negatively affected by poverty because parenting skills are negatively affected by the stress related to
poverty (Conger & Elder, 1994). Thus children o f famihes Hving in poverty are proposed to be
disadvantaged, leading to heightened risk for hom elessness as adolescents.
H ow ever, it is well docum ented that adolescents w ho are hom eless leave hom e for variety o f
reasons, and poverty has n o t been identified as one o f these reasons. T h e U nited States G eneral
A ccounting O ffice (1989, cited in Rotheram -B orus et al., 1996) reports that lack o f a supportive and
functional family is the m ost com m on factor associated w ith youth hom elessness. Rew et al. (2001) Hst
em otional, physical, and sexual abuse, hom ophobia, and parental disapproval o f their substance use as
leading reasons. Schweitzer and H ier (1994) found that family environm ents o f hom eless adolescents
were perceived as unstim ulating and devoid o f m eaningful social, poHtical, inteUecmal, and culmral
activities. Kipke, Palmer, LaFrance, and O 'C onnor (1997) conducted a study that supports the theory
that no one parenting style o r set o f child-rearing practices are associated w ith hom elessness am ong
youth.
Y outh hom elessness has been linked to childhood abuse by a num ber o f researchers
(Rotheram -Borus et al., 1996; Janus, Brown, & W elsh, 1994; K urtz et al., 1991). Associating family
poverty w ith youth hom elessness leads to a dubious Hnk betw een poverty and childhood abuse, and
caution in form ing this association is warranted. It appears that while poverty may be the prim ary
determ inant o f youth hom elessness in developing countries (Rotheram -Borus et al., 1996), confhct
and family dysfunction prevail as leading risk factors in developed countries.
H aber and T o ro (2004) argue that family poverty m ay lead to family hom elessness, w hich in
turn may lead to inconsistent and disrupted physical environm ents. These factors may contribute to
p o o r perform ance in school, and reduce the probabihty o f fum re success in the areas o f education and
em ploym ent, and thus may provide an indirect path to adolescent hom elessness. A lthough poverty as

40

a cause o f adolescent hom elessness in N o rth Am erica is questionable, poverty has been identified as a
barrier to adolescents rem oving them selves from the street once they have becom e hom eless
(Raleigh-DuRoff, 2004). As well, poverty and lack o f econom ic opportunity have been identified as
key reasons for the high risk behaviours o f youth on the street, since street youth have Httle
opportunity to find legitimate em ploym ent (Gaetz and O 'G rady, 2002).

T he proposition o f intergenerational hom elessness theory is that o u t o f hom e care increases
risk for hom elessness later in hfe. H aber and T o ro (2004) include time spent in a shelter and other
hom eless situations in their definition o f out o f hom e care. As noted above, family poverty may place
youth at risk for future unsuccessful outcom es in the areas o f education and em ploym ent, and thus for
hom elessness as adults.
H aber and T o ro (2004) point out that a high num ber o f hom eless adults spent tim e in care o f
the state as children. T he G A O (1989 as cited in R otheram -B orus et al., 1996) estimates that about half
o f the youth w ho run away have spent tim e in foster care. O th e r adolescent hom elessness researchers
have also found that a significant p roportion o f the adolescent hom eless population arrive at
hom elessness via care o f the state, and som e refer to this group as the "doubly hom eless" (Kurtz et al.,
1991; H erm an & Susser, 1997). H ow ever, smdies designed to explore the com plex relationships
betw een o ut o f hom e care and childhood hom elessness on future hom elessness have n o t been
conducted (Haber & T oro, 2004).

Ecological theory.
H aber and T o ro (2004) describe the ecological perspective as a general fram ew ork that can
guide research, intervention, and pohcy concerning hom elessness. They recognize that our complex
social system requires broad social analysis, including a focus on individual factors, family factors, and

41

societal factors. A lthough n o t always identified as an ecological perspective, a num ber o f researchers
are focusing on broader issues including the need to address im m ediate needs o f the individuals along
w ith longer term solutions, and som e are questioning w hether to blam e the victim o r wider systemic
problem s (Novae et al., 1996).

Theoretical Trameworkfo r Present Study
U pon com pletion o f a thorough review o f the Hterature relating to adolescent hom elessness in
Canada and the U nited States (see Hterature review, chapter 2), it has becom e evident that social
scientists have, alm ost w ithout exception, exam ined the issue in isolation. T he problem has been
nam ed and described, youth have been labeled, precipitating factors have been identified, and impacts
on health and weU-being have been weU docum ented. As noted previously, a num ber o f theoretical
fram eworks for youth hom elessness have been proposed, yet for the m ost part, researchers are
continuing to examine the problem in isolation, outside o f poHtics and society. P roposed interventions
thus flow predom inantly from this perspective as weU, w ith Httle real social changes actuaUy
happening, and the problem continuing to escalate (Bridgman, 2001; H aber & T oro, 2004).
This chapter provides a description o f social pow er in our society, and links it to adolescent
hom elessness. As weU, brief explanations o f social problem s, social work, and fem inist w ork are
provided. FinaUy, social problem s, structural social w ork, and fem inist theory are discussed in relation
to adolescent w om en's hom elessness, and provide the theoretical fram ew ork o f this research.

Socialpower
A ccording to Ricks, Charlesw orth, BeUefeuUle, and Field (1999), each individual's capacity is
Hmited by both internal potential and external factors. They explain that in Canada a hierarchical
bureaucracy provides the foundation for the rules and procedures that guide and govern m em bers o f
our com m unities. Smith (1995) states that poHtical institutions are undem ocratic in alm ost every way

42

and that the great bureaucracies w ithin which we Uve and w ork are stifling, authoritarian, and
hierarchic. Because our social, health, and justice program s are im bedded in our bureaucracies, the
bureaucracies control these program s.
Ricks et al. (1999) also p oint out that bureaucratic accountability is focused on fiscal
responsibility, and therefore, long-term outcom es take a back seat in term s o f priority. As well, the
choice for com m unity m em bers is lim ited because policy m akers set expectations, and the policies are
translated into program s w ith Httle discretion. Bureaucracies have a need to be efficient, com bined
w ith a need to follow poHcy, resulting in inflexible and top dow n program s and services. Thus, pow er
over m any resides w ith a few.
T he nam re o f bureaucracies includes an "us" and "them " mentahty; they pay Httle attention to
individual needs; provide fragm ented services; are com petitive, self serving, and self protective; utiHze
reductionist thinking to produce simple solutions; and rem ove choice (Ricks et al., 1999). Sm ith (1995)
confirm s that we have developed specializations and experts, resulting in fragm ented and
com partm entaHzed services. T here is a lack o f wiU for coUaborative service deHvery because o f the
"us" and "them " mentaHty, perceived com petition for resources, and division o f labour and skiU,
creating problem s for those w orking tow ard resolution o f social problem s.

Y outh hom elessness has been identified as a social problem in Canada as weU as in other
industriaHzed countries, and the question to ask now, before we can ask how can w e eradicate youth
hom elessness, is how the problem should be framed. W e have examined youth hom elessness under an
overarching them e o f delinquency, and denied the roles played by larger systemic forces (Bronstein,
1996, as cited in Bridgm an, 2001). By continuing to fram e the problem as youth and family pathology,
we focus on deficiencies and this may acmaUy foster hom elessness and detract from wellness based

43

progtam s (Haber & T oro, 2004). T he focus on deficiencies results in a cyclical dependency on the state
as the underlying social issues cannot be articulated or addressed and may even be exacerbated by
proposed solutions. A ccording to G iroux (2003), a generation o f youth is at risk because o f our failure
to recognize inherent strengths in youth, and our failure to fram e the problem s as com m unity or
societal issues.
G iroux (2003) reports that in the U nited States, there is systematic failure to provide safety and
security for children. Children have fewer rights than alm ost any other group, and fewer ways to
p rotect their rights. T heir voices are alm ost completely absent in the developm ent o f pohcy.
H om elessness is only one o f the issues facing A m erican youth as a result o f their position in society
and their lack o f power. G iroux also reports that the poHtical attim de o f suspicion and m istrust o f
youth in the U nited States is being translated into pohcy, and youth are being crim inahzed and
persecuted at accelerated rates. F or example, extracurricular activities have been cut, and youth are
being excluded from pubhc spheres outside o f schools and forced to spend tim e in the streets. In som e
jurisdictions, youth have to subm it to drug testing in their schools, and school years have been
shortened.
W ere we to fund youth program s extravagantly, b u t m aintain the structure o f pow er over
youth w ithout reform , the problem s facing youth w ould persist. A ccording to MuUaly (1997), a state o f
welfare capitahsm exists w hen the social welfare m odel supports the strucm res o f dom ination and
oppression. Thus, by redistributing resources w ithout changing the social fabric o f society to one o f
equity or participatory democracy, the w hole area o f spirimal, emotional, and m otivational needs o f
youth cannot be m et. T herefore, social change m ust be considered if we are to genuinely im prove the
hves and futures o f youth.

44

Social change can begin at different levels. F o r example, according to K uyek (1990), affecting
political change com es dow n to confrontation w ith a pow er structure - those people w ho benefit from
the way things are now, and w ho control resources. W hen contem plating how to m ake political change
to counter social injustice at this level, it is im portant to w ork w ith an issue that generates passion, to
determ ine the ideal solution, and to assess b o th allies and adversaries. Then, a concerted push for
reform m ay occur.
R eform m ay also occur through com m unity developm ent. Advocates for com m unity
developm ent urge social change in the area o f youth hom elessness from a less grand and possibly m ore
m anageable level. F o r example, Cadell et al. (2001) propose a wellness m odel that encom passes and
advocates a vision com bining hum an spirit and healthy com m unity. W hile this m odel prom otes a
strengths based perspective and em pow erm ent, it operates w ithin our existing political and
bureaucratic system. Social change occurs over time, and like a w ave as m ore com m unities m ove
tow ard com m unity health models.

A ccording to Gusfield (1975 as cited in Cadell et al., 2001), com m unity m eans that the
m em bers have a shared sense o f belonging, a com m on history and identity, shared experience, and
em otional closeness. Ricks et al. (1999) translate the m eaning o f com m unity to be a collection o f
relationships in w hich people feel identification, belonging, sharing, and m utual caring. They argue that
healthy com m unity requires a shift from pow er and control values to learning, creativity, and harm ony
values, giving com m unity m em bers the ability to shift from the perspective o f scarcity and pessim ism
to abundance and optim ism .

45

A lim ited num ber o f innovative Canadian projects designed to build on strengths, foster a
sense o f com m unity, and em pow er hom eless youth have been piloted and evaluated (Karabanow,
1999; Bridgman, 2001). These projects dem onstrate how a holistic approach, com bined w ith a
com m itm ent to perceive hom eless youth as part o f the solution rather than the problem can have a
dram atic im pact on the lives o f hom eless youth in the com m unity, and on society's perception o f the
problem .

Social w ork is based on the values o f hum anism , egalitarianism, respect, self-determ ination,
and acceptance (MuUaly, 1997). As well, MuUaly (1997) states that the foundations o f social w ork
inherently include a belief in participatory democracy, a system where societal decisions drive
econom ic decisions, and a social welfare system that em phasizes equality, solidarity, and community.
H ow ever, since social w ork is primarily carried out in agencies m anaged by or heavily dependent upon
the state (McKay, 1999), social w orkers are p u t in a difficult position. By m eeting the dem ands o f the
state, w hich is also the em ployer and program funder, social workers may be in conflict w ith the values
and goals o f their profession.
M ainstream social w ork practice tends to focus on individuals as opposed to environm ents
(Mckay, 1999), supporting the status quo. It follows that the m ajority o f the research and interventions
designed to address the problem o f youth hom elessness have focused on the individuals experiencing
hom elessness, and their families, as opposed to com m unity or society. O n the other hand, progressive
practitioners recognize that social problem s are ro o ted in the social order and inequities in societal
structures (McKay, 1999), and therefore, attem pting to rehabilitate people experiencing problem s,
instead o f changing the environm ents, is likely going to be ineffective. P roponents for progressive
social w ork practice advocate for transform ative change tow ard a fairer society. Canadian efforts to

46

addtess youth hom elessness have focused on the individual for the m ost p art (Bridgman, 2001), yet
Canadian youth hom elessness is still on the rise (Krause et al., 2001; K arabanow , 2002), which suggests
that another approach, such as a societal change perspective, m ay be warranted.
T he position o f structural social w ork theory is to provide im m ediate relief on one level, and
longer term institutional or structural change on another level (MuUaly, 1997). Social workers
practicing under this theory strive to aUeviate the negative effects o f an exploitative social order, and to
transform the social structures that cause the negative effects. Structural social w orkers may stiU be
caught in a dUemma o f how to best m eet the needs o f individuals and com m unities w ithin the
param eters o f pohcy and fiscal restraint.

In m any studies on hom elessness there is a distinct lack o f fem inist perspective. Such absence
is lam entable. Fem inist social w ork practice is focused on elirninating dom ination, subordination,
exploitation, and oppression o f w om en (H einonen & Spearm an, 2001). CampbeU and Schram (1995)
state that w om en's lives and experiences have n o t been adequately captured o r addressed by
m ainstream science, and that the dom inant group's view has been im posed on everyone, including
w om en. They explain that science and its practice uphold the values and experiences o f white m iddle
class males and that the values and experiences o f w om en have n o t been systematicaUy examined.
H ow ever, in regard to hom elessness, there are clear differences betw een w om en's and m en's
experiences (Harm an, 1992). By studying hom elessness through a fem inist lens, w om en's experiences
and realities may be vaUdated, and fem inist social action m ay begin (H einonen & Spearman, 2001).
Social action should begin through consciousness raising, w hich aUows w om en to recognize that the
personal is political and to address societal inequities (H einonen & Spearm an, 2001).

47

T he goal o f fem inist scholarship is to im prove the status o f w om en (Eichler, 1997). Eichler
explains that fem inist research is a perspective, n o t a m ethod. In fact, there is no fem inist m ethodology
per se. Fem inist research is an inclusive process, providing voices to oppressed w om en; it is subjective;
it is nonhierarchical; its theory is grounded in experience; and it aims to create social change.

A dolescent hom eless w om en are triply disadvantaged in our society. They are am ong Canada's
hom eless population, they are youth, and they are female. I f they are o f a visible m inority group, their
position is disadvantaged further. T heir position in society, their lack o f pow er, and their lack o f voice
have am assed into a lack o f research on issues that pertain specifically to them , and a lack o f program s
designed specifically for them . W hile adult w om en have attained recognition that male dom inated
research and program s do n o t fit their needs, adolescent w om en's hom elessness research rem ains
sparse. Vahdation o f w om en's experiences has becom e a key com ponent o f fem inist research, yet for
Canadian adolescent hom eless w om en, b o th validation and research are alm ost nonexistent.
T he driving purpose o f this research is to ascertain w hat adolescent w om en w ho have been
hom eless in W hitehorse need from our com m unity. A strong consideration o f this research
m ethodology is to approach the problem o f adolescent w om en's hom elessness from the perspective
that it is n o t the youth that are at the ro o t o f the problem , b u t their environm ents. By being em pathie
and open to their explanations, the researcher enables the participants to avoid feeling blam ed, to feel
that they are heard, and to have an opportunity to be creative in stating their needs and suggestions.
This research is also intended to provide vahdation o f the experiences o f adolescent w om en w ho have
been hom eless in W hitehorse, and to enable adolescent w om en to have active voices in describing
their experiences, their needs, and in generating solutions in their com m unity. T he inform ation

48

provided by the young w om en is intended to be used to advocate for social change, w hether it is in the
form o f consciousness raising, com m unity developm ent, or pohtical action.

Theoryfor present research.
T he assum ption that youth in our society, particularly female youth, are w ithout pow er is a
strong underpinning o f this research. T he focus on bureaucratic efficiencies and fiscal responsibihties,
w hich have been the driving forces about w hether and how our com m unity should act, is a serious
concern. A desire to rem ove the focus from the individual, and the family, and redirect it to society and
the systematic processes that provide an environm ent that allows youth hom elessness to occur guides
this research as well. T h e goal o f m oving tow ard transform ation through social action, by facilitating a
focus on wellness as opposed to pathology is part o f the fram ew ork guiding this research. T he
fram ew ork also incorporates a high regard for the value in developing a healthy com m unity, and a
strong desire to facihtate social change through healthy com m unity. Overall, the fram ew ork for this
research recognizes and em braces fem inist theory, strucm ral social w ork theory, and a wellness
approach.

49

Chapter 4 Y outh Homelessness in Context
W hile research on adolescent hom elessness in N o rth Am erica is becom ing m ore prohfic, it is
guided by a num ber o f theoretical approaches, as described in C hapter 3. T he context in w hich the
theoretical fram eworks exist is perhaps as im portant in understanding and addressing youth
hom elessness as the fram eworks themselves. F o r example, how pervasive the issues are in global,
regional, and jurisdictional contexts can have im phcations o n how the issues are addressed w ithin
different regions and jurisdictions. U nderstanding how the issues are perceived on various levels, how
m uch support is provided to each com m unity and country, and w hat the obhgations o f each o f these
jurisdictions are, are im portant factors in w hether or n o t the issue is given priority, how it is addressed,
and by w hom . This chapter provides an overview o f youth hom elessness on regional, national, and
global levels.

U N Convention
O n N ovem ber 20,1989, the U nited N ations adopted a docum ent entided the U nited N ations
C onvention on the Rights o f the Child w hich spells o u t the rights o f children and youth worldwide
(Canadian C hildren’s Rights Council rep o rt on Canada’s N ational Child Day, 2004). This C onvention
outlines responsibihties o f governm ents, famihes, and caregivers, in addition to rights o f children.
Each child’s right to supportive family, housing, and education are specifically identified. T h e U nited
States and Somaha are the only countries in the w orld that have n o t yet ratified this C onvention, and
the U nited States has indicated that it does n o t have any intention o f doing so.

UN Convention in Canada
Canada ratified the C onvention in 1991 (M cGregor, 2005). H ow ever, the developm ent o f a
legal fram ew ork that w ould m eet the obhgations o f the C onvention is stiU ongoing. T he federal

50

governm ent was planning to m eet w ith territorial and provincial governm ents to discuss ways to fulfill
the C onvention in late A pril 2005, however, the outcom es o f these meetings are currently unknow n.
Canada’s com m itm ent to the C onvention has been questionable, according to Senator
A ndreychuk, the Chair o f the Standing Senate C om m ittee on H um an Rights, as there is no one single
enabling piece o f legislation that puts it into law (The Standing Senate Com m ittee on H um an Rights,
2005, February 14). In fact, a recent Suprem e C ourt ruling upholds the use o f “reasonable force”
against children, thus perm itting capital punishm ent (M cGregor, 2005). Peter D udding, the Executive
D irector o f the Canadian Child W elfare League o f Canada, reports that the num ber o f children and
youth entering the pubhc foster care system increased by 50 percent betw een 1996 and 2003 (The
Standing Senate Com m ittee on H um an Rights, 2005, February 14). D udding states that this is an
indication o f the state o f well-being o f children in Canada, and o f the nature o f Canada’s prevention
program s.
O n D ecem ber 13, 2004, the Senate o f Canada Standing Com m ittee on H um an Rights
com m enced an investigation process on Canada's international obhgations on the rights and freedom s
o f children (The Standing Senate C om m ittee on H um an Rights, 2004, N ovem ber 18). T h e focus o f
this investigation has been directed to the children o f other countries. T h e Canadian Children's Rights
Council (2004) states that an investigation o f the rights o f Canada's children w ould be em barrassing as
C anadian governm ents have failed to provide for the rights o f Canadian children.
T he G overnm ent o f Canada reports to have taken a leading role at the W orld Sum m it F or
Children in 1990, and claim s that by ratifying the C onvention, Canada has affirm ed the inherent
dignity, equality, and inalienable rights o f all people, including children. (A Canada Fit for Children,
2004). Canada has developed a national action plan for children (“Brighter Futures”), as well as
designated a N ational Child Day. T he N ational C hildren’s A genda has been developed and provides a

51

vision for prom oting the best starts in life for Canadian children, and the necessary opportunities to
reach their full potential. T he G overnm ent o f Canada claims that “ for the m ost part, children in
Canada are doing well.” (A Canada Fit for Children, 2004). This appears to fly in the face o f w hat
critics have described as increasing child poverty and deteriorating social program s resulting in an
increase o f children and youth in care o f the state.

T here are an estim ated 30 to 170 million hom eless adolescents worldwide (Farrow et al., 1992
cited in Raleigh-DuRoff, 2004). Panter-Brick (2002) reports that U N IC E F (cited in Cam pos, 1994)
estimates that there are 100 million youth growing up in the streets worldwide. Estim ating the num ber
o f hom eless youth, and classifying or categorizing street youth is a challenge due to the fluidity o f the
youth, and the heterogeneous nature o f the populations (Panter-Brick, 2002).
Street children are highly visible in urban centers worldwide, and have begun to be considered
only one group o f p o o r children w ho are considered high risk (Panter-Brick ,2002). A lthough in
w estern countries children tend to be on the street because o f a lack o f a suitable family or family
conflict, in m any developing countries, m any children on the streets are w orking to support famihes
(Panter-Brick, 2002). H ow ever, this is n o t always the case, as a notable exception may be street
children o f Africa w ho are hom eless because they are orphans (Rotheram -Borus et al. 1996). In Brazil,
m any children are hom eless due to the poverty o f their famihes, and the parents are unable to support
them (R otheram -Botus et al., 1996). In these cases, hom elessness is a way o f hfe (Rotheram -Borus et
al., 1996) as opposed to a tem porary state as it is hoped to be for hom eless youth in Canada (Higgitt et
al., 2003).
A ccording to H aber and T o ro (2004), there have been only a few attem pts to com pare
hom elessness across nations. Results o f one study show that hfetime prevalence o f hteral

52

hom elessness was the highest in the U nited States and the U nited K ingdom , w ith lower rates in four
other E uropean countries (Toro et al., 2004, cited in H aber & T oro, 2004).
In prosperous countries worldwide, hom elessness in general is a concern that continues to
plague the poor. Bitoun (1999) reports that in France for example, there are an estim ated 1 miUion
hom eless people (out o f a total population o f 60 imllion) despite the fact that the gross national
p ro d u ct has increased by 50 percent, and average incom e has increased by over 33 per cent in the past
tw enty years. Share International (“H om eless in H olland” 1999, June) also reports that although
H olland is considered one o f the m o st affluent nations o f the w orld, the num ber o f hom eless has been
estim ated at 40,000, out o f a total population o f 15.5 million. In Spain, there are 273,000 hom eless out
o f a total population o f 39.6 million, b u t ironically, som e 15 percent o f existing housing is em pty (Font,

1998).
Hargrave (1999) reports that hom elessness in Canada is estim ated at 100,000 to 250,000 out o f
a total population o f 28 miUion. As Canadian youth hom elessness alone has been estim ated at 150,000
in som e other studies (Radford et al., 1989, and C aputo et al., 1997, cited in H iggitt et al., 2003), an
estim ate o f 100,000 to 250,000 for the total num ber o f hom eless appears low.

The Canadian North
K rause et al. (2001) rep o rt that there is very lim ited inform ation in term s o f num bers o f
adolescent hom eless, and their characteristics, in the Canadian north. These researchers found that
although the invisible hom eless predom inate, youth w ho are absolutely hom eless have been identified
as well. In spite o f this, until recently there were no youth shelters in the north.
Yellowknife began a new drop in program for youth betw een the ages o f 13 and 18 years in July
2003, funded through Yellowknife H ealth and Social Services ("O vernight weekend.. 2 0 0 3 , July
31). This program was open weekends from m idnight until 7:30 a.m. to provide youth w ith a safe

53

haven, b u t did n o t provide beds. Unfortunately, due to funding issues, the shelter was forced to close.
O n N ovem ber 1, 2005, the Side D o o r Y outh Centre opened a new shelter called T he Living R oom (R.
Peters, personal com m unication, N ovem ber 7,2005). Y outh are able to access emergency shelter from
m idnight until 8:00 am on any night o f the w eek until at least M arch 31, 2006 w hen the current funding
arrangem ent concludes.
Tw o youth shelters opened up in the n o rth in 2004. CBC N o rth (“Teen shelter . . . ”, 2004,
January 9) reported that a five-bed shelter for people aged 16-25 had opened in Iqaluit, the capital city
o f N unavut, the preceding August. H ow ever, after only five m onths o f operation, its existence was
jeopardized due to lack o f funding. In 2005, b o th the hom eless shelter and hom e for troubled youth,
while sfiH in operation, are also still struggling financially. Younger-Lewis (2005) reports that the
budget crunch has never been so bad, that the lUifiit Society, w hich runs the shelter, is struggling to pay
staff wages, and that volunteers are covering expenses o ut o f their ow n pockets. T he territorial
governm ent is expected to provide enough funding to support local agencies to leverage funds from
federal program s, b u t are n o t com m itted to funding a shelter.
K irstinsdottir (2004) o f the Y ukon N ew s reports that in W hitehorse, the Y outh o f Today
Society piloted a six m o n th youth hom elessness project during the w inter o f 2004. A ccording to
K irstinsdottir the shelter provided hom es for 18 people betw een the ages o f 18 and 25 years. H ow ever,
at the conclusion o f the six m o n th project, the shelter was unable to secure funding from either the
federal or territorial governm ents to keep the shelter in operation. G ehm air et al. (2004) rep o rt that the
Blue Feather H ousing Program closed in the spring o f 2004 due to lack o f funding even though $1
million had been com m itted to Y ukon hom elessness through national initiatives.
A ccording to N ovae et al. (2002), in w hich the writers rep o rt on young w om en's hom elessness
in Yellowknife, young n orthern hom eless w om en couch surf, stay in coffee shops at night, sleep over

54

w atm grates, in stairwells, and in bank m achine entryways, and trade sex for shelter. Aboriginal youth
are over represented in this hom eless population. D ue to the northern location o f Yellowknife, and its
isolation, conditions are different than those in the south. N o t only are w eather conditions m ore
extrem e, it is com m on for houses to have no plum bing or heat, for one ro o m dwellings to house a
m ultitude o f people, for shacks to provide housing on the outskirts o f tow n, and for extremely high
rents.
BeU (2004) reports that hom elessness in N unavut rem ains hidden in the stairwells and
overcrow ded hom es. This is verified by the N ational H ousing Research C om m ittee (NHRC) (2002)
w hich states that N unavut has the highest average num ber o f people per dwelling, w ith the average
n um ber o f people per room being 0.84, while the Canadian average is 0.04. T o the hom eless in the
C anadian territories, sleeping outdoors is n o t an option (BeU, 2004), and m any o f the hom eless crow d
in w ith relatives w here it is n o t uncom m on for 10 to 15 people to share a smaU hom e or apartm ent.
BeU claims that hundreds o f people are on waiting Usts for pubUc housing in m o st com m unities and
m any m ore do n o t even p u t their nam es on the Ust because the waiting tim e is too long. As N unavut
has one o f the highest b irth rates and youngest populations in Canada, the housing problem is
expected to get w orse (BeU, 2004). BeU reports that ren t on a bachelor apartm ent ranges from $1500 $2000 per m onth.
T h e N H R C (2002) confirm s that hom elessness in the n o rth is different than in the south.
Living in the n o rth m eans that the tem peratures are colder, and the hom eless population is less visible
as they crow d into dwellings. C onstruction costs are higher, and buUdings tend to be smaUer, w ith less
Uvable space. As weU, com m unities tend to be isolated, w ith large centres, w here m ore services are
available, being a significant distance away from smaUer comm unities.

55

W hitehotse is a relatively large northern city, w ith a population o f just over 20,000 people. It is
located in the Y ukon Territory w here there are thirteen rural com m unities outside o f W hitehorse, one
o f w hich is accessible only by airplane during spring, sum m er, and fall. T he population o f the entire
territory is approxim ately 32,000. O ne o f the closest large Canadian cities is E d m o n to n , a 24-hour
drive away. Physical isolation makes W hitehorse unique w hen com pared to southern (south o f 60*
parallel) com m unities, including those in the northern areas o f British Colum bia and Alberta. Y outh in
W hitehorse have lim ited ability to leave the region, as other urban areas are such a long distance away.
T he housing m arket in W hitehorse has been on an upw ard trend for the past three years, w ith
availability declining, and prices rising. A C H O N FM news broadcast (July 11, 2005) reports that
betw een the last quarter o f 2004 and the end o f the first quarter in 2005, the average cost o f a house in
W hitehorse increased by $20,000. T he average cost o f a country residential hom e increased by $50,000
over the same period. A nd, while W hitehorse has a public transit system, it has lim ited hours o f
operation (i.e. the only evening service is on Fridays, and there is no service on Sundays) and regular
b u t infrequent schedules. T hus transportation from the dow ntow n area is lim ited outside o f business
hours. Lack o f pubhc transportation is also a significant problem for youth, often resulting in youth
being sm ck in unsafe places overnight (Finton & K ram er, 2005).

Whitehorse Kej Informant Reports
In order to gauge the extent o f hom elessness from a professional p o in t o f view, two
W hitehorse service providers in the area o f youth services were interviewed on July 6, 2005. O ne
service provider has extensive experience w orking in the area o f youth outreach in W hitehorse, and the
other w orks in the area o f youth advocacy and is director o f an agency that supports youth led projects.
Specific questions asked o f the service providers are Hsted in A ppendix B. T he purpose o f these

56

interviews was to obtain current inform ation about local services available for youth, and to assess
current trends o r issues related to youth hom elessness.
T he services available to hom eless youth in W hitehorse, as verified by service providers
(Interview #1 and Interview # 2 , July 6, 2005) w ho w ork with hom eless youth in W hitehorse, include
the adult shelter; soup kitchens; tw o youth centers (with daytime and evening hours); youth outreach
(advocacy, support, and referrals); and the N o Fixed A ddress O utreach V an (for food, condom s, first
aid, and referrals). T he services available depend on the age o f the youth, because the com m unity has
an array o f services geared tow ard young children, families, and adults, b u t there is a significant gap for
those aged 16 to 19 years.
B oth service providers consulted stated that m any youth are couch surfing at a young age in
places that are unsafe. O n e service provider noted that the youth that she encounters w ho are couch
surfing appear to be getting younger, and m any are com ing from the foster care system. She also
reports that we are “band aiding” individual youth, b u t m ore keep com ing and falling through the
cracks.
W ith regard to W hitehorse as a unique and northern com m unity, the second service provider
reports that relative hom eless is very high in com parison to absolute hom elessness because o f seasonal
conditions. A lthough m any hom eless youth are invisible, and are n o t acmaUy sleeping in doorways and
under bridges, they are still unsafe.

Federal Fesponsibilitj
T he N ational H om eless Initiative (N H I) (G overnm ent o f Canada, n.d.) is the prim ary focus o f
Canada’s federal response to the growing Canadian hom elessness crisis. T h e N H I was originally a
three year plan designed to support com m unities to address hom elessness issues through b o th short
term and long term solutions and prevention measures. It was designed to support a hoHstic approach

57

to the problem , by focusing on collaborations betw een different governm ent levels, com m unity
agencies, and those at risk. T he G overnm ent o f Canada has extended the N H I to continue for another
three years, ending in 2006. T he purposes o f the extension (called Phase II) were to allow
com m unities to increase supports for hom eless populations and encourage and strengthen
partnerships and collaboration betw een stakeholders. Betw een 1999 and 2004, over 2900 projects
across Canada were undertaken, funded wholly or in part by the various com ponents o f the N H I.
T h e N ational Secretariat on Hom elessness (NSH) in collaboration w ith H um an Resources and
Skills D evelopm ent Canada developed and im plem ented a Prom ising A pproaches Project
(G overnm ent o f Canada, n.d.). In 2005, a call for proposals for Prom ising A pproaches Project-Phase
II w ent out. T he purpose o f Phase O n e was to identify and collect inform ation on effective local
program s in the areas o f transitional and supportive housing, and to dissem inate the inform ation. O ne
W hitehorse project. O ptions for Independence (OFI), a supported housing initiative for individuals
living w ith intellectual disabilities, was one o f the eight projects selected for Phase 1 o f the Prom ising
A pproaches Project. O th er initiatives o f the N H I include the First N ational Research C onference on
H om elessness, in collaboration w ith Y ork University; Strategies for Gaining C om m unity A cceptance
W orkshop and Train the Trainer project, in collaboration w ith CM HC, N SH , and Skills D evelopm ent
Canada (SDC); and the production o f a web guide to support building strength in organizations, and
providing strategies for supporting individuals and families w ho are at risk for becom ing, or w ho are,
hom eless (G overnm ent o f Canada, n.d.).
A lthough the federal governm ent has com m itted to addressing hom elessness through the
N H I and the N SH , in som e aspects, the com m itm ent appears to be sorely lacking, giving a m ixed
m essage o f our governm ent’s sincerity. T he federal governm ent claims that phase one o f the N H I
enabled com m unities to focus on the m ost pressing and urgent needs o f their hom eless populations.

58

investing primarily in emergency shelters, establishing new ones, and renovating and upgrading others
(G overnm ent o f Canada, n.d.). H ow ever, as n o ted previously the youth emergency shelter services
available throughout the n o rth are sketchy and highly unstable.
T hrough the N H I (G overnm ent o f Canada, n.d.), a num ber o f W hitehorse services received
funding from the federal governm ent. T he Salvation A rm y received $343,569 for support services,
Y ukon Family Services A ssociation received $304,315 for su p p o rt services, the Fetal A lcohol Society
and O ptions for Independence Society received $300,000 and $112,151 respectively for capacity
building, support services, and pubhc awareness. W here the funding to ensure sustainabüity o f any o f
these projects wiU com e from at the conclusion o f the federal project appears uncertain, and increasing
com m unity services to provide emergency shelter for youth w ould be yet an additional expense.
O n another front, the federal governm ent claims to be a w orld leader in advocating for the
rights o f children. Carol Bellamy, the Executive D irector o f U N IC E F , states that “Canada continues
to be an effective and long-tim e voice for children and their rights in the international arena” (press
release from the G overnm ent o f Canada, “A Canada Fit for Children” , 2004, May 10). How ever, in
reahty the Canadian Children’s Rights Council has a different perspective. They p o in t out, for example,
that the G overnm ent o f Canada comm itted to eliminating child poverty in Canada by the year 2000,
and this has yet to happen. In fact, over 400,000 m ore Canadian children Hve in poverty now than in
1989 (Canadian Children’s Rights Council rep o rt on C anada’s N ational Child Day). A ccording to the
U nited N ation’s C onvention, all children have the right to a supportive family, to provision o f
adequate food, clothes, housing, and education.
T he Caledon Instim te for Social Pohcy (2000, O ctober) reports that Canada has a N ational
Strategy on C om m unity Safety and Crime Prevention w hich has an annual budget o f $32 m ilhon and is
intended to reduce crim e and victim ization by addressing their ro o t causes though a social

59

developm ent approacli. T h e strategy focuses particularly on children and youth, Aboriginal people,
and w om en and girls. T he social developm ent approach is intended to rem ove personal, social, and
econom ic factors that lead to crime a n d /o r victim ization. It appears contradictory that at one level,
Canadians are approaching youth social issues from a social developm ent perspective, and at another
level, are approaching it from a criminal and individualistic angle.
Criminalization o f behaviour associated w ith hom elessness represents a perspective o f
blam ing the victim. As noted in the theoretical fram ew ork chapter, and in the literature review, youth
tend to be hom eless because o f a lack o f other acceptable solutions, and for many, hom elessness
actually is a solution. O ntario im plem ented a Safe Streets A ct in 2000, and in British Colum bia, a Safe
Streets A ct has been proposed and has attained a high level o f support (Von, 2004). T he Safe Streets
legislation makes m any form s o f solicitation illegal under the criminal code (Von, 2004). Thus, while
the federal governm ent is supporting social program s to address youth hom elessness, at some
provincial and com m unity levels, we are blam ing the youth for being on the street and have
crim inalized their survival strategies. As Peter D udding, the Executive D irector o f the Child W elfare
League, points out, the federal governm ent m ust w ork in partnership w ith the provinces and
territories, m unicipal governm ents, civil society organizations, com m unity m em bers, and the private
sector to provide political leadership in relation to children and youth (Standing Senate C om m ittee on
H um an Rights, 2005, February 14). D udding recom m ends, am ong other things, that a child and youth
secretariat w ithin the federal governm ent, and a Canada fit for children com m ission, be estabUshed.

A t a local level, in W hitehorse services for hom eless youth are piecemeal. A ccording to one
service provider (personal com m unication, July 6, 2005), youth hom elessness in W hitehorse is over
studied, and our com m unity has n o t begun to really address the problem at all. This service provider

60

states th at we have a couple o f stopgap m easutes that ate very useful, b u t we lack a continuum . For
example, outreach workers can advocate for youth, b u t there is now here to refer them to, now here safe
to send them for the night. A nother service provider (personal com m unication, July 6,2005) notes that
w e have com m itm ent am ong com m unity w orkers w ho w ork w ith youth, and we have som e services,
b u t we are n o t looking at kids as w hole people. W e appear to be unable to m obilize to deal w ith youth
as holistic persons.
A ccording to a youth outreach w orker w ith Y ukon Family Services A ssociation (YFSA)
(Substance A buse Prevention C oahtion M eeting, July 27, 2005) the federal funding for the Y outh
O utreach Program , one o f the few existing prim ary program s o f W hitehorse’s hom eless youth service
continuum , was scheduled to term inate on M arch 31, 2006. T he program received a reprieve, however,
and funding was extended for another full year. A lthough the positions have been functioning for over
four years, funding has always been on a project or term basis. T he Y outh O utreach Program provides
the only outreach services for hom eless adolescents, however, they have been unsuccessful in securing
perm anent funding. T he youth outreach w orker states that if ongoing funding is n o t secured by
D ecem ber 2005, YFSA will com m ence w ith winding dow n the program . Should this occur,
W hitehorse’s only direct services for hom eless youth wiH be the tw o youth centers. As noted in the
report. Y outh Profile T o ro n to /Y o rk Service DeUvery Sector (G overnm ent o f Canada, 2003), research
w ith hom eless youth in T o ro n to indicates that street youth prefer to use program s targeted specifically
to them , and outreach services targeted to street youth provide critical links to support services such as
drop-ins and shelters. T hus w ithout the youth outreach w orkers, W hitehorse hom eless youth will be
disconnected from m ainstream society and services to an even greater extent than they are currendy.
Some considered the youth shelter pilot project run by the Y outh o f Today Society in 2004 for
six m onths a success, however, requests for subsequent funding were unsuccessful (Kristinsdottir,

61

2004). T he com m unity has heen w ithout an emergency, transitional, or long term youth shelter since
that one closed in the spring o f 2004.

A lthough quantitative youth hom elessness research in the no rth is scarce, it is evident that
youth hom elessness is a significant problem and that youth w ho are hom eless, or at risk o f
hom elessness, are in need. Service providers at the street level have clearly identified that a significant
n um ber o f youth are at risk o f hom elessness, and at risk o f all the perils that accom pany that condition.
T h e n orthern environm ent im pacts youth hom elessness in a num ber o f ways, including a cold climate
w ith extrem e w eather, isolation, and a lack o f services for youth because o f small population sizes in
com m unities. As well, hom elessness tends to be hidden. Y outh rely heavily on their social netw orks to
avoid absolute hom elessness, w hich often results in high risk situations and also allows the problem to
persist unnoticed by many.
W hile the federal governm ent has recognized that youth hom elessness is a significant problem
across the country through its recent initiatives, political leadership in addressing youth hom elessness
consistentiy is lacking. In July 2004, the Secretary o f State for Children and Y outh position was
elim inated entirely, and there is no dedicated m inister w ho is direcfiy responsible for children and
youth at the Cabinet level (Dudding, 2005). Legislation to pro tect the rights o f children is lacking at all
levels, and financial com m itm ents continue to be focused on projects, rather than on ongoing services.
Program s across the country are piecemeal, and even w ithin jurisdictions, there is high inconsistency in
if, and how , youth hom elessness is addressed. Overall, w hile Canada proclaim s to support the U N ’s
C onvention on the Rights o f the Child, Canada has yet to provide a legal fram ew ork or accountability
system to actually protect the rights o f Canadian children (M cGregor, 2005), leading m any to w onder
how com m itted to the U N C onvention Canada acmally is.

62

Chapter 5 M ethodology
^search Goals
T h e goal o f this study is to obtain in-depth inform ation on potential solutions to adolescent
w om en's hom eless from the perspective o f adolescent hom eless w om en w ho are, o r have been,
hom eless in W hitehorse. T he research purpose is to understand, rather than predict. Y oung w om en
have n o t been specifically consulted on their experiences o f hom elessness, their experiences utilizing
existing services, or their specific challenges and concerns in m o st o f the existing research. Ultimately,
this research is intended to lead to the generation o f pohcy that may be useful for local com m unity
interventions in relation to adolescent w om en's hom elessness. F o r example, should the participants
consistentiy identify an aversion to using a shelter that is primarily utihzed by adult m en, it m ay be
theorized that this is n o t an effective intervention for adolescent w om en, and other potential
interventions may need to be considered.

Design
Quahtative m ethodology was selected for this research because o f the characteristics o f the
population involved in the study and because o f the nature o f the goal o f the smdy. In depth
inform ation pertaining to the experiences o f adolescent hom eless w om en was sought, and it is
generally accepted that unstructured, in-depth interviews and focus groups are suitable for this
purpose. Ayers (2003) states that a notable strength o f qualitative research is its ability to illuminate the
particulars o f hum an experience in the context o f a com m on circum stance o r event. U nderstanding
the context o f each young w om an's experience and narrative is essential to understanding the true
m eaning o f her w ords, and qualitative research may be used in such a way as to preserve the integrity o f
the context (T hom pson & Barret, 1997).

63

A n analysis o f the Htetature on adolescent hom eless reveals that hom elessness for youth has a
m yriad o f causes, precipitating factors, and im pacts, and that there are as m any possible com binations
o f potential solutions as there are hom eless individuals. N o one has agreed u p o n the best, m ost
cost-effective m eth o d o f addressing the issue. This is reflected in the (dis)connectedness and array o f
services offered in com m unities across the country. As well, we have hardly begun to consult the best
authority on the issues - the hom eless adolescent w om en themselves. They are the ultim ate experts on
their ow n experiences, and they are a heterogeneous population that has experienced a com m on event.
T hus, b o th the similarities and the differences in their experiences, needs, and p roposed solutions are
o f interest.
This research was a cross-sectional, quahtative study, and involved four one-on-one flexibly
structured (or semi structured) interviews and one focus group consisting o f six individuals. T he
individual interviews were conducted in order to address the concern that participation in a group
environm ent (focus group) may lim it or inhibit the participants from discussing particular issues. T he
focus group is beneficial as interaction betw een participants is know n to have the potential to produce
a valuable kind o f data and can be b o th consciousness raising and em pow ering for b o th participants
and researcher (Montell, 2001).

Sampling the adolescent hom eless population is challenging, as docum ented by a num ber o f
researchers (PoUio et al., 2000; Rew et al., 2001). F o r this study, sampling was purposive, w ith specific
criteria, so that the participant responses w ould provide as m uch insight as possible into the research
question. This study’s sample is non-representative and small because o f the difficulty in locating
participants w ho m eet the criteria.
T h e quahfying criteria for individuals to be invited to participate in this study were:

64

•

the individuals had expehence(s) o f self defined hom elessness w hen they w ere betw een the
ages o f 13 and 18 years;

•

they were o f female gender;

•

they were at least 16 years o f age at the tim e o f the study; and

•

they resided in W hitehorse at the tim e o f hom elessness.

A lthough the criteria describe a hom ogenous population, each participant represents an atypical
case and the individuals are thus expected to dem onstrate variance in their life experiences and
construction o f reality. In order to ensure a sample that consisted o f enough participants and relevant
data to establish patterns or theories, snowball sampling was used to locate individuals, and b o th
current and retrospective data was sought. T he first participant identified was asked to refer others
w ho m ay have similar experiences to theirs to the researcher's contact num ber.
Prior to identifying specific participants for this study, a proposed strategy was reviewed by the
R esearch Ethics B oard o f UN BC. U p o n approval o f the process from the Research Ethics B oard in
2003 (Appendix C), participants were sought through advertising and w ord o f m outh. Posters (see
A ppendix D) w ere posted at the W hitehorse Y outh Centre, the Victoria Faulkner W om en's Centre,
and at the Bringing Y outh T ow ard Equality (BYTE) office. A small rem uneration was offered bo th as
incentive for participation in the study (if the individual m et the participant criteria), and as a
dem onstration o f respect for the tim e the researcher requested each participant give to the study.
Locating participants w ho m et the established criteria for the study proved to be challenging.
H ow ever, a staff m em ber o f the Bringing Y outh T ow ard Equality (BYTE) office to o k an interest and
assisted in locating one participant for an individual interview, and two participants for the focus
group. Tw o other participants saw the posters at the youth center and B Y TE office and contacted the
researcher direcfiy. O ne other participant was located through personal contacts.

65

T he sample size was small, and lent itself to in depth semi stm ctured interviews, w hich were
conducted in July 2003. F our individual interviews and one six-person focus group provided rich
contextual inform ation for the benefit o f understanding how these w om en survived hom elessness in
W hitehorse, accessed services, and addressed the challenges o f being hom eless. H ow ever, due to the
small sample size, generalizations to the general population need to be m ade w ith caution.

Individual Interviews and Focus Group
Four prospective participants w ere invited to participate in individual interviews that were
audio taped, and lasted betw een 30 and 90 m inutes. E ach o f the young w om en w ho w ere interviewed
individually were invited to participate in a focus group. As well, two additional participants were
invited to participate in the focus group. T hus six young w om en w ho had been hom eless betw een the
ages o f 13 and 18 participated in a focus group w hich was video taped. T h e focus group was o f a
tw o-hour duration, and was held after hours at the Victoria Faulkner W om en's Centre.

Kesearch Questions
T he nam re o f the individual interviews was sem i-structured, and pre-planned questions were
open ended. Q uestions were designed and w orded to facilitate the expression o f the participants'
personal experiences and thoughts, in the context o f each young w om an's construction o f reahty. For
example, the study included questions such as (refer to A ppendix E for a com plete hst o f questions):
•

"in your w ords, w hat does hom elessness mean?",

•

"how do you see yourself in relation to family and com m unity; are you connected?",

•

"what do you envision your future to be like?",

•

"based on your experiences, w hat can be done to help hom eless young wom en?".

66

T h e interview questions were planned to elicit rich, contextual responses and to provide a
focus for the young w om en's narratives. T he researcher intended the questions to be used w ith
flexibihty and to enable each participant to focus on areas o f particular relevance to her.

T he researcher transcribed the data verbatim from the interview tapes and the focus group
video, and began the official process o f data analysis w ith an im m ersion in the transcripts. In reviewing
the transcripts, the researcher was able to examine the data in its original context. T hroughout this
process, the researcher docum ented all intuitions, interpretations, and them es, and n o ted relevant
phenom ena and categories for further analysis.
Tw o m atrices were developed for the purpose o f locating and docum enting all data that related
to services. O ne m atrix was used for the individual interviews, and the other for the focus group. T he
purpose o f utihzing the m atrices was to identify any responses the participants had m ade that were
com m on across cases, and to identify w here there were differences. T he researcher ensured that b o th
within-case and across-case com parisons were m ade throughout, as b o th types o f com parison are
necessary to achieve person-specific inform ation and to form broader generahzations (Ayres,
D avanough, & Knafl, 2003).
T h e data was coded according to categories and then them es. T h e them es were inductively
derived, based on inform ation provided by the respondents. H ow ever, based on the Hteramre review,
the researcher was aware o f som e areas that w ould likely surface. Inform ation obtained from
interviews and the focus group was com pared to assess w hether there was a difference in the type o f
data obtained from each m ethod. D ata was attributed to respective participants (whose identity is not
revealed).

67

T he them es and patterns that em erged were used to link the data together, and to develop
understanding o f adolescent w om en's hom elessness in W hitehorse. W hile the inform ation was
reduced and taken o ut o f context through coding, direct quotes from the participants were linked to
each o f the categories a n d /o r them es for the purpose o f m aintaining the richness and context o f the
narratives. In addition, sub them es were described as a further effort to m aintain the richness o f the
individual interviews (Ayers et al., 2003).
It was anticipated that the data w ould indicate how the adolescent w om en defined
hom elessness, and w hat the com m unity could do to support each w om an before, during, and after
hom elessness. E ach participant's experience was considered relevant, even if it was n o t supported by a
m ajority o f the respondents. Because the purpose o f the study was to understand, as opposed to
predict in a broader population, less dom inant patterns need n o t be considered errors or outhers.

'?dgour
A lthough the standard m ethods o f preserving research integrity and ensuring rigour for
quantitative research are n o t always apphcable to quahtative research, there are a num ber o f other
actions a researcher can take for the same purpose (W estbrook, 1994). F or the purpose o f this study,
the following protocols were followed to m aximize the reliabihty, vahdity, and objectivity o f the
research:
•

T he com m on them es represent the "essential structure" o f the research (Ayers et al., 2003).
W orking back from the essential strucm re, an analysis was m ade to ensure that
interpretations were based on data from original accounts, and to ensure that the essential
structure truly reflected the context and em otion as found in the original accounts.

•

D istinct efforts were m ade to preserve the authenticity o f the findings through direct
relation o f them es to examples from individual accounts.

68

•

Existing literature and theory was used to for the purpose o f triangulation. Research
findings that were supported in other studies have stronger reliability.

•

T he system and steps involved in the process o f form al analysis were well docum ented in
order to provide an audit trad. By clearly labeling, defining, and describing each them e, and
providing examples, other researchers may verify findings.

•

Researcher bias was stated at the outset.

A nother know n option for testing rehabdity and vahdity is to bring the findings back to the
participants for verification (W estbrook, 1994). T he participants o f this smdy are no longer in the same
locations, and their w hereabouts are unknow n to the researcher. T herefore, they have n o t been
contacted to verify the findings. A notice was posted in the Y ukon N ew s on M arch 3, 20006 to invite
participants to m ake contact w ith the researcher to receive a copy o f the rep o rt and provide feedback,
how ever, no participants came forward.

Kesearcher Bias and Values
T he researcher's personal and professional experiences led to the research questions guiding
this smdy, and the researcher's values led to the design, m ethodology, and theoretical fram ew ork
selected. In W hitehorse, there are shelters for adult w om en and adult m en, however, there is no place
for adolescent w om en to find a safe haven. A dolescent w om en are an oppressed group in our society
w ith very httle econom ic, personal, or political power.
A cross Canada, there is only one shelter specifically for adolescent w om en and it is located in
T o ro n to (Novae, Serge, et al., 2002). In W hitehorse, as in the rest o f the country, young w om en's
hom elessness has n o t been addressed. T heir experiences o f hom elessness, and their stories, can help
m ove the com m unity to social change. This research is intended to be used to benefit the participants,
other hom eless adolescent w om en, and other researchers as they investigate the problem further.

69

As noted, the design o f the study was selected ftotn a fetninist perspective in term s o f
providing a forum for young w om en to tell their stories, and a faith that through their stories,
im p o rtan t and vahd inform ation wiU be revealed. Fem inist perspective in this context reflects a belief
that dom inant N o rth Am erican societies are based on patriarchy; that w om en in general tend to be
disadvantaged and marginalized; that social science and health-related theories have traditionally been
developed based o n male perspectives and have been generahzed to w om en; and that b o th adult
w om en and adolescent w om en are understudied populations, and their specific needs are n o t well
understood. This researcher's com m itm ent to respect the experiences, narratives, and tim e o f the
participants is reflected in the purpose o f the research, the m ethods o f data collection, the analysis
process, and in the presentation o f the findings as well.

Ethical Issues and RjsÆ to Participants
T h e interviews w ere held at times convenient to the participants and the researcher, and were
held in neutral locations, usually o f the participants' selection. T he focus group occurred in late
afternoon, in daylight. T he researcher had selected three possible locations, for b o th the interviews and
the focus group, that were reasonably accessible and close to the heart o f W hitehorse. Final selection
o f the locations depended on availability o f each site and preference o f the participants.
Each participant was advised o f w hat the research may potentially be used for, and each was
provided w ith a Participant Inform ation Sheet (Appendix F). All participants w ere guaranteed that the
inform ation they provide w ould be reported anonymously, and each person was required to sign an
interview consent form (Appendix G) prior to com m encing the interview a n d /o r the focus group. T he
researcher ensured that each person understood that she should only consent to participation if she
understood the inform ation being presented to her, and if she was truly wiUing to participate. AU
participants were asked if they understood that their participation was com pletely voluntary, and that

70

they could w ithdraw at any time. In the focus group, the participants w ere advised that they could
signal their withdrawal by simply leaving the room if they chose. T he honorarium s were paid equally to
all participants.
AU participant questions related to the purpose o f the study, and their roles in the study were
m ade clear to ensure inform ed consent was obtained. T he nam es on the consent form s were n o t linked
to the data coUected in this study.
A youth counseUor was present at the focus group. In order to niiiiitnize the em otional and
psychological risk to participants, prior to com m encing w ith the focus group once aU o f the
participants had gathered, the researcher ensured that each participant was aware that she could leave
the ro o m at any tim e if she needed to do so, and that there was a counseUor avaUable w ith w hom she
could speak if she needed support. A nything said to this person w ould b e held in confidence, and
w ould n o t be included as p art o f the smdy.
A t the conclusion o f b o th the individual interviews and the focus group, participants were
invited to stay and debrief. They were invited to identify any concerns they had, and to state w hether
they required assistance in dealing w ith em otions w hich surfaced during the interview or focus group.
T he youth counseUor was avaUable to provide support for focus group participants, and the researcher
ensured that com m unity counselling services were available during the individual interviews. For
example, the w om en's advocate o f the Victoria Faulkner W om en's Centre was on site during the
individual interviews held at that location, and the youth advocate was on site at the B Y TE office for
individual interviews held at that location. T he participants appeared to enjoy the interviews and did
n o t access any o f the supports provided. T he vaUdation o f their experiences by each other, and the
opportunity to relate their experiences and opinions may have been therapeutic in nature. T here was

71

little deep em otion dem onstrated throughout the interviews, although the young w om en did show
m oderate levels o f indignation, anger, sadness, and hum our.
W hen the results were analyzed and the rep o rt com pleted, it was m ade available to W hitehorse
com m unity m em bers for reference purposes. This was accom plished through a notice placed in a local
N ew spaper in February 2006 inviting b o th com m unity m em bers, and those young w om en w ho
participated in the study, to contact the researcher if they w ished to obtain a copy o f the report, or to
receive a verbal sum m ary o f the findings. A copy was distributed to the W hitehorse Planning G roup
on H om elessness in O ctober 2005 as weU.

72

Chapter 6 Analysis

In this study, four participants were interview ed individually, and a focus group o f six
participants was held shortiy thereafter. T he focus group consisted o f the four individual interview
participants in addition to tw o other participants. Table 1 provides a summ ary o f dem ographic
inform ation relating to each participant. Participants were asked similar questions in b o th interview
form ats. These questions were focused on perceptions o f hom elessness, experiences o f hom elessness
in W hitehorse, and recom m endations for addressing adolescent w om en's hom elessness in
W hitehorse. Interview and focus group guiding questions are contained in A ppendix E.
T h e focus group was beneficial in that the discussions vaHdated the experiences o f the
individuals both exphcitly and implicitly. A n example o f impHcit reinforcem ent occurred w hen one
participant discussed how "com ing out" led to experiences o f hom ophobia in her parent's hom e, and
another participant then com m ented on how im portant respect, acceptance, and feeling safe to be
oneself are. A simple example o f an explicit reinforcem ent occurred w hen one participant stated that,
"Conflict with your parents. Definitely, [as the m ost com m on cause o f adolescent w om en's
hom elessness]" and another participant immediately responded, "O h yeah."

73

Table 1
Summary o f Participant D em ographic Inform ation
Participant

Means o f
Initial
Contact

Age at time o f

N um ber o f
Homelessness
Episodes in
Whitehorse

Yukon
First
Nation

Participated

1

Personal
contact

18

Secondary
School

1

No

Yes

2

Advertising

18

University
Graduate

1

No

Yes

3

Advertising

17

Unknown

M ore than 1

Unknown

Yes

4

Snowball
Sampling

Between 16
and 18

Unknown

Unknown

No

No

5

Snowball
Sampling

Between 16
and 18

Unknown

Unknown

No

No

6

Advertising

17

Some
University

M ore than 1

Yes

Yes

#

Education

Whitehorse
Homelessness
Episode(s)

In
Individual
Interview

74

T he focus group discussions led to issues that were n o t touched on in the individual interviews
as the individual interviews were m ore directed than the group discussion. As well, in the focus group
the discussion reached greater depth in som e areas than in the individual interviews as the participants
built on each others' responses. T he depth achieved appeared to be a reflection o f the reinforcem ent o f
the value o f each participant's opinions and experiences through positive com m ents from other
participants a n d /o r the facilitator, and through natural dialogues that developed as participants
discussed b o th similar perceptions and experiences and the differences in their experiences. For
example, one participant described a hard lesson learned w hen first on the street, and another
participant asked if a particular program in secondary school m ight have helped her. A third participant
provided feedback on the status o f the program referred to by the second participant, and the
discussion then took a turn tow ard other program s that could be im plem ented to help prepare
sm dents for the reahty o f w hat Hfe as an independent adolescent can be.
O ne o f the disadvantages o f the focus group was that n o t every participant provided input on
each issue that arose. In som e cases, individuals w ere m ore outspoken o r confident than others, and in
other sim ations the conversation changed direction before aU participants expressed their opinions. As
facilitator, the researcher ensured that anyone w ho appeared in any way anxious to speak had an
opportunity to do so, b u t otherwise did n o t interfere w ith the direction o f the discussion except to
bring the group back to the original question o r the next planned question, once the divergence had
ru n its course. T herefore, the individual interviews were very im portant in ensuring that each person
had an opportunity to voice her opinion and discuss her ow n experiences in each question area.
Generally, in b o th the individual interviews and the focus group, the dialogues progressed in
similar fashions, com m encing w ith discussions o f hom e and hom elessness before m oving to
precipitating factors, experiences, problem s, and recom m endations. T he analysis for the individual

75

interviews occurred independendy from the focus group, and the data was n o t com bined. T he reason
for m aintaining separate data bases was that the areas discussed in each o f the interview types was not
the same, and therefore w ould n o t fit into the same matrices. Also, the data was kept separate to avoid
placing undue significance on data that may have been reported twice by the same participants through
an overlap in participants betw een individual interviews and the focus group.
In the following sections, the text provides a summ ary o f all o f the data relating to key themes.
E ach sum m ary is followed by one or m ore quotes that provide context and richness. Tables 2 and 3
provide a list o f the them es discussed, concise codes representing the data collected, the num ber o f
participants w ho responded according to each code, and the total num ber o f participants w ho
provided inform ation relating to each specific theme.

Four w om en, betw een the ages o f 18 and 25 years, w ho had experienced hom elessness as
adolescents in W hitehorse, and w ho were currently residing in W hitehorse, w ere interviewed
individually. E ach participant experienced hom elessness betw een the age o f 17 and 18 years, and the
duration o f their hom elessness episode(s) varied from eight days to three and a half m onths. E ach
participant’s responses in key question areas are sum m arized in Table 2.
T hree participants reported experiencing cycles o f hom elessness, although n o t each episode
occurred in W hitehorse. O ne participant com m ented in regard to her W hitehorse hom elessness
experiences: "T hat was like a cycle. Y ou stay there and behave well, and then have enough, get kicked
o u t or leave... " (Participant 4)
T h e participants were highly consistent in their rep o rt on the factors leading up to their
hom elessness episodes. Each participant attributed her need to leave hom e at a young age to, at least in

76

part, conflict w ith her parents. O ne young w om an stated that, "I just w anted to do my ow n th in g .. .and
it was causing stress on b o th our p a rts .. .and then I was out and sad." (Participant 3)
W hen asked about future hom elessness, m o st o f the young w om en were highly uncertain.
O nly one felt that it w ouldn't happen again due to her current com m unity connectedness, b u t the
others w ere less confident. Certainly the desire to avoid future episodes o f hom elessness was reflected
in the response o f one o f the young wom en: "G o d I hope not." (Participant 1)
T h e reports o f the participants in response to questions about w hat their experiences were like
revealed fear, hardship, traum a, loneliness, sadness, and frustration. "They either w ouldn't help m e
because I'm First N ations or ... because I have a university education

A nd they w ouldn't help m e

because I'm n o t pregnant." (Participant 1) "I m ade a lot o f mistakes and I g ot in tons o f really unsafe
situations at a young age." (Participant 2) "I was terrified o f asking anyone for help." (Participant 2)
"E ven a night is pretty scary." (Participant 3) " If it's forty below and you d o n 't have anywhere to
g o .. .w e'd just go up to the banks on m ain street and just sleep in there on the floor." (Participant 4)
In response to the question o f how extensive adolescent w om en's hom elessness is in
W hitehorse, the young w om en did n o t have access to specific num bers. H ow ever, one young w om en
revealed that her tw o best friends had also been hom eless; another stated that "there was a whole
bunch o f us w ho kind o f lived in the flop houses— It was always full o f people." (Participant 1)
A nother participant reported on her experiences o f frequentiy arriving at work, the previous February,
in the m ornings, to find "three or four kids w ho had spent the night under the Riverdale Bridge and
w ere just waiting for an office to open so they could have som e coffee." (Participant 2)

77

Table 2
Individual Interview Results

Code 1

T hem e
D efining homelessness

Lack o f Som ething safe

Code 2

Code 3

Code 4

Code 5

Lack o f a stable place for

Lack o f hom e for any

N o ro o f over your

Lack o f a physical place

longer than a week

length o f tim e

head o r four walls

th at is

around you

satisfactory/com fort-abl
e

Precipitating Factors

Parental divorce

Fam ily/Parental conflict

Age at tim e o f

17

18

unlikely

Possibility

probability

Experiences

"heU" "brutal"

unsafe

scary

Social assistance

N o t eligible

N o t enough

T tied b u t didn't think I

homelessness

Predictions o f fum re
episodes o f homelessness

needed it
N um bers

W hole b unch o f us w ho lived in flop

O ften there were three or

houses

four kids ... waiting for
an office to o pen so they

B oth m y best friends

In the bush

unw elcom e

78

could have som e coffee
Existing W hitehorse

I w ouldn't stay there

It's n ot safe

It's only for m en

Shelter(s)

U nsuitable for young

T here's nothing for y o u th

w om en

w ho aren't in "the
system"

Shelter Specific

Shelter specifically for w om en w ho

Em ergency shelter for

Recom m endations

are homeless for any reason

youth

Mediation

Access to family m ediation/conflict

T em porary shelter while

resolution

family m ediation/conflict
resolution occurs

Accessibihty

24 hour service

Basic N eeds

My $20 w ent mainly to the p ool for

H ow m uch I was

showers

spending o n necessities
was shocking

O ther

H igh school life skills courses in

Professionals are not

N eed F N and FAS

m oney m gm t, ho w to find a hom e

always respectful

services

BY TE

D IA n o t helpful

and n o t be taken advantage o f
Com m unity services that
did help

YFSA

79

Com munity

N ot connected

Isolated; aU alone

C onnectedness

N obody was there for

Y our friends' parents

me

do n 't w ant you
around

N o rth (com pared to
south)

Differences exist

W inter com es sooner;

Less homeless services

colder

in n o rth (more in
south)

80

W ith tegatd to social assistance and housing assistance, the participants found services were
lacking. "You're n o t eligible .. .up here until you turn nineteen." (Participant 4) "I was on a waiting list
for tw o and a half years for Y ukon housing." (Participant 1)
T he data collected in regard to the existing W hitehorse shelter ru n by the Salvation Arm y was
totally consistent betw een respondents. T he young w om en all felt that it was unsuitable at best, and
generally unsafe. "I w ouldn’t stay there - I didn't stay there." (Participant 1) "It's n o t safe— Like for a
seventeen year old w om an to be w ith 40 year old m en? N o way." (Participant 2) "I'd rather just sit in
T im H o rto n 's ..." (Participant 3) "I think this is catering to one clientele, w hich is basically the people
o n the stre e t.. .the chronic alcohols [sic], drug addicts type o f thing." (Participant 4)
Existing youth hom elessness services were described as being nonexistent. "Unless you're a
w ard o f the sta te .. .or in a group hom e, there's nothing they can d o .. .they can't even ren t you a hotel
ro o m - that's only if you're on social services." (Participant 2) "There's nothing for youth, specifically
for young w om en in this city at all. There's nothing for people w ho aren't in 'the system'. I m ean
nothing." (Participant 4)
T he recom m endations provided in the individual interviews were predom inantly shelter
related. "I think w hat we need is a shelter that is for wom en, b u t n o t only for w om en w ho are abused,
b u t aU w om en w ho are hom eless." (Participant 1) "We really need a tem porary, like emergency, shelter
for youth." (Participant 2) "I think we should have a w om en's shelter

Like there's K aushee's which is

great, b u t Hke, I w asn't battered or anything." (Participant 3) "I prefer som ething specifically for
w om en. Like have a w om en's and a m en's shelter. ... I think there should be one for youth. W e could
definitely use it." (Participant 4)
In addition, the participants were concerned w ith the lack o f services in the evenings and on
the w eekends. " If you get kicked out on a Friday night, you're screwed. Like really." (Participant 3)

81

Tw o participants also com m ented that if they had had access to family m ediation, and a place
to stay during m ediation, they may n o t have had to becom e homeless. "Maybe if there was someplace
I could go while m e and my M om patched up this argum ent we had." (Participant 4)
T ow ard the conclusion o f each interview, the participants were asked about their experiences
o f com m unity connectedness during their hom elessness experience. T he prevailing sentim ent
reflected feeUngs o f isolation and no w here to turn. "N o 1 didn't actually [feel connected]." (Participant
1) "It's pretty isolating." (Participant 2) "I was like aU a lo n e .. .nobody was there for m e." (Participant 3)
"Sure you have your teenage frien d s.. .but their parents d o n 't w ant to p u t up w ith the BS you'll bring
in." (Participant 4) "W hen I g ot kicked out, like no problem . I've got lots o f friends, you know. T hen all
o f a sudden, I didn't." (Participant 3)
In discussions o f how the no rth m ight differ from the south, the responses were focused on
tw o m ain issues - the colder tem peratures in the n o rth and the lack o f options in the north. "Definitely,
[winter]comes sooner, yes." (Participant 1) "I definitely saw a lot o f differences in the services that I
could access in M ontreal as com pared to W hitehorse." (Participant 2) "D ow n south w e have food bags
and stuff - 1 found that [finding food] was really hard." (Participant 3) "C om pare here to V ancouver,
w e don't have the resources Hke they do dow n th e re .... up here we don't really have anything."
(Participant 4)

Vocus Group Jkesults
Six w om en currently in their late teens to early twenties, w ho had experienced
adolescent hom elessness in W hitehorse and were residing in W hitehorse at the time o f the study,
participated in the focus group. F our o f these individuals also participated in the individual interviews,
therefore, data collected in this section should n o t be interpreted as corroboration o f the data obtained
in the individual interview section, as it may be dupHcation. Table 3 summ arizes the results o f the focus

82

group. T he participants seem ed to feel m ost intensely about the lack o f services available in
W hitehorse, problem atic services, and were proHfic w ith recom m endations. T h e focus group
com m enced w ith a discussion o f the m eaning o f hom e and hom elessness.
H om e was described as a place o f com fort and safety (including b o th physical and em otional
safety), a place o f acceptance w here one should n o t feel afraid. A person can be considered hom eless if
the place they stay in is n o t com fortable, given the factors that define a hom e. "Sometim es it is just
w ithout a physical hom e." (FG M em ber 1) "If you can't go back there and feel com fortable, then that's
n o t really a stable place for y o u

D o esn 't have to be physical instabihty e ith e r.. .there's a lot o f

em otional instabihty that leads a lot o f young people to leave." (FG M em ber 2) "I also think that
acceptance and respect are huge for you to feel safe." (FG M em ber 5)
In the group discussion o f precipitating factors for hom elessness, em ploym ent, confhcts with
parents or boyfriends, and in the smaller com m unities o f the Y ukon, lack o f personal safety were
identified. "Confhct w ith your parents. Definitely." (FG M em ber 4) "It was because o f confhct with
my parents." (FG M em ber 5) "It's n o t just fighting w ith your parents [in a lot o f smaller comm unities],
a lot o f it is you have to leave for your ow n safety, for your ow n peace o f m in d .. .you're n o t physically
able to stay there anymore." (FG M em ber 6) T here is a possibhity that the latter response was in
reference to issues other than em otional safety o r confhct.

83

Table 3
Focus groups them es and coding
Code 1

rh e m e /q u e stio n

Meaning o f hom e

W ithout a physical hom e

C ode 2

E m otional safety, stability,

Code 3

Em otional support

Code 4

Acceptance an d respect

satisfaction
Direct Causes

employment

(precipitating

Arguing w ith p arents/conflict Break up w ith boyfriend

Personal safety

w ith parents

factors)
Experiences

N o help

Couldn't w ork

W hitehorse

Services for homeless are

Volunteers

Services

Referral Agencies; daytime
services

indirect

(see G aps for two
part quotes)
Problematic
services

Can't quite m ake it one
m onth (financially) - UI
w on't help

□LA pN A C ]- lack o f support Religious affiliation o f
and respect

services

Childless Y o u th n o t a priority
for housing

C ode 5

Physical Safety/Stability

84

rh em e /q u estio n

Gaps

Code 1

No homeless specific

Code 3

Code 2

Code 4

Code 5

Social assistance n o t available

services for youth; N o
service to help people keep
their homes
Inappropriate

Stay in unsafe places

Stay hom e

Cheap Hotels

G overnm ent G roup H om es

Age (discrimination)

Lack o f awareness

Decision makers d o n ’t listen Lack o f support from D IA

O ptions
Barriers to finding
hom es
Community
Connectedness

to youth
There's nobody there

Only com m unity is oth er
hom eless youth

No one cares

[INAC]
Ignorance is bliss (and
knowledge brings
responsibility)

abandoned

85

T hem e/question

Recom mendations

Code 1

Shelter

Specific Homelessness

Code 6
Governm ent supported
Recom mendations
Continued

financial incentives a n d /o r
programs

Code 11
Recom mendations
Continued

Greater O pportunities for
youth to experience trades
in high school

Code 3

Code 2

Nfonjudgmental,

Prevention Life skiEs

nondenom inational-al,

program s (high school)

independent services

Code 4

Prevention emphasis
(including awareness)

Code 5

Address underlying issues
and em pow er w om en

Code 7

Code 8

Code 9

[experienced ]Peer educators

Safe place w ith a shower;

Cooperative organizations

Financial incentives for

(to ultimately support

cooperative, w om en

cooperative housing)

centred program s

in schools

food

Code 10

86

In discussing personal hom eless experiences the respondents described situations that
revealed feelings o f em barrassm ent and rejection. "It's aU talk and no action." (FG M em ber 3) "W hen
1 was on the street and needed help, 1 couldn't find it anywhere." (FG M em ber 1) O n e participant
described a situation w here she found em ploym ent b u t couldn't accept it.
1 got a job once in tow n here and 1 was so broke and hom eless and at the time, they gave m e
uniform s and they were disgustingly dirty, and she's like, be back in tom orrow at eight a.m. and
I'm like how am 1 supposed to clean these? 1 d on't even have a quarter - you bought m e coffee
during my interview, [laugh] Y ou know? W hat am 1 gonna do? So 1 ended up just com ing back
and returning the uniform s and saying 1 can't w ork here; these are disgusting -1 refuse. A nd 1
did it in such a way that 1 didn't tell them you know 1 didn't even have a quarter to w ash these
or a looney to w ash these. B ut 1 did it in a way that, you know, screw you guys - give m e dirty
clothes, type thing. (FG M em ber 6)
T he discussion o f W hitehorse hom elessness services revealed that, w ith respect to youth, there
are trem endous gaps. T he following com m ents from the participants o f this study have been recendy
verified by the W hitehorse Planning G roup on H om elessness’s rep o rt (Finton & K ram er, 2005). In
this report, it is noted that there are no after hours services, and no specifically designated youth
hom elessness service providers. "1 think there's lots o f people w ho have experience w orking w ith
people w ho are experiencing hom elessness, b u t no organizadon that is specifically looking at it."(FG
M em ber 2) "Like we've got lots o f places that can direct you som ew here

They just direct you all

over the place." (FG M em ber 1)
W e've got all these centres, b u t they all shut dow n at a certain time. Y ou can hang o u t there for
so long, b u t then you have to leave and w here are you going to go? Y ou go to the next place

87

that's open a little b it latet, and then you go to the next place, or else you go sit at T im H orton's
because it's open 24 hours, and you can have coffee. (FG M em ber 6)
In M cDowell and M adsen’s 2001 study o f W hitehorse Y outh at Risk o f H om elessness they
touched on this topic indirecdy. In this study, respondents (aged 13 to 29 years) described locations
w here they normally accessed food, clothing, showers, and a telephone. O nly a small percentage
accessed any o f these items at a shelter (i.e. approxim ately seven percent), and none o f the places hsted
are typically open beyond norm al business hours. A m ong the responses to the question o f w here they
currently lived, an emergency shelter was n o t listed am ongst the responses at all, and a significant
prop o rtio n o f the respondents stated that they w ere couch surfing or staying at the hom e o f a friend or
relative. E ight percent were hving outside o r in the bush. T he responses from this 2001 study validate
the com m on experience o f the participants o f the current study —there were no places to go to access
services after hours.
In the W hitehorse C om m unity Plan on H om elessness (W hitehorse Planning G roup on
H om elessness, 2001), a short-term shelter and outreach workers (especially female) w ere am ong the
item s identified as hom eless services required in W hitehorse. T he 2001 study revealed other
requirem ents as well, such as alcohol and drug treatm ent program s for youth (in the territory), a drop
in m edical center, and safe emergency transportation. Accessible prim ary health care has been n o ted as
being o f im portance for hom eless youth due to the negative health im pacts o f hom elessness and their
avoidance o f m ainstream services (W ojtusik & W hite, 1998).
I f an individual has em ploym ent and is trying to m aintain independent incom e, and just cannot
quite m ake it one m onth, there is now here to turn. M aking the transition from unem ployed to
em ployed can cause a gap in availability o f funds, posing a barrier to em ploym ent. " If you're n o t

88

w orking you get regular cheques [em ployment insurance]. B ut once you start working, and you can't
quite m ake that m onth, you just need that extra b it..." (FG M em ber 1)
In addition to lack o f services in particular areas, som e services w ere noted to be problem atic.
T he W hitehorse shelter is rehgion based. " If I'm in a situation like that. I'm n o t going to w ant to hear
w hat G o d has to do for m e, or Jesus is going to save me. T hat's n o t my style." (FG M em ber 3) "I
w orked a lot in Carmacks, b u t I had no place to Hve and every tim e I'd get close to being on the Hst o f
Y ukon H ousing, o r the First N ation's [housing], som ebody w ould have a kid. A nd I ended up having
to m ove. T here was tons o f w ork b u t no place to Hve." (FG M em ber 6) As well, the departm ent o f
Indian and N orthern Affairs (now know as Indian and N o rth ern Affairs Canada), was noted as being
unhelpful. "They treat First N ations youth Hke crap." (FG M em ber 6)
T here was discussion o f inappropriate solutions to hom elessness. Staying in an inappropriate
family hom e was considered an option. ".. .Y ou stay there and the w hole problem just gets worse."
(FG M em ber 4) "There isn't the option to leave hom e. T here isn't. .. .Maybe w hen you're a Httle
o ld e r... " (FG M em ber 5) A nother respondent talked about staying in the cheapest hotels. "They are so
disgusting, you d o n 't even w ant to walk in them , let alone stay overnight there." (FG M em ber 6)
In a discussion o f barriers to finding hom es, age was noted as a significant im pedim ent.
".. .Y ou're too young to have a job, you're too young to support yourself, and even if you could, you
can't m ove in som ew here w hen you're fourteen." (FG M em ber 4) G overnm ent run group hom es were
identified as being one o f the few options available to youth. H ow ever, "N o fourteen year old is going
to willingly check themselves in because they know it's term ed the bad kids' place— It's for bad
kids

Y ou have to be p u t in there. Y ou can't go there on your own." (FG M em ber 6) "There's just so

m uch attached to being young or being n o t m arried, o r n o t fuU tim e working for the m a n ,.. .if you're

89

n o t any o f those things, then you're obviously a party animal w ho deals heroin and abuses anim als..."
(FG M em ber 2)
T h e general consensus from the group appeared to be that hom elessness was associated w ith
disconnectedness from comm unity. "I m ean it's n o t anybody else's responsibihty, b u t ... w hen you
need som ething there's nobody th ere — I felt very alone. A lm ost hke that dream w here you wake up
and go out on the street and there's nobody there."(FG M em ber 1) ".. .at that tim e the only
com m unity I could even identify was other people w ho were in my situation. B ut I still didn't seek
them out because I was really afraid o f them because I was afraid o f becom ing a victim again." (FG
M em ber 2) "N o one really gave a damn. Y ou were just a htde speck o f dirt, you w eren't even a hum an
being." (FG M em ber 3) "I was young and I felt ab a n d o n ed ..." (FG M em ber 4)
T h e recom m endations generated from the focus group w ere num erous and diverse. They
ranged from very simple interventions such as opening a youth shelter, to prevention initiatives such as
hfe skills program s in the high schools, to longer term cooperative incentive program s for w om en.
Five suggestions are noted herew ith in the w ords o f the young wom en. "... I think that a greater
em phasis needs to be p u t on preventing the problem from actuaUy occurring." (FG M em ber 4) In the
succinct w ords o f another young w om an, "I just w ant a safe place and a shower. A nd maybe som e
food." (FG M em ber 3) Som e ideas were m ore comphcated:
I f . .. the governm ent could p u t som e o f that [child tax benefit] away in the kid's nam e, until
they're twenty, then they'd have this chunk o f m oney that you could either p u t it towards
buying land, or the governm ent could m eet you a bit o f the way, kind o f like that, or else
towards renting o r buying a house. (FG M em ber 6)
A nother suggestion was:

90

I f thete was ttiofe access for w om en to get m ote financial education o r m oney managing
[education], or m o te access to partner loans w here you could borrow m oney w ith a bunch o f
people, or... Like that w ould allow people to get som e - get a unit. (FG M em ber 2)
A nother participant suggested a m ore systemic approach:
D eal w ith the underlying issues that actually cause it as well. Like w om en staying w ith their
boyfriends that treat them badly, hke body image issues, like self w orth, or self respect— W e're
just still bom barded by hke stupid images around us aU the time, that m ake us feel even w orse
about ourselves

E m pow er w om en to feel better about them selves and feel hke you know, 1

can hopefully do som ething about this situation, you know , and n o t just feel powerless. (FG
M em ber 5)
In summary, the responses o f the participants in b o th the individual interviews and the focus
group reflect dire experiences o f hom elessness in W hitehorse. T he stories reveal a com m unity that has
turned its back on hom eless youth and left them to fend for themselves, w ith the exception o f a very
small num ber o f individuals. T h e focus group w ith these young w om en highhghted the foUowing
concerns and recom m endations based on their first hand experiences:
•

W hitehorse needs an emergency, youth or w om an specific shelter that is accessible to, and safe
for, all adolescent w om en regardless o f age, and is available seven days per week, 24 hours per day;

•

W hitehorse lacks housing that is suitable for, o r available to youth;

•

W hitehorse com m unity agencies (i.e. schools, youth centers, non-governm ent organizations)
could provide m any preventive and healing m easures such as hfe skills training, em ploym ent
program s, counseling/m ediation, and supportive housing;

•

Underlying issues leading to oppression o f young w om en m u st be dealt w ith so that hom elessness
m ay be prevented.

91

92

Chapter 7 Discussion and Conclusion
This discussion begins w ith a description o f the theoretical fram ew ork underlying this study, a
sum m ary o f the systemic issues and limitations related to adolescent hom eless research in general and
specifically to this smdy. T he rationale for this smdy is followed by a com parison o f the characteristics
o f this sample w ith those o f other studies related to adolescent hom elessness. T he experiences and
services described by the participants are then sum m arized and com pared w ith those reported in
previous youth hom elessness research w here apphcable. T he recom m endations generated by the
participants are then com pared w ith the recom m endations o f researchers o f other smdies. Finally,
im phcations for poUcy m akers, funding bodies, and existing service providers are presented.

Theoretical Framework
T h e theoretical fram ew ork for this research was based on a fem inist approach, and was
grounded in structural social w ork theory. A ccording to Eichler (1997), a fem inist approach to
research is a perspective that is guided by fem inist theory; it is n o t a m ethod in and o f itself.
Specifically, it is inclusive and provides a voice to individuals and groups w ho are oppressed in our
society; it is focused on em pow erm ent and the im provem ent o f the stams o f w om en; and it is
undertaken by researchers w ho define them selves as feminists. Eichler also highhghts the lack o f
objectivity, and the intentional subjectivity, in fem inist research. Instead o f being objectified, each
w om an’s global experiences are sought and recognized. Joyappa and M artin (1996) contend that
fem inist research produces knowledge for m arginahzed people rather than for dom inant groups.
W hile the process is intended to be em pow ering and even consciousness raising, the outcom e is also
im portant. Fem inist researchers m aintain that the goal o f fem inist research m ust be social change
(Eichler, 1997; Joyappa & M artin, 1996).

93

Mullaly (1997) describes structural social w ork theory as another m ethod o f eliminating
oppression through em pow erm ent and social change. H e highhghts a num ber o f characteristics o f
structural social w ork theory that m akes it an excellent foundation for fem inist research. F o r example,
Mullaly contends that structural social w ork theory is based on the prem ise that the personal is
poHtical, a fundam ental underpinning o f fem inist theory. As well, Mullaly argues that structural social
w ork is focused on em pow erm ent and consciousness raising, and that a structural social w orker m ust
recognize that social transform ation is a necessary outcom e o f structural social work.
Fem inist and structural social w ork theories were com bined in this study to provide a voice for,
and to em pow er, young w om en w ho experienced hom elessness in W hitehorse as adolescents. A
com m on understanding betw een the two theories that oppression occurs at a personal level, b u t is a
poHtical m achine, is one o f the m ain underpinnings upon w hich this research is based. T he
com bination o f fem inist theory w ith structural social w ork theory enables the focus on individual
experiences to occur in a hoHstic appreciation o f the experiences o f the participants, while in the
context o f society, and provides the im petus to advocate for innovative solutions and social
transform ation.

Y outh hom elessness research has inherent challenges due to the characteristics o f this
population. W hen the population to be studied is broken dow n further by gender and by a narrow age
group, it becom es even m ore challenging. Cross sectional design w ith small, non-representative
samples are the norm in youth hom elessness research due to the difficulty in accessing larger
non-random samples, and in foUowing such participants once they are accessed. In a relatively small
com m unity such as W hitehorse, these challenges are magnified. T he northern context also changes the

94

face o f youth hom elessness, reducing the percentage o f absolutely hom eless youth and increasing the
p ro p o rtio n o f relatively hom eless youth, m aking hom eless youth even less visible.
Living in a n o rth ern context n o t only changes the appearance o f youth hom elessness, it also
im pacts services that youth may expect to have access to. Such services that do exist for hom eless
youth are predom iiiantly located south o f the 60* parallel, and research has been focused in southern
areas as well. O nly recently has the n o rth begun to be included in national research projects related to
youth hom elessness, and issues unique to the n o rth identified. F or example, K rause et al. (2001) report
that there is very lim ited inform ation in the territories related to num bers and characteristics, and there
are no youth specific shelters. As noted previously, one youth shelter existed briefly in W hitehorse
since 2001, and two other shelters have em erged in other territories. How ever, at least one o f these
shelter’s existences has been noted as insecure due to funding concerns (Younger-Lewis, 2005).

Umitations of This Study
As noted by num erous researchers, the characteristics inherent in the youth hom eless
population make research challenging. It is difficult to locate and interview hom eless youth, and next
to im possible to count hom eless youth as they are a highly invisible population, especially in the north.
Hom eless youth are also highly m obile, as they are o f no fixed address and do n o t tend to rely on
shelters. Y outh hom elessness tends to be cychcal, w ith youth m oving on and o ff the street over time.
Thus, cross-sectional research results in an incom plete picture. Sample sizes tend to be small and
non-representative as the majority o f hom eless youth cannot be found, and may n o t even self-identify
as homeless.
T his study involved a sample size o f only 6, b u t this was sufficient for the purpose o f the smdy.
T he prim ary purpose was exploratory, thus a quahtative m ethod involving in-depth, semi structured
interviews, and a focus group, w ere employed. Sample selection was purposive snowball sampling, and

95

was com pleted in June 2003. Posters advertising for participants were posted in areas w here adolescent
w om en w ould be likely to see them , and one respondent was asked to refer other potential participants
for the focus group. A small, non-random sample was used, and therefore generalizations o f the data
are m ade w ith caution. T he inform ation provided by each participant was retrospective, and may have
been tem pered by time.
A lthough each participant provided in depth inform ation about her experiences and
perceptions, all recom m endations m ust be m ade w ith caution, and validated by future studies. In
establishing validity o f the findings o f this study, the researcher utilized a num ber o f techniques as
n o ted in C hapter 6, how ever, the participants did n o t have an opportunity to review the findings. T he
prim ary reason for this was that the participants could n o t be located as m ore than tw o years elapsed
betw een the time o f the interviews and the production o f a final report for review. T hus, future studies
should incorporate a plan for obtaining feedback from participants on the findings in the research
methodology^ in order to provide participants w ith an opportunity to com m ent o n the findings before
the rep o rt is finalized.

Research Rjationale
A thorough review o f the literature related to adolescent hom elessness revealed that research
over the past fifteen years has focused on causes and explanations o f adolescent hom elessness,
experiences o f hom eless adolescents, health issues, and behaviours. As noted in C hapter 3,
(Theoretical A pproach to U nderstanding Hom elessness), youth hom elessness researchers have rehed
u p o n a variety o f theoretical fram eworks to understand youth hom elessness. In addition, researchers
have focused heavily on an individualized approach to understanding hom elessness —w hat it was
about each individual or family that predisposed each youth to hom elessness.

96

A lthough a n u m h et o f theories have been generated to explain youth hom elessness, a
significant am ount o f research has been conducted w ithout theoretical underpinnings (H aber & Toro,
2004). This has resulted in an abundance o f research that examines factors in isolation and from an
individualistic perspective. As well, little research has been conducted from a national perspective,
resulting in patchy com m unity-based research utilizing an inconsistent array o f definitions for b o th
“hom elessness” and “youth” . Perhaps because o f the lack o f utilization o f theoretical fram eworks, an
assortm ent o f interventions have been im plem ented across the country, m o st w ithout systematic
evaluation plans. As a nation, we have n o t agreed u p o n w hat the problem actually is, and therefore,
initiatives to address it have been piecemeal, fragm ented, and o f questionable effectiveness. T hus, the
problem continues to exist and grow.
In Canada, little research has been done in the area o f how youth m ake successful transitions
o ff the streets (Raleigh-Duroff, 2004) and w hat the youth perceive the m o st needed and effective
solutions to be (Aviles & H elfrich, 2004). As well, research pertaining specifically to hom eless
adolescent w om en is particularly scarce (Novae et al., 2002). K arabanow (1999, 2002, and 2003)
reports a growing need for services in Canada that respect the perspectives o f street youth, and a lack
o f research and services that are developed and generated from a position o f respect for the hom eless
youth population. T he underlying theories that guided this smdy are based on the prem ises that our
society allows hom elessness to exist, and that systemic factors play a significant role in contributing to
individual and family vulnerability.

A focus on individuals and families, outside o f the context o f society, perpem ates the problem
o f hom elessness. In order to change the social context, so that the circumstances leading to
hom elessness are no longer present in our com m unity, we m ust refram e the issue. This may be

97

accom plished through structural change resulting from consciousness raising, em pow erm ent, and
com m unity developm ent. W hile it is possible to w ork w ithin the conventional social services system,
achieving structural social change through this avenue is unlikely. A collective, com m unity based
strategy involving alternative agencies, youth non-governm ental organizations, and the service users
them selves is called for.
K arabanow (2003) and V an Leeuwen (2004) b o th advocate for the collaboration o f
non-governm ental service providers to address youth hom elessness issues. W hile this is im portant at a
local level, in researching the global context, Canada’s international com m itm ents, and Canada’s
current com m itm ents in the areas o f youth hom elessness, it has becom e apparent that Canada’s overall
com m itm ent is thin and sketchy. It is im portant that all levels o f governm ent support youth
hom elessness initiatives that are intended to eliminate youth hom elessness, yet this consistency is
absent. C om m unities are assum ing a leading role w ithout consistent poUtical leadership and support.
H igh level, pohtical support is necessary, b u t is only likely to continue for as long as it remains
poHtically purposeful, and therefore, it is critical that the com m unity, including alternative agencies and
youth organizations, keep the spotiight on the larger pohtical agenda, and ensure that governm ent
rem ains accountable.
C ollaboration at ah levels is crucial, and we need the federal governm ent to take a leading role,
yet the process cannot be top-dow n. W hen com m unities begin the process o f societal change, the
federal governm ent m ust be present, com m itted, and willing and able to role m odel genuine
coUaboration. How ever, as K arabanow (2003) argues, the solution m ust be b o tto m up. ParaUel
processes, one at the com m unity level, and others at territorial and federal levels, m ust be m oving in
similar directions. T he com m unity can drive its part o f the process through m obihzation o f

98

m atginalized populations, non-govem m ental organizations, alternative and youth agencies, m aking a
collective effort to effect change.
I f Canada as a nation truly desires to eliminate, or significantly reduce the im pacts o f youth
hom elessness, com m unities and regions m ust be supported through legislation. As well, dem onstrated
support for innovative program s and progressive approaches through long term and ongoing funding
opportunities are required. As a nation, we m ust dem onstrate our respect and regard and hope for our
youth in all com m unities, provinces, and territories. O ur approaches cannot be b o th right and left
wing. Specifically, we cannot condone capital punishm ent and crim inalization o f youth hom elessness
survival strategies while supporting social program s in the same jurisdictions. By so doing, we are
perpetuating and enhancing the problem and then applying band-aid-type solutions. This approach
reflects a high degree o f m arginahzation as opposed to inclusion and respect.
T he U N C onvention has stipulated that youth m ust be respected, valued, and included as
genuine participants in our decision making processes. Canada has agreed to the U N ’s stipulations, b ut
has n o t im plem ented strategies for accountability. It is time for the federal governm ent to take a strong
leading role in im plem enting the convention’s requirem ents throughout Canada. This m eans passing
legislation, providing long term resources for com m unity program s, insisting that provinces and
territories support long term initiatives, and holding provincial and territorial and o ther governm ents
accountable. O nly then can com m unity program s designed to support families and support the
hom eless achieve positive long-term outcom es.

C ounting hom eless youth has proven to be a challenging task. As o f the year 2000, there had
been only two attem pts to estim ate the num ber o f hom eless persons in Canada (Peressini &
M cD onald, 2000). T he m o st recent attem pt was by Statistics Canada, w ho did n o t release their findings

99

due to unidentified inaccuracies. T heir study was based on 1991 census data obtained from the num ber
o f individuals utilizing soup kitchens. T he other attem pt was m ade by the Canadian Council o n Social
D evelopm ent, in conjunction w ith the Canada M ortgage and H ousing C orporation, and utilized a key
inform ant approach to estim ating the num ber o f hom eless people in Canada in 1987. They concluded
that betw een 130,000 and 250,000 people were hom eless in Canada on any given night.
T hough there is a lack o f an accurate count, K arabanow (2002) reports th at Canada's youth
hom eless situation is approaching "disaster status". K rause et al. (2001) rep o rt that a rising trend can be
identified. Y outh hom elessness research is fraught w ith problem s (Kipke et al., 1997; K ipke & Unger,
1997; PoUio et al., 2001; Rew et al, 2001). Researchers do n o t agree on definitions o f youth or
hom elessness, research designs are highly variable, and samples are non-representative and tend to be
small. T he hidden hom eless people have been disregarded due to their inaccessibility and because o f a
focus on absolute hom elessness, and research has been cross sectional, causing the cyclical nature o f
youth hom elessness to be understated. T hose hom eless for short episodes tend to be m issed in cross
sectional research (Kipke & U nger, 1997).
In addition to the research problem s noted above, characteristics o f the population itself m ake
it practically im possible to m easure. H om eless youth are a hidden and difficult-to-track population,
forcing researchers to rely on shelter data (Ringwalt et al. 1998) and small convenience samples (Rew et
al., 2001). A ccording to research conducted in the T o ro n to and Y ork regions, only about 25 percent o f
the hom eless youth utilize shelters, and therefore, data based on shelter use is highly inaccurate
(G overnm ent o f Canada, 2003).
T h e goal o f the current study was n o t to enum erate adolescent hom eless w om en in
W hitehorse, b u t to develop an understanding o f their experiences and their perceptions o f service
needs. As confirm ed by Aviles and H elfrich (2004), narrative interviews provide an encounter betw een

100

the researchef and inform ant th at aUow the researcher to understand the experiences o f the inform ant
in her ow n w ords. A n o th er im portant goal o f this research was to provide an opportunity for young
w om en to teU their stories through individual interviews and a focus group. In keeping w ith the
prem ises that youth hom elessness is a societal problem , and that young hom eless w om en are a
relatively powerless and voiceless population, the researcher guided the participants to discussions o f
w hat hom elessness m eant to the participants, w hat the com m unity could do to prevent adolescent
w om en’s hom elessness, and w hat they believed led to their experiences o f hom elessness and how this
experience m ight have been avoided.
M cD ow ell and M adsen (2001) identified youth as being betw een the age o f 13 and 29 years in
their study o f youth hom elessness in W hitehorse. F o r the purposes o f the current study, however,
youth were identified as being betw een the age o f 13 and 19 years. T he rationale for this decision was
the researcher's intent to focus on adolescent issues and perspectives, w hich may differ from those o f
young adult w om en in their twenties. As well, the data collected by M cDowell and M adsen included
in form ation for b o th males and females. T he data for the current study was restricted to adolescent
w om en because o f the under representation o f this group in the existing research, because o f a desire
to highhght the needs o f adolescent w om en specifically, and because young w om en in the n o rth may
have unique experiences.

Participant Experiences and Perceptions
A com parison o f the responses provided in this study w ith the Uterature is a form o f
triangulation, and dem onstrates strong external validity. T he location specific inform ation provided by
the participants is considered vahd, and is used as the basis for recom m endations for the com m unity,
given the strong external validity o f the inform ation provided by the participants in all other aspects o f
youth hom elessness that were discussed. In addition, the youth hom elessness research literature

101

reviewed for this study also supports and validates the prevention and intervention suggestions put
forth by the participants in the course o f this study.
H ighlighted below are the predom inant them es that arose from the data collected in this study.
T he participants discussed definitions o f hom elessness, the nature o f hom elessness experiences, and
the precipitating factors leading up to their experiences o f hom elessness. They also described their
experiences in relation to the services that were available to them in W hitehorse, and how the
com m unity could have assisted them to achieve m ore successful outcom es. Social barriers that
contributed to their hom elessness experiences were also noted as being o f im portance, and as issues
that should be addressed to prevent future hom elessness experiences for other young w om en.
In defining hom elessness, the inform ants o f this study vahdated the results found in other
research. A bsolute hom elessness is n o t an accurate depiction o f any hom eless population, nor is lack
o f physical shelter by any m eans a com plete description o f hom elessness. In the north, definitions o f
youth hom elessness m ust include those youth w ho rem ain w ith their famUies in spite o f lack o f
personal safety a n d /o r conflict, as other options are extremely limited. As well, in the north, youth
hom elessness definitions m ust include those youth living in overcrow ded conditions, and in insecure
or unsafe environm ents, again because o f the lack o f alternatives. Recognition o f the environm ental
factors that contribute to young w om en’s hom elessness in the no rth could provide a basis for
addressing the problem . H aber and T o ro (2004), w ho state that a focus solely on deficiencies o f
hom eless youth m ay actually foster hom elessness, and K arabanow (1999) w ho concludes th at creating
a healthy com m unity that em pow ers youth is critical to resolving youth hom elessness issues,
substantiate this theory.
A ccording to the respondents o f this study, hom elessness occurs if a young w om an is w ithout
a hom e for any length o f time - a day, a week, or three m onths. As well, there is clearly a difference

102

betw een a house and a hom e. If a person does n o t have "som ething safe w here you can close your eyes
and sleep and feel com fortable", she is hom eless. N ovae et al. (2002) confirm that young wom en's
subjective definitions o f hom elessness have been found to be related to their feelings o f safety and
belonging. This is contrary to Tom as and D ittm ar's (1995) rep o rt in w hich adult w om en defined hom e
as w here they Uved, w ith safety and security constituting a quest. T he inform ants o f the current smdy
clearly identified com fort, acceptance, respect, and em otional stability as being key factors in their
definitions o f hom e. T herefore, according to the respondents o f this smdy, hom elessness occurs if a
young w om an does n o t feel safe, respected, and com fortable w here she is living, if she does n o t have
shelter, or if the shelter is inadequate. A lthough emergency shelters w ould undoubtedly benefit
adolescent hom eless w om en, a shift in how we as a society understand and give respect to the rights o f
young w om en is required in the long term . As MuUaly (1997) states, provision o f resources w ithout
changing the pow er structure only perpem ates the problem .
T h e literature points to a num ber o f precipitating factors and causes o f adolescent
hom elessness, from sexual abuse (Tyler et al., 2001), to being placed in a group hom e (Cauce, 2000), to
gentrification (Murphy, 2000). T he participants o f this study, however, clearly identified parental
confhct as the predom inant reason for leaving hom e at a young age. W ithout social supports, and in
com m unities w here runaway o r throw -away youth are identified as deviant or defiant, in com bination
w ith a lack o f preparation for independence, lim ited finances, and their young age, youth w ho leave
hom e often encounter huge barriers in finding suitable shelter. Som e youth may rem m hom e w hen the
conflict that precipitated the hom eless episode has subsided. H ow ever, the experience o f
hom elessness for youth has been docum ented as being episodic (Ringwalt et al., 1998), and m any
youth find them selves hom eless again at som e tim e in the future. T he inform ants o f the current smdy

103

confirm ed the cyclical nature o f adolescent hom elessness as well - the narratives o f half o f the
inform ants reflected periods o f hom elessness, as opposed to a single experience.
U nfortunately, w hen unable to find suitable lodging, there were no safe alternatives available to
the young w om en in this study. W hitehorse does n o t have an emergency youth shelter, and the
experiences o f aU o f the respondents were that there were no services available outside o f business
hours from M onday to Friday. W hile there is no youth specific shelter in W hitehorse, there is one
hom elessness shelter, and a W om en’s shelter. T h e shelter for the hom eless is ru n by a
nongovernm ental organization, and provides services to all hom eless individuals. It was dism issed by
all participants as being unsafe and unsuitable for young w om en for a num ber o f reasons. In fact, the
participants felt safer on the streets, in squats, o r sitting in T im H ortons. W hitbeck et al. (2001) state
th at the m ost im m ediate need is protection from further harm , and clearly the participants o f this study
do n o t feel that the current W hitehorse shelter can provide that protection. In other w ords, their needs
w ere n o t m et by existing services.
T he w om en’s shelter was also n o t considered a viable alternative for the participants by the
participants them selves, and clearly, its prim ary purpose is n o t to provide shelter for hom eless
adolescent w om en. T he participants clearly understood that this shelter is only an option if a w om an is
19 years o f age or older, how ever, in reality the shelter does have som e flexibility depending on
circumstances. As well, the young w om en in this study did n o t identify them selves as victim s o f
violence from a partner, and they did n o t feel they m et the criteria to stay there. F rom the perspectives
o f the young w om en, the W om en’s T ransition H om e was n o t an option due to their understanding o f
its purpose, and their assessm ent o f their personal circumstances.
O n the other hand, the participants did describe two services that were o f assistance: the youth
outreach counceUors o f the Y ukon Family Services Association, and Bringing Y outh T ow ard Equahty

104

(BYTE) staff. H ow ever, these services operate during regular business hours, and they are n o t focused
o n addressing youth hom elessness. T he outreach w orkers and B Y TE staff were noted as being
particularly helpful and com passionate, b u t the participant was still hom eless at the end o f the day. For
example, in one instance, an outreach w orked assisted a young w om an to apply for social assistance
and for emergency housing, b u t neither application enabled the young hom eless w om en to access
em ergency shelter or funds.
Age itself was acmaUy identified in this study as a significant barrier to finding suitable housing.
N ovae et al. (2002) confirm that the program and service gap for 16 and 17 year olds has been n o ted by
researchers in Canada, w ith youth and young adults falling through the cracks betw een public systems
o f care. They are ineligible for children's care systems and yet their needs cannot be m et through the
adult care system (M cDowell & M adsen, 2001; W hitehorse Planning G roup on H om elessness, 2001).
A ccording to a Y ukon G overnm ent H ealth and Social Services adult services unit staff m em ber
(personal com m unication, N ovem ber 7, 2005), Social Services in W hitehorse reserves one emergency
bed for youth under the age o f 19. H ow ever, this bed can only be accessed once the youth has
exhausted all other avenues, and the governm ent has becom e the parent o f last resort, and in any case,
the participants o f the present study did n o t reveal any knowledge o f this service.
T he participants o f this smdy identified governm ent group hom es as being the only possible
housing resource available to them , as they were too young to qualify for social assistance. H ow ever,
they did n o t consider becom ing a w ard o f the state a viable option. It is well docum ented that youth in
care com prise a significant percentage o f the youth hom elessness population (Karabanow, 2003), and
it is n o t surprising that adolescent w om en w ould n o t consider this an alternative to hom elessness. N o t
only was there stigma attached to it, b u t they also did n o t believe they should becom e wards o f the
state.

105

T he participants also revealed experiences o f m istrust and disrespect from potential landlords,
w ho w ere reluctant to rent to youth. In his study, K arabanow (2003) has docum ented that hom eless
youth m ay feel perceived as thieves and criminals, w hich is clearly how the participants o f this study
felt they were view ed by potential landlords. Renting an apartm ent was n o t an option for a num ber o f
the participants, even if a sym pathetic landlord could be found, as they had no funds to do so.
Finding em ploym ent while one is hom eless is extremely challenging. T he participants o f this
study confirm ed that n o t only is providing contact inform ation a problem , arriving for job interviews
in clean clothes may be nearly impossible. G aetz and O 'G rady (2002) rep o rt that hom eless youth in
Canada face the toughest barriers o f any group in the w ork force in term s o f obtaining and m aintaining
paid em ploym ent. They also rep o rt that the m ajority o f hom eless youth aspire to conventional jobs,
and tod hard for litde return. T he success o f the youth hom eless population is im pacted by social
exclusion and lim ited choices. In this regard, W olfe and T o ro (1999) also note that youth typically lack
the skdls and education for jobs that pay wed.
C ouch surfing and living in squats are wed know n phenom enon for youth w ho are unable to,
or w ho have no desire to, return to their norm al place o f residence (Krause et al., 2001). M ore than one
participant o f the current smdy noted that couch surfing is n o t a realistic option as the parents o f the
friends o f hom eless youth generaUy do n o t welcome hom eless youth in their hom es for any length o f
time. A noth er participant relayed that living in squats w ith a num ber o f other hom eless persons was
how she resolved her hom elessness sim ation, whde another described dangerous and negative
experiences w ith squats.
W hitbeck et al. (1999) state that living on the streets involves learning to be antisocial, and that
interactions reinforce untrustw orthiness o f others. This was clearly verified in the experiences o f one
young w om an w ho reported being terrified o f asking for help, and afraid o f approaching other street

106

people fo t fear o f victim ization. O ne respondent in the study reported that the only people she felt
connected to w ere o ther hom eless people, yet she did n o t approach them , and therefore, she was
completely disconnected from the community.
All participants were unanim ous in theic reports o f their experiences o f social connectedness
during their hom eless experiences. They clearly described a lack o f social connectedness, feeHng alone,
w ith now here to turn, isolated, and as if no one cared. Rew (2002) found that social connectedness was
inversely related to feelings o f loneliness and positively related to feelings o f well-being. Since each o f
this smdy’s participants reported feeling isolated and disconnected, it follows th at they w ould feel
alone and unwell. This im phcation is validated by the participants' com m ents that hom elessness is
“heU, brutal, scary, and it sucks.”
A ccording to K arabanow 's (2003) study involving street youth, perceptions o f feeling alone,
n o t fitting in, and being perceived as the dregs o f society may be typical. Ricks et al (1999) include
belonging and m utual caring in their definition o f com m unity, and it is apparent that at least some
hom eless youth are n o t p art o f comm unity. MuUaly (1997) also describes a system o r com m unity that
is based on equahty, sohdarity, and comm unity. Clearly, there is a chasm betw een hom eless youth and
comm unity.
T he inform ation provided by the participants o f the study supports the need for an innovative
approach to resolving adolescent w om en’s hom elessness. T he underlying m essages from the
participants o f this study reinforce the notions that barriers exist in m any com ponents o f Ufe w hen a
young w om an is trying to avoid hom elessness. A top dow n approach to resolving adolescent w om en’s
hom elessness may provide m uch needed band-aids, b u t pow er over the Uves o f hom eless young
w om en then rem ains in the hands o f bureaucrats, as opposed to w ith the w om en themselves.

107

As well, stopgap m easures to address hom elessness do n o t prevent future hom elessness or
provide a m eans o f social change. T he participants o f this study clearly stated that if one is n o t treated
w ith respect, a n d /o r does n o t feel safe or com fortable, then she is homeless. A m ore systemic
approach to com m unity wellness, through em pow erm ent, com m unity capacity building, and a
strengths based approach to services may be required to significantly reduce adolescent w om en’s
hom elessness (Cadell et al, 2001; Ricks et al, 1999; K arabanow , 1999). Building strength and resüiency
from the ground up is a way o f building capacity and em pow erm ent on an individual and com m unity
level, w hich leads to societal change. A b o tto m up approach takes pow er from a few and distributes it
to many.

T he participants o f this smdy have clearly identified that while there is a strong im petus to m eet
im m ediate needs, through shelters and other support systems, social change is the key to prevention o f
fum re hom elessness for adolescent w om en. Historically, research has been com pleted w ith hom eless
youth in the areas o f experiences, health concerns, weU being and safety issues, and needs.
Conventional m ethods have resulted in researchers having the dom inant voice in generating potential
solutions for youth hom elessness, based on input obtained from a num ber o f sources, including
hom eless youth. T he recom m endations for solutions and interventions generated through such
research are num erous and diverse, and have been prom inently focused on the individual experiencing
hom elessness and her family.
A ccording to L orde (1993), utihzation o f the m aster’s tools wül never dism antle the m aster’s
house; they will never allow genuine change. This argum ent is supported by MuUaly (1997), w ho
contends that the personalization o f social problem s, and m eeting an individual’s needs through
conventional social w ork program s, serve to m aintain the status quo. T hus, interventions grounded in

108

ouf cuff eut welfare systems will n o t im pact the oppression experienced by m arginalized groups such as
hom eless adolescent w om en, or young w om en at risk o f homelessness.
W hile we are beginning to recognize that hom eless youth are a heterogeneous population w ith
a num ber o f subpopulations, that services need to vary according to subgroup (Kipke & U nger, 1997),
and th at an array o f services is needed for such a diverse population w ith diverse needs (Brooks et al.,
2003; MaUet et al., 2004; H aber & T oro, 2004), we continue to m ake recom m endations to m eet needs
and to develop safety nets, and have n o t m ade the transition to approaching the problem from outside
a conventional social w ork system. Researchers continue to attem pt to address gaps in service and
accessibility and so on. Pawsey and FuUer (1993) state, for example, that services m ust reach the m ost
vulnerable populations. O ’Brien et al (1993) state that equitable access, and safe, inform ed, and
supportive services are key to success. As well, research through the Canadian M ortgage and H ousing
C orporation (2002a), while prom oting a hohstic approach, is still supporting services w ithin the status
quo, such as safe and affordable hom es, em otional support, relationships w ith at least one adult,
opportunities to develop Hfe skills, access to training, education, and em ploym ent readiness program s,
and health care. W hile these services may be effective in supporting youth to transition o ff the street,
they do n o t necessarily em pow er individuals or groups, im pact pow er distribution w ithin society, or
im pact the m arginahzation and aUenation o f hom eless adolescent w om en. Structural social w ork
theory (MuUaly, 1997) recognizes that if we provide services, and assist individuals to access services,
we are acting benevolently and are n o t addressing the actual need itself.
In the current study, the participants identify a num ber o f diverse and varied potential
poHcy-related interventions and approaches, aim ed at m eeting im m ediate needs while addressing the
actual need. T hese suggestions are based on personal experience, expertise gained through trial and
error and survival, and they are aU specific to W hitehorse. M ost o f these recom m endations are n o t new

109

o r unique to the n o rth and have heen corroborated through other research. R ecom m endations for
social change, w hde perhaps uncom m on in youth hom elessness research, are com m on throughout
fem inist based research. T he ideas generated by the participants o f this study com e from the expertise
gained through first hand experience, however, and have n o t been filtered through a researcher or
instim tion.
Because the personal is pohtical, individual w ork is by necessity an elem ent o f a larger
m ovem ent o f social transform ation (MuUaly, 1997). A num ber o f the recom m endations for
interventions and prevention generated by the participants o f this study may appear to address short
term needs, w ithout social change. H ow ever, the m ethods utdized to generate the solutions em braced
the concepts o f consciousness raising and em pow erm ent, and led to discussions for the necessity o f
social transform ation as a preventive tool. Individual needs m ust be m et w hde social change occurs
over a longer term , so that today’s hom eless youth are n o t sacrificed for tom orrow ’s youth.

In relation to intervention program s, the individual interviews strongly highhght the need for a
W hitehorse youth shelter, prim ardy because W hitehorse lacks a shelter that is specific for youth, and
because there is clearly a need for at least one youth specific service that is avadable in the evenings and
on weekends. A lthough the participants in this study are highly consistent in specifying a need for a
w om en specific shelter. N ovae et al. (2002) rep o rt that young w om en generaUy prefer to ahgn w ith
young m en as opposed to adult w om en. H ow ever, they also report that typical hom eless youth services
that support b o th genders are oppressive for young w om en and that sexual violence is com m onplace,
w hich supports a w om an specific service. A num ber o f experts confirm that shelters can be beneficial
interventions (Karabanow, 1999; K rause et al. 2001), however, how wed they are accessed and utilized

110

depends on how successfully they m eet the needs and concerns o f the youth (G teene & Ringwalt,

1997).
T he focus group participants also clearly specify that shelters, and places to access food and
showers, are very im portant. As well, the participants specify that services should n o t be affiliated w ith
religious institutions o r institutions w ith other agendas. This is corroborated by research conducted in
T oronto, in w hich researchers found that youth prefer to use program s targeted specifically to them
(G overnm ent o f Canada, 2003). Providing emergency services in an environm ent w here youth are
stigmatized, ahenated, o r separated from society will n o t be o f great assistance. In considering
emergency services, we need to em brace youth in our com m unity and include them in the
developm ent o f program s. T hus how we approach interventions is as im portant as the interventions
themselves.
In a structural social w ork approach to interventions, as w ith a fem inist approach, a focus on
em pow erm ent, consciousness raising, and norm alization o f the issue are fundam ental to developm ent
o f interventions (MuUaly, 1997). Thus, involving service users in defining and developing
interventions; supporting activities that enable adolescent w om en to understand the issues in the
context o f society and to refram e the problem as a social problem as opposed to a personal or family
pathology; and w orking w ith service users and com m unity in an inclusive and coUective process to
reduce aUenation, isolation, and rejection are im portant for success.

Prevention programs.
T he participants o f this smdy identify that in prevention, as with intervention, addressing
underlying issues and em pow ering young w om en to feel positive about the fum re are critical. Thus
prevention recom m endations have taken the form o f social action. A ddressing underlying issues such
as pow er inequities and values (Ricks et al., 1999) and exclusion from com m unity (Karabanow, 1999)

Ill

have also been identified thtough recent Canadian research as being critical to successfully addressing
youth hom elessness, especially for young wom en.
In this smdy examples o f specific prevention services that w ould have been beneficial to the
participants prior to their hom elessness experiences are provided. Tw o individual participants state
that m ediation w ould have helped prevent their hom elessness in the first place. As conflict is a well
docum ented precipitating factor for youth hom elessness (Janus et al., 1995; K ipke et al., 1997;
Schweitzer & H ier, 1994), this is a well vahdated suggestion. Since m ediation is an individual approach,
and is an example o f w orking w ithin the conventional social w ork system, it should be included in an
overaU process that leads to social change on pohtical and personal levels.
Research provides a num ber o f examples o f how prevention may be accom phshed through a
service provision approach (CadeU et al., 2001; K arabanow , 2003), but it is also a societal and global
issue. T he participants o f this sm dy identified the need for societal change, while m eeting the needs o f
today’s hom eless young wom en. T he dual role o f services was recognized by focus group participants
o f this smdy as they provided examples o f how interventions could also be considered prevention
tools depending on the tim ing o f the service/program . F o r example, hfe skihs program s can be b o th a
m eans o f prevention and intervention. O th er examples o f prevention/ intervention program s
suggested included:
•

having peer educators com e into the secondary schools to talk about reahty on the street,

•

developing school based group projects that present chaUenges for sm dents - such as going
through the process o f finding a hom e if you were to becom e suddenly hom eless;

•

providing an extensive trades experience for sm dents to facihtate goal developm ent and
inform ed career choices; and

•

providing m oney m anagem ent training in the schools.

112

A lso n o ted by the focus group participants are m ore complex, longer term solutions. F or
example, one participant suggests the developm ent o f cooperative organizations that could ultimately
support cooperative housing for youth and w om en. A nother suggestion involves program s to
prom ote financial education for young w om en, and access to partner loans to p rom ote cooperative
housing. T he discussions around collaboration, partnerships, and recom m endations for program s that
w ould result in young w om en assum ing control over their finances and careers, and enhancing
knowledge o f society reflect a high level o f understanding that these are key elem ents to long-term
change.
Overall, the youth hom elessness research literature validates the experiences o f the
participants o f this study during their hom eless periods. In spite o f the small sample size, participant
responses in the key question areas are typical o f hom eless youth in other jurisdictions o f N o rth
America, as docum ented in the hterature. In addition, the theoretical fram ew ork that underpins this
study b o th reinforces and is reinforced by the responses o f the participants w ho articulate an
awareness o f their ow n exclusion from society, while recognizing the need to be respected,
participating m em bers o f the comm unity.

T he literature review conducted for this study points to a lack o f theoretical underpinnings for
a significant am ount o f research related to adolescent hom elessness. In addition, the adolescent
hom elessness research that does exist and is related specifically to adolescent w om en’s hom elessness is
very limited. T he theoretical fram ew ork for understanding adolescent w om en’s hom elessness as
identified earlier in this paper clearly illustrates that there are a num ber o f reasons th at adolescent
w om en’s hom elessness m erits study as an issue separate from other hom elessness research, and that a

113

fem inist approach to research is beneficial to understanding the issues from the perspective o f
adolescent wom en.
As well, although Canadian researchers have generated a significant body o f research on
adolescent hom elessness, it has been predom inantly focused on youth Uving in southern, urban
centers. This study shows that n orthern populations face different issues than southern populations,
only one o f w hich is a relative lack o f resources for hom eless populations, such as em ergency shelters.
T h e specific im pacts o f cultural differences, cHmate, and geographical isolation on adolescent w om en’s
hom elessness in the n o rth are relatively unexplored. T h e implications o f each o f these factors for
young w om en w ho are hom eless could be significant.
Finally, the num ber o f adolescent hom eless w om en in the no rth rem ains a mystery. O nce
again, the characteristics o f the Canadian n o rth m ake generalizations from southern data o f
questionable value. This study clearly shows that the issue o f adolescent w om en’s hom elessness does
exist, b u t how well it can be addressed w ithout a valid estimate o f the num bers o f youth and families
im pacted is o f concern. N o t only may bureaucrats be unwilling to allocate funding to an issue that
cannot be proven to be o f significance, b u t also m easuring outcom es in ways that show that funding is
m aking a difference will be a challenge. T herefore, there is a perceived need to understand how
extensive this issue is in the Canadian north.

Based on the experiences o f the participants o f this study as presented through the course o f
this research, and on other W hitehorse based research (M cDowell & M adsen, 2001; Le Cam p 2001;
K rause et al., 2001; F inton & K ram er, 2005), W hitehorse is clearly currendy unable to address the
needs o f adolescent w om en w ho are homeless. T he implications o f allowing the problem to persist and
grow, w ithout intervention, are devastating for young wom en.

114

Everything about hom elessness degrades health (Wright, 1990), and hom elessness is a
predictor o f early death for youth (Ubelacker, 2004). T herefore, through our inaction, the health o f
every young w om an w ho is hom eless for any length o f tim e is seriously com prom ised. Y oung w om en
are forced to participate in a num ber o f health com prom ising behaviours in order to survive (Yates et
al., 1988). N o t only is their health com prom ised, their risk o f victim ization is increased, and they are
often criminalized for resorting to survival tactics.
In light o f the findings o f this study, and the release o f the W hitehorse rep o rt on youth
hom elessness (Finton & K ram er, 2005), a continuum o f services, including a youth or w om an specific
shelter, is urgently needed. A youth or wom an-specific emergency shelter that is accessible in the
evenings and o n weekends is vital - especially for female youth, w ho are very likely to be victim ized and
to engage in high risk survival strategies (W hitbeck et al., 2001). While this service could alleviate the
im m ediate risk facing young w om en w ho are currently hom eless in W hitehorse, there is m uch m ore
that needs to be done as the systemic issues m ust also be addressed in order to prevent young w om en
from being put at risk o f hom elessness.
T he recently released rep o rt on W hitehorse youth hom elessness (Finton & K ram er, 2005)
advocates for a com m unity based multi-agency, m ulti-faceted continuum o f services for hom eless
youth. A com m unity based approach is confirm ed by a rising voice in youth hom elessness research
w hich is recom m ending that solutions be designed to em pow er youth (Avdes & H elfrich, 2004),
follow a m odel o f wellness (Cadell et al., 2001), and employ com m unity developm ent and social action
m odels (Karabanow, 1999).
W hitbeck et al. (1999) focus on the need to build on the strengths and independence o f
hom eless youth, as does K arabanow (2003) in his description o f a culmre o f hope. A culm re o f hope is
an environm ent in w hich individuals can gain strength, courage, resiliency, and a sense o f optim ism for

115

tke p tesen t and tke futnte (Katabanow , 2003). T be Canada M ortgage and H ousing C orporation
(2002b) also supports reducing econom ic and social exclusion through involvem ent o f participants in
program s and services. T ogether, these interventions and prevention tools could be em ployed in a
com m unity plan that w ould facilitate social change.
In W hitehorse, such a com m unity plan should include the youth agencies, as well as all other
interested stakeholders. MuUaly (1997) advises that coalition building is an effective tool for obtaining
social change, and this m odel has been proven to be effective in other program s in W hitehorse. Finton
and K ram er (2005) also recom m end coalition budding as an integral com ponent o f the com m unity
plan that they recom m end for W hitehorse for addressing youth hom elessness. T hrough the
establishm ent o f a coaUtion, aU m em bers o f the pubUc, non-governm ental agencies, governm ent
departm ents, and o ther interested stakeholders can share responsibUity and decision m aking authority.
CoaUtions aUow groups to share knowledge and expertise and are thus also a tool for com m unity
developm ent.
A com m unity plan for W hitehorse m ust also include an array o f services that are based on a
b o tto m up approach. Self help program s have been noted to em pow er the individuals w ho participate
in them , through consciousness raising and coUectivism (MuUaly, 1997). A n alternative agency can be
form ed to facUitate youth self help program s, and a com m unity coaUtion could act as a coordinating
body for the estabUshment o f self help program s, to recruit volunteers, apply for funding, and estabUsh
any initial guidelines and poUcies. A n alternative agency is one w hich distances itself b o th
phUosophicaUy and physicaUy from governm ent, and takes a clearly unconventional approach to
services. Alternative agencies respect the expertise o f service users, and tend to be non-hierarchical.
Funding is a critical aspect o f aU services, and there is currently no ongoing program funding
for specific youth services in W hitehorse, other than the state youth protection system. T he Y ukon

116

governm ent m ust be convinced o f the im portance o f funding a shelter system for Y ukon’s youth, and
for supporting program s that provide the support that youth need to stay o ff the street. This
com m itm ent should be dem onstrated by a willingness to w ork w ith a coahtion, and by providing a
hum an resource that is dedicated to hom elessness issues, research, and youth health prom otion.
Shelters are unable to operate on project funding, and require the com m itm ent o f longer term
operational funding from the territorial governm ent. W hde a coalition is im portant in advocating for
youth specific shelters that wdl address the needs o f various age groups as wed as male and female
youth, and com m unity m em bers (including youth) may be expected to shoulder som e w ork, the bulk
o f the w ork itself m ust be funded by the governm ent.
T he Y ukon governm ent has a history o f political inconsistency. W hde one governm ent may
m ake com m itm ents to address particular issues, the reahty is that it w ould be highly unusual for one
pohtical party to rem ain in office for m ore than one term . T hus, it is very im portant that the youth
agencies, alternative agencies, and the coahtion be prepared to m ake youth hom elessness an issue o f
note for each governm ent, to pubhcly hold governm ent accountable, and to advocate w ith each
governm ent for long term com m itm ent to a com m unity based plan. Advocacy may occur at the federal
level as wed as locahy since leadership and com m itm ent are also lacking in Ottaw a. W hde Canada has
ratified the U N C onvention on the Rights o f the Chdd, our country has no legislation in place to guide
the country in im plem entation o f the Convention. T he im pacts o f the C onvention for youth and
chddren in Canada can only be insignificant if there are no accountabihty systems or leadership for the
governm ents o f the provinces and territories. In campaigning for youth rights, advocates m ay send
delegates to the U N for assistance to hold the Canadian governm ent accountable for fading to solve
the problem o f youth hom elessness. T hese delegates to the U N should include som e young adolescent
w om en w ho have experienced hom elessness.

117

W hile W hitehorse is currently in dire need o f youth services for hom eless youth and youth at
risk o f hom elessness, especially young w om en, there is hope for the future. T he com m unity has begun
to take action through the Y outh hom elessness rep o rt (Finton & K ram er, 2005) and its
recom m endations, and discussions are occurring at the grass roots and within governm ent. T h e p ro o f
o f the level o f com m itm ent o f local governm ent to addressing this issue wül be in the types o f services
and the funding com m itm ent that result.

118

References

Aviles, A. & H elfrich, C. (2004). Life skill service needs: Perspectives o f hom eless youth [Electronic
version].

of Youth and Adolescence, 33(4), 331-338.

Ayers, L, K avanaugh, K ., & K nafl, K. (2003). W ithin-case and across-case approaches to quahtative
data analysis \Elec\xom.c'vetssovi\. Qualitative Health Research. 13(6), 871-883.
BeU, P. (2004, June 17). T he Cam paign - N unavut: Big riding. Few voters. O ne MP. C B C News.
Retrieved from http: / / w w w .cbc.ca/canadavotes/ thecam paign/nunavutriding.htm l.
Bitoun, G. (1999, May). T he A T D fourth w orld m ovem ent. Share International Retrieved on June 18,
2005 from http://w w w .share-international.org/archives/hom elessness/hl-gbatd.htm .
Bridgm an, R. (2001). 1 helped build that: A dem onstration em ploym ent training program for hom eless
youth in T o ro n to , Canada

American Anthropologist, 103(3), 779-795.

Brooks, R.A., M ilburn, N .G ., Rotheram -B orus, M.J., & W hite, A. (2003). T he system -of-care for
hom eless youth: Perceptions o f service providers [Electronic version]. Evaluation and Program
Plannings 27(4) 443-451.

CadeU, S, K arabanow , J, and Sanchez, M. (2001). Com m unity, em pow erm ent, and resUience: path to
wellness. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 20(1), 21-35.
Caledon Institute o f Social Pohcy. (2000, O ctober). N ational Strategy on C om m unity Safety and Crime
Prevention. ISBN # 1-894598-08-3. [electronic version].
CaUaghan, M. (1990). H ousing rig h ts.. .for adults only?. Canadian Women’s Studieslhes Cahiers de al
Femme, 11(2), 61-62.

CampbeU, M. & Frymire, A. (2005). W rap up rep o rt —Business & Com m unity, w orking together to
end hom elessness. U npubhshed docum ent.

119

Cam pbell, R. & Schfam , P.J. (1995). Fem inist research m ethods: A content analysis o f psychology and
social science textbooks [Electronic version]. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 19, 85-106.
Canada M ortgage and H ousing C orporation (2002a). Involving hom eless and form erly hom eless
cUents in projects and program s to address hom elessness. P^search Highlights, Sodo-Ecommlcs
Series 98^ (Available from website www.cmhc-schl.gc.ca).

Canada M ortgage and H ousing C orporation (2002b). Innovative housing for hom eless youth. Research
Highlights, Socio-economic Series Issue 108,, (Available from website www.cmhc.ca).

Canadian Children’s Rights Council. (2004). R eport on C anada’s N ational Child D ay retrieved July 13,
2005 from h ttp://w w w .canadiancrc.com /N ational Child D ay.htm .
Canadian Pubhc H ealth Association. (1997). C P H A 1997 Position Paper on Homelessness and Health.
Retrieved on June 18, 2005 from
h ttp ://w w w .cp h a.ca/enghsh/poH cy/pstatem /hom eles / pagel .htm.
Cauce, A. M. (2000). T he characteristics and m ental health o f hom eless adolescents: Age and gender
differences [Electronic version]. Journal of Emotional (pT Behavioral Disorders, 8 (4), 230-239.
Cauce, A. M., & M organ, C. J. (1994). Effectiveness o f intensive case m anagem ent for hom eless
adolescents: Results o f a 3-m onth follow-up [Electronic y &H\o E\. Journal of Emotional &
Behavioral Disorders, 2 (4), 219-228.

Chen, X., Tyler, K.A., W hitbeck, L.B., & H oyt, D. R. (2004). Early sexual abuse, street adversity, and
drug use am ong female hom eless and runaway adolescents in the M idw est [Electronic
vemsion]. Journal of Drug Issues, 34(1), 1-22.

Corrado, R. R., O dgers, C. & Choen, I. M. (2000). T he incarceration o f female young offenders:
P rotection for whom ? [Electronic version]. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 42(2), 189-207.

120

C uputo, T., W eilet, R., & A nderson,}. (1997). T he Street Lifestyle Study [Electronic version]. H ealth
Canada. ISBN 0-662-24823-6.
Eichler, M. (1997). Fem inist m ethodology [Electronic version]. Current Sociology, 45(2), 9-36.
Fin ton, H. & K ram er, M. (2005). R oom to grow: A m ade-in-Y ukon m odel o f service for hom eless
youth. U npublished M anuscript.
F ont, C. (1988, N ovem ber). H om elessness in Spain —“W e help them recover their self-esteem ” . Share
International. Retrieved on June 18, 2005 from

http://w w w .share-intem ational.org/archives/hom elessness/hl-cfS pain.htm .
G aetz, S. & O 'G rady, B. (2002). M aking money: E xploring the econom y o f young hom eless workers.
Work, C,mployment and Society: A . Journal of the British Sociological Association, 16(3), 433-456.

G ehm air, L, C ochrane, R., & B olton, C. (producers). (2004). 2 Cents Worth: Poperp in the Yukon [film].
(Available from Y ukon College, P.O . 2799, W hitehorse, Y ukonY lA 5K4).
G iroux, H.A. (2003). Racial injustice and disposable youth in the age o f zero tolerance [Electronic
YÇXÛoxd\. Qualitative Studies in education, 16(4), 553-565.

G oodm an, L, Saxe, L., & Harvey, M. (1991). H om elessness as psychological trauma: Broadening
perspectives

American Psychologist, 46(11), 1219-1225.

G overnm ent o f Canada. (May 10, 2004). A Canada Fit for Children [press release]. Retrieved on July
13, 2005 from http://w w w .canadiancrc.com /C anadian governm ents plan 2004.htm l.
G overnm ent o f Canada. (April, 2004). A Canada Fit for Children [report]. R etrieved on Ju n e 18, 2005
from h ttp :/ / w w w l 1.hrsdc.gc.ca/e n /c s / sp /h rsd c /so c p o l/p u b lic a tio n s/2 0 0 2 -0 ...
G overnm ent o f Canada, (n.d.). N ational H om elessness Initiative. Last updated A pril 18, 2005.
Retrieved June 18, 2005 from h t t p : / / w w w .hom elessness.gc.ca/intiative/index e.asp.

121

G overnm ent o f Canada, (n.d.) N ational R eport on Investm ents and A ccom plishm ents. Retrieved
Ju n e 18, 2005 from h ttp ://w w w .hom elessness.gc.ca/reportcard/accom plishm entsinvestm e. ..
G overnm ent o f Canada. (2003). Y outh Profile T o ro n to /Y o rk Service DeHvery Sector H um an
Resources D evelopm ent Canada. Retrieved on June 18, 2005 from
h ttp ://w w w .hrsdc.gc.ca/asp/gatew ay.asp?hr= en/on / offices / toronto / w o ...
G reene, J. M, & Ringwalt, C. L. (1997). Shelters for runaway and hom eless youths: Capacity and
occupancy [Electronic version]. Child Welfare, 76(4), 549-561.
H aber, M .G., & T oro, A. (2004). H om elessness am ong families, children, and adolescents: A n
ecological-developm ental perspective [Electronic version]. Clinical Child andFamilj Psjchologji Pevie.

7(3), 123-164.
Hargrave, C. (1999, April). H om elessness in Canada - from housing to shelters to blankets. Share
International. Retrieved on June 18, 2005 from

h ttp ://w w w .share-international.org/archives/hom elessness/hl-ch_C an. ..
H arm an, L.D. (1992). T he fem inization o f poverty: A n old problem with a new nam e. Canadian Woman
Studies Journal, 12(4), 6-9.

H einonen, T., & Spearm an, L. (2001). C hapter 13: A fem inist approach to social work. Social Work
Practice. T oronto: Irw in Publishing.

H erm an, D . B. & Susser, E. S. (1997). A dverse childhood experiences: A re they risk factors for adult
homelessness? [Electronic version].

Journal of Public Health, 87(2), 249-255.

Higgitt, N ., W ingert, S., Ristock, J., Brow n, M., Ballantyne, M., Caett, S., Coy, K., & Q uoquat, R.
(2003). Voices from the margins: Experiences o f street-involved youth in W innipeg [Electronic
version], Canada H ousing and M ortgage Corporation; Social Sciences and H um anities Research
Council o f Canada.

122

H om elessness in Holland. (1999, June). Share International. Retrieved on June 18, 2005 from
http: / / w w w .share-intem ational.org/archives/hom elessness/ht-H oU and.htm .
H oyt, D . R., Ryan, K. D ., & Cauce, A. M. (1999). Personal victim ization in a high-risk environm ent:
H om eless and runaway adolescents, journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36(4), 371-392.
Jackson, M.P. & McSwane, D .Z . (1992). H om elessness as a determ inant o f health. Ruhlic Health
Nursing, 9(3), 185-192.

Janus, M .D., A rcham bault, F. X., & Brown, S. (1995). Physical abuse in Canadian runaw ay adolescents.
Child Abuse <& Neglect, 19 (4), 433-447.

Joyappa, V. & M artin, D . J. (1996). Exploring alternative research epistemologies for adult education:
Participatory research, fem inist research and fem inist participatory research [Electronic version].
A d u lt Education Quarterly, 47(1), 1-10.

K arabanow , J. (1999). Creating comm unity: a case study o f a M ontreal street kid agency [Electronic
version]. Community Development journal, 34(4), 318-327.
K arabanow , J. (2002). O p en for business: E xploring the life stages o f two Canadian street youth
shelters [Electronic version], journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, XXIX(4), 99-116.
K arabanow , J. ( 2003). Creating a culture o f hope: Lessons from street children agencies in Canada and
Guatemala. International Social lFon&j_46(3), 369-386.
K idd, S.A., & Krai, M.J. (2003). Suicide and prostitution am ong street youth: A qualitative analysis
[Electronic version].

37(146), 411-430.

Kinzel, D. (1991). Self-identified health concerns o f tw o hom eless groups [Electronic version]. Western
journal ofNursingRxsearch, 13(20), 181-194.

Kipke, M.C. Palm er, R.F., LaFrance, S., & O 'C onnor, S. (1997). Hom eless youths' descriptions o f their
parents' child-rearing practices. Youth <0° Society, 28(4), 415-431.

123

Kipke, M .D., Simon, T.R., M ontgom ery, S.B., U nger, J.B., & Iversen, E.F. (1997). H om eless youth
and their exposure to and involvem ent in violence while living on the streets. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 20, 360-367.

Kipke, M .D, & U nger, J.B. (1997). Street youth, their peer group affiliation and differences according
to residential status, subsistence patterns, and use o f services [Electronic version]. Adolescence,

32(127), 655-669.
Kris tins do ttir, S. M. (2004, Septem ber 24). H om eless youth left out in the cold. The Yukon N e m , p5.
Koegel, P., Melamid, E., & Burnam , M. A. (1995). C hildhood risk factors for hom elessness am ong
hom eless adults. American Journal of Tublic Health, 85(12), 1642-1649.
Kraus, D ., Eberle, M. & Serge, L. (2001). Environmental Scan on Youth Homelessness: Tinal Report.
G overnm ent o f Canada: Canada M ortgage and H ousing C orporation, www.cm hc-schl.gc.ca.
K urtz, P.D . Jarvis, S.V., & K urtz, G.L. (1991). Problem s o f hom eless youths: Em pirical findings and
hum an services issues [Electronic version]. Social Work, 36(4), 309-314.
Kuyek, J.N . (1990). Tipf tingfo r Hope: Organising to Realis^ our Dreams. M ontreal: Black Rose Books.
Le Cam p, J. (2001). A n exploratoiy study of Whitehorse serviceproviders perceptions of homelessness issuesforjoung
women escaping violence. U npublished m anuscript.

Levine, M., T oro, P. A., & Perkins, D . V. (1993). Social and com m unity interventions.
Psychology, 44, 525-58.

Lorde, A. (1993). T h e m aster’s tools will never dism antle the m aster’s house. In L. R ichardson & V.
Taylor (Eds.) Feminist Frontiers III. (pp. 10-11). T oronto, Canada: M cGraw-Hill, Inc.
M acLean, M .G., Em bry, L.E., & Cauce, A.M. (1999). H om eless adolescents' paths to separation from
family: C om parison o f family characteristics, psychological adjustm ent, and victim ization
\Electi:onic version]. Journal of Community Psychology, 27(2), 179-187.

124

Mallet, S., Rosenthal, D ., & Keys, D . (2005). Y oung people, dm g use and family conflict: Pathways into
hom elessness ]^&c\x.ox^cY&in.ov^. journal of Adolescence, 28, 185-199.
MaUet, S., Rosenthal, D ., Myers, P., M ilburn, N ., & Rotheram -B orus, M.J. (2004). Practising
homelessness: A typology approach to young people’s daily routines [Electronic version],

of

Adolescence, 27, 337-349.

M cCarthy, B. & Hagan, J. (1992). M ean streets: T he theoretical significance o f situational delinquency
am ong hom eless youths. American Journal of Sociology, 98(3), 597-627.
M cCarthy, B., Hagan, J., & M artin, M .J. (2002). In and out o f harm 's way: violent victim ization and the
social capital o f fictive street families. Criminology, 40(4), 831-865.
M cDowell, J. & M adsen K. (2001). House and Home - A Study of Whitehorse Youth at RisÀ of Homelessness.
N o rth ern Research Institute. U npublished m anuscript.
M cG regor, S. (2005, April 13). U N C onvention on the rights o f the child popular, b u t hard to enforce.
The Embassy, Diplomacy This Week. Retrieved July 28, 2005 from

h ttp ://w w w .canadiancrc.com /articles/Em bassy_Signed_D eH vered_B. ..
McKay, A. (2004). Sex Research U pdate [Electronic version]. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality,
13(1), 57.
McKay, S. (1999). Postm odernism , social well-being, and the m ainstream /progressive debate. In F. J.
T urner (ed) Social Work Practise: A Canadian Perspective (pp 10-22). Scarborough, O ntario: Prentice
HaU AUyn and Bacon Canada.
M cK night, J. (1997). A 2pt-century m ap for healthy com m unities and families. Tamilies in Society: The
Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 78(21), 117-127.

Miller, P., D onahue, P., Este, D ., & H ofer, M. (2004). Experiences o f being hom eless or at risk o f
being hom eless am ong Canadian youths [Electronic version]. Adolescence, 39(156), 735-755.

125

M ontell, F. (2001). Focus group interviews: A new fem inist m ethod [Electronic version]. iVIFXd
Journal, 11(1), 44-71.

MuUaly, B. (1997). StructuralSodalWork —Ideology, Theory, andPractice. O ntario: O xford University Press.
M urphy, B. (2000). On the Street - How we Created the Homeless. Canada: J. G o rd o n ShiUingford Pubhshing
Inc.
N ational H ousing Research Com m ittee. (2002, Fall). Survey reveals Nunavut’s hidden homeless. New sletter.
NoeU, J., Rohde, P., Seeley,}., & O chs, L. (2001). C hildhood sexual abuse, adolescent sexual coercion
and sexually transm itted infection acquisition am ong hom eless fem ale adolescents [Electronic
version]. Child Abuse Cr Neglect, 25(1), 137-148.
N o rth , C. S., & Smith, E. M. (1993). A com parison o f hom eless m en and wom en: D ifferent
populations, different needs. Community Mental Health Journal, 29(5), 423-431.
N ovae, S., B row n,}., & B ourbonnais, C. (1996). N o room of her own: A literature review on women and
homelessness. G overnm ent o f Canada: Canadian M ortgage and H ousing C orporation.

www.cm hc-schlgc.ca.
N ovae, S., B row n,}. & Gallant, G. (1999). Women on the rough edge: A decade of changefo r long-term homeless
women. Canada M ortgage and H ousing C orporation. CM H C File 6585-N 027).

N ovae, S., Serge, L., Eberle, M., & B ro w n ,}. (2002). On her own: Young women and homelessness in Canada.
G overnm ent o f Canada: Status o f W om en Canada. Canadian H ousing and Renewal Association.
h ttp :/ / www.swc-cfc.gc.ca.
O 'B rien, C., Travers, R., & Bell, L. (1993). N o Safe Bed: Hesbian, Gay and Bisexual Youth in P^sidential
Services. T oronto: Central T o ro n to Y outh Services.

O vernight w eekend youth shelter opening. (2003, }uly 31). C B C North. Retrieved }uly 13, 2005 from
h ttp ://n o rth .c b c .c a /regional/servlet/V iew ?G lenam e=]uly 24sidedoor0—

126

Panter-Brick, C. (2002). Street children, hum an rights, and public health; A critique and future
directions [Electronic version]. A nnual review of anthropology!, 31, 147-171.
P atton, M .Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and ^search Methods (second edition). N ew bury Park,
London: Sage PubHcations.
Pawsey, R. & FuUer, A. 1993. T h e hom elessness agencies resource project [Electronic version]. Youth
Studies, 12 (1), 45-47.

Peressini, T. & M cD onald, L. (2000). U rban hom elessness in Canada. In T. B unting & P. Fihon (Eds.),
Canadian Cities in Transition, (pp. 525-543). D o n Mills Ontario: O xford University Press.

PoUio, C. E., T hom pson, S. J., & N o rth , C. S. (2000). Agency-based tracking o f difficult-to-foUow
populations: Runaway and hom eless youth program s in St. Louis, M issouri [Electronic version].
Community Mental Health Journal, 36(3), 247-258.

PoUio, D . E., M cD onald, S. M., & N o rth , C. S. (1996). Com bining a strengths-based approach and
fem inist theory in group w ork w ith persons 'on the streets'. Social Work with Groups, 19(3/4), 5-20.
Raleigh-DuRoff, C. (2004). Factors that influence hom eless adolescents to leave or stay hving on the
street. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 21(6), 561-572.
Reid, P., & Klee, H. (1999). Y oung hom eless people and service provision [Electronic version]. Health
and Social Care in the Community, 7(1), 17-24.

Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist Methods in Social Kesearch. N ew York: O xford University Press Inc.
Rew, L. (2002). Relationships o f sexual abuse, connectedness, and loneliness to perceived well-being in
hom eless youth. JSPN , 7(2), 51-63.
Rew, L., Taylor-Seehafer, M., T hom as, N.Y., & Yockey, R.D. (2001). Correlates o f resilience in
hom eless adolescents [Electronic vetsion ]. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33(1), 33-40.

127

Ricks, F., Chaflesw orth, J., Bellefeuille, G., Field, A. (1999). JiHTogether Now: Creating a Social Capital
Mosaic. Victoria, British Columbia: Francis Ricks, and O ttaw a, Canada: V anier Institute o f the

Family.
Ringwalt, C. L., G reene, J. M., R obertson, M.., & M cPheeters, M. (1998). T he prevalence o f
hom elessness am ong adolescents in the U nited States [Electronic vexs,iori\. American Journal of Public

88(9), 1325-1329.
R obert, M., Pauze, R., & Fournier, L. (2005). Factors associated w ith hom elessness o f adolescents
under supervision o f the youth protection system [Electronic version]. Journal of Adolescence, 28,

215-230.
Rosenthal, D ., & MaUett, S. (2003). Involuntary sex experienced by hom eless young people: A public
health problem . Psychological Reports, 93, 1195-1196.
R otheram -B orus, M. J. (1993). Suicidal behaviour and risk factors am ong runaw ay youths. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 150(1), 103-107.

R otheram -B orus, M.J., Parra, M., Cantwell, C., Gw adz, M., & M urphy, D. A.. (1996). Runaway and
hom eless youths. In R. J. D iClem ente, W. B. H ansen, and L. E. P o n to n (Eds.), Handbook of
Adolescent Health Rdsk Behaviour, (pp. 369-391). N ew York: Plenum Press.

Ryan, K .D ., Kilm er, R.P., Cause, A.M., W atanabe, H ., & H oyt, D.R. (2000). Psychological
consequences o f child m altreatm ent in hom eless adolescents: Untangling the unique effects o f
m altreatm ent and family environm ent. Child Abuse

Neglect, 24(3), 333-352.

Sam pson, R. J., & Lauritsen, J. L. (1990). D eviant lifestyles, proxim ity to crime, and the
offender-victim link in personal violence [Electronic vetsion ]. Journal of Research in Crime <ù°

y, 27(2), 110-139.

128

Sckweitzeir, R.D ., & H iet, S J. (1994). Patentai bonding, family systems, and environm ental predictors
o f adolescent hom elessness [Electronic version]. Journal of Emotional qIt Behavioral Disorders, 2(1),
39-45.
Serge, L. (1999). Documentation of Best Practices Addressing Homelessness. G overnm ent o f Canada: Canada
M ortgage and H ousing C orporation. Cat. N o. N H l 5-329-1999E.
Smith, D . (1995). First Person Plural: A Community Development Approach to Social Change. M ontreal,
Quebec: Black Rose Books.
Standing Senate C om m ittee on H um an Rights. (February 14, 2005). Unrevised Evidence. Retrieved
July 28, 2005 from http://w w w .canadiancrc.com /S enate_hearings_child_rights_38th/S en—
Standing Senate C om m ittee on H um an Rights. (N ovem ber 18, 2004). E xert retrieved from
http://w w w .canadiancrc.com /S enate_hearings_child_rights_38th/S en...
Statistics Canada. (2001). 2001 Census Analysis Series - 2001 Census: Collective Dwellings. G overnm ent o f
Canada, catalogue: 96F0030X IE2001004.
Stewart, M., R eutter, L., L etourneau, N ., B arnfather, A., Hungles, K., A lm ond, A., & King, K. (2004).
Support intervention for hom eless youth: Phase 1. U npublished M anuscript, University o f
Alberta.
Tang, K. L. (2003 ). Im plem enting the U nited N ations convention on the rights o f the child; T he
Canadian experience. International Social Work, 46(3), 277-288.
Teen shelter at end o f financial rope. (2004, January 9). CBC N orth. Retrieved Ju n e 18, 2005 from
h ttp ://n o rth .c b c .c a /regional/ servelet/V iew ?filenam e=jan09iqsheltteen...
T hom pson, S. M., & B arrett, P. A. (1997). Sum mary oral reflective analysis: A m eth o d for interview
data analysis in fem inist qualitative research. Advances in Nursing Science, 20(2), 55-65.

129

Tom as, A., & D ittm ar, H. (1995). T he experience o f hom eless women: A n exploration o f housing
histories and the m eaning o f hom e [Electronic version]. Homing Studies, 10(4), 493-515.
Tyler, K.A., H oyt, D .R., W hitbeck, L.B., & Cauce, A.M. (2001). T he im pact o f childhood sexual abuse
on later sexual victim ization am ong runaway youth [Electronic version]. Journal ofKesearch on
Adolescence, 11(2), 151-176.

Ubelacker, S. 2004. Street youth m ore likely to die o f suicide, drug overdose: M ontreal study. Canadian
Press, August 7, 2004. T he Canadian H arm Reduction N etw ork website.
V an Leeuwen, J. (2004). Reaching the hard to reach: Innovative housing for hom eless youth through
strategic parm erships [Electronic version]. Child Welfare, L X X X III (5), 453-468.
Y onn, M. (2004, O cto b er 20). Safe streets - laws for us, laws for them . Vancouver Sun. Retrieved on July
1, 2005 from h ttp ://w w w .bccla.org/o th e rc o n te n t/04safestreetsvonn.htm .
W estbrook, L. (1994). Qualitative research m ethods: A review o f m ajor stages, data analysis
techniques. Ubrary and Information Science ^search, 16(3), 241-254.
W hitbeck, L.B., & Simons, R.L. (1990). Life on the streets: T he victim ization o f runaway and hom eless
adolescents [Electronic version]. Youth (& Society, 22(1), 108-125.
W hitbeck, L.B., H oyt, D.R., & Ackley, K.A. (1997). Families o f hom eless and runaway adolescents: A
com parison o f p arent/caretaker and adolescent perspectives on parenting, family violence, and
adolescent conduct. Child Abuse (àr Neglect, 21(6), 517-528.
W hitbeck, L.B., H oyt, D.R., & Y oder, K.A. (1999). A risk-ampHfication m odel o f victim ization and
depressive sym ptom s am ong runaway and hom eless adolescents. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 27(2), 273-297.

130

W hitbeck, L.B., H oyt, D.R., Y odef, D.A ., Cauce, A.M., & Patadise, M. (2001). D eviant behavior and
victim ization am ong hom eless and runaway adolescents . o

f

Interpersonal Violence, 16(11),

1175-1204.
T he W hitehorse Planning G roup on H om elessness. (2001). The Whitehorse Community Plan on
Homelessness. UnpubHshed m anuscript.

W ojm sik, L., & Castle W hite, M. (1998). H ealth stams, needs, and health care barriers am ong the
h om eless. Journal of Health Carefo r the Poor and Underserved, 9(2), 140-152.

W olfe, S., & T oro, P.A. (1999). A com parison o f hom eless and m atched housed adolescents on family
environm ent variables [Electronic version]. Journal ofPxsearch on Adolescence, 9(1), 53-66.
W right, J.D . (1990). P o o r people, p o o r health: T he health stams o f the hom eless. Journal of Social
Issues, 46(4), 49-64.

Yates, G.L., M acKenzie, R., Pennbridge, J., & Cohen, E. (1988). A risk profile com parison o f runaway
and non-runaway youth. American Journal of Public Health, (37), 820-821.
Younger-Lewis, G. (2005, March 11). Homeless shelter on the rocks. Nunatsiaq News. Retrieved on July 13, 2005
from http: / / w w w .nunatsiaq.com /archives /5 0 3 1 1 /news / n u n a v u t/50311 08.htm .

131

A ppendix A - Summary o f K ey Y outh H om elessness Studies
Researcher(s)

Year

L ocation

Purpose o f Study

Key Findings

Bridgm an, R.

2001

T o ro n to ,
Canada

Pilot project designed to provide
housing and em ploym ent training
opportunities.

• Challenges w ere related to youth participation,
representational authority, and conflicting values;
•

Requires flexibility on p art o f organizers;

• Requires sensitivity related to privacy and
publicity;
• Y outh develop sense o f com m unity and agency,
b u t then enter a w orkplace w ith different values.
Cadell, S.
K arabanow , J.
Sanchez, M.

Cauce, A.

2001

2000

M ontreal,
Canada

Seattle, U.S.

Exam ines em pow erm ent, resilience,
and com m unity —building in three
populations to develop a wellness
model.

• C om m unity is im p o rtan t in fostering
em pow erm ent and resilience and these in turn lead
to stronger com m unity;

Exam ines characteristics and m ental
health o f hom eless adolescents.

• Y outh hom elessness num bers are growing;
• Rem oval from h o m e by state authorities was a
significant pathw ay to hom elessness;

• N atural com m unities are am ong the last
rem aining hopes fo r m arginalized populations.

• Girls w ere m o re likely to leave hom e on their
ow n than boys (because o f higher rates o f abuse);
• Recognition o f gender and age based
heterogeneity is im p o rtan t in program developm ent.
Corrado, R.
O dgers, C.
C ohen, I.

2000

F inton, H.
K ram er, M.

2005

British
Colum bia,
Canada
Y ukon,
Canada

Explores offending patterns, social
histories, and crim inal justice
system’s response to m o st serious
female young offenders in B.C.
Explores m odels for service
provision for hom eless youth in
W hitehorse.

•

M ost offences are m inor o r administrative;

• Prim ary rationale for incarcerating young
w om en is to p ro te c t them (not society).
• C ontinuum o f services needed based on age,
gender, and specific needs;
• Flexible, small, nonbureaucratic agencies
needed;

132

• Coalition o f service providers assum ing
collective responsibihty recom m ended.
G oodm an, L.
Saxe, L.
Harvey, M.

1991

U.S.

G overnm ent o f
Canada

2003

T oronto,
Canada

Exam ines the effects o f
hom elessness itself on m ental
health.

• Many hom eless individuals m ay be experiencing
short and long term traum a w rought by
hom elessness itself;
•

Profiles youth in the T o ro n to /Y o rk
region.

D evelopm ent o f traum a theory.

• 75% to 82% o f hom eless youth in T o ro n to do
n o t use th e shelter system;
• in 2002, 6,900 youth stayed in municipally
funded shelters (T oronto; estim ated; up to age 24)
• youth u n d er 18 are one o f the tw o fastest
grow ing hom eless groups.

G reen, J. M.
Ringwalt, C. L.

1997

U.S.

Analyses data from national sample
o f youth hom eless and runaway
shelters to assess occupancy rates.

•

Y o u th shelters have low occupancy rates;

• Many youth perceive youth shelters to be
unsafe;
• H om eless youth are am ong the m o st vulnerable,
elusive, a n d difficult to serve populations.

Higgit, N.
W ingert, S.
Ristock, J.
E t al.

2003

W innipeg,
Canada

Exam ines how youth cam e to be on
the street; w h at their hves w ere like
then; w h at things m ade Hfe on street
harder or easier; w hat m ight
facilitate m ove o ff the street.

• M any y outh perceive they have n o choice b u t to
leave hom e;
• Y outh becom e hom eless due to failure o f family,
school, com m unity, child protection, and youth
corrections systems;
• T he longer on the street, the harder it is to g e t
o ff although m o st youth dream o f m eaningful
em ploym ent, education, hom es, cares, and famihes;
• Y o u th w an t control over their lives and
destinies.

Janus, M. D .
A rcham bault, F. X.
Brown, S.W.
W elsh, L. A.

1995

Canada

Investigates the physical abuse
experienced in Canadian adolescent
runaways.

• 86% o f sam ple (195 youth) reported physical
abuse (females 90%);
• data suggests chronic, extrem e abuse at a young
age, initiated prior to runaw ay episode;

133

• female youth at greater risk than m ales for all
types o f abuse.
K arabanow , J.

1999

M ontreal,
Canada

Explores the developm ent o f an
em ergency street kid shelter.

• Success o f this shelter is due to recognition and
acceptance, o f and respect for, street culture and to
providing youth w ith pivotal roles in agency
developm ent;
• G o o d exam ple o f locahty developm ent and
social action.

K arabanow , J.

2002

T oronto,
Canada

Explores the life stages o f two
T o ro n to youth shelters.

• These shelters have ad ap ted /ev o lv ed to address
need and environm ents, and to survive;
• Consciously provide services to form al
“system ” youth, as opposed to street kids (original
target).

K arabanow , J.

2003

T o ro n to &
M ontreal,
Canada &
Guatem ala

Illuminates the experiences o f street
children in T o ro n to , M ontreal, and
G uatem ala City.

• Labeling youth as delinquents, criminals,
victim s, chents enables us to avoid seeing them as
hum an;
• Program s m o st successful provide a sym bohc
space w here youth feel safe, cared for, and part o f a
comm unity;
•

N o tio n o f citizenship rather than pathology;

• Successful agencies are flexible, respectful, a n d
allow youth to retain dignity.
Kraus, D.
Eberle, M.
Serge, L.

M acLean, M. G.
E m bry, L. E.
Cauce, A.

2001

1999

Canada

W ashington,
U.S.

Exam ines youth hom elessness
across Canada.

Investigates three paths to
hom elessness o r separation firom
family: running away, being kicked

• Y outh have sam e general characteristics across
the C ountry (i.e. exposure to physical violence,
conflict w ith the law, m ental health problem s);
•

M any have been raised in foster hom es;

•

N u m b er o f hom eless young w o m en is growing;

•

Lifestyles o f hom eless youth puts health at risk.

• N o differences w ere found in cu rren t family
relationships, psychological sym ptom atology or
rates o f recent victim ization;

134

M cD ow ell,}.
M adsen, K.

2001

W hitehorse,
Canada

out, and being rem oved from hom e
by state.

• Girls w ere m ore likely to have ru n away, and
boys were m ore likely to be kicked out.

Investigates youth hom elessness
issues in W hitehorse.

• H om eless youth are largely invisible, difficult to
count, mobile;
• 64% stated th at they som etim es felt they had
now here to stay;
• 62% stated th at they som etim es hve outd o o rs o r
camp;
•
70% stated th at they som etim es go w ithout
meals;
• 51% stated that they did n o t have enough
m oney to m eet basic food and shelter needs;
•

M cCarthy, B.
H agan, J.
M artin, M. J.

2002

Miller, P.
D onahue, P.
Este, D.
H ofer, M.

2004

U.S.

Lethbridge
& Calgary,
Canada

Tests the hypothesis that street
families generate social capital
resources that pro tect hom eless
youth from harm.
Exam ines diversity issues am ong
hom eless youth and those a t risk o f
hom elessness in a larger city and a
smaller city.

28% stated th at they h ad jobs;

• D ifferentiates b etw een fictive street famihes and
non-fam ily street groups;
• D ata suggests th a t fictive street famihes increase
support in areas o f shelter, food, and incom e, and
reduce victim ization.
• Them es com m on to youth hom elessness and
risk o f hom elessness included family
conflict/violence, lack o f perm anence in housing,
and financial constraints;
• Y outh looked u p o n their sim ations as
tem porary;
• Lack o f education contributed to em ploym ent
lim itations, b u t lack o f part tim e w ork kept y outh
from pursuing education;
•

N ovae, S.
Serge, L.
Eberle, M.

2002

Canada

Explores the causes, dem ographics
and patterns o f young w o m en ’s
hom elessness in Canada.

H igh rehance o n social netw orks.

• It is n o t possible to estabhsh the level o f
hom elessness am ong young w om en in Canada;
•

Y oung w om en m ake u p V s to Vz o f hom eless

135

B row n, J.

youth in Canada;
• Cross sectional research m ethods miss cycles o f
hom elessness and over represent groups;
• Provides extensive inform ation o n a num ber o f
factors im pacting and influencing y oung w om en’s
hom elessness in Canada.

Perissini, R.
M acD onald, L.

2000

Canada

Reviews contem porary research on
Canadian hom elessness.

• D escribe tw o national attem pts to count the
hom eless
• Statistics C anada (1991)- did n o t release findings
due to inaccuracies;
• Canadian C ouncil on Social D evelopm ent and
CM H C (1987) - estim ated 130,000 to 250,000
(unable to confirm accuracy)

Rew, L.
Taylor-Seehafer, M.
T hom as, N . Y.
Yockey, R. D.

Ringwalt, C. L.
G reene, J.
R obertson, M.
M cPheeters, M.

2001

1998

U.S.

U.S.

Exam ines reasons for youth
hom elessness, explores relationship
betw een resilience and risk and
protective factors; identifies
differences in risk and protective
factors by gender; determ ines best
predictors o f resüience.
Smdies prevalence o f hom eless
episodes am ong adolescents in the

U.S.

•

Nearly h alf rep o rted history o f sexual abuse;

•

O ver h a lf th ro w n out by parents;

• Lack o f resilience was related to hopelessness,
loneliness, risky behaviour, and connectedness;
• Resilience m ay he identified to m ean self rehant
to som e youth.
• Prevalence varied little by sociodem ographic or
geographic factors;
• 7.6% o f national sam ple rep o rted episodes o f
hom elessness over a 12 m o n th period;
•

Rates w ere higher for boys than girls;

• Y outh hom elessness is m uch m o re com m on
than is generally thought.
R obert, M.
Pauze, R.
Fournier, L.

2005

Canada

C om pares characteristics o f two
groups o f youth u n d er the
supervision o f th e youth protection
system, according to periods or
absence o f hom elessness.

• Y outh w ith experiences o f hom elessness w ere
m ore likely to have been placed in substim te hom es,
have been diagnosed w ith behavioural problem s,
and to have experienced relationship problem s w ith
at least one parent.

136

R otheram -B orus, M.

1993

N ew Y ork

aty, U.S.

Stewart, M.
Reutter, L.
L etourneau, N .
B arnfather, A.
H ungler, K.
A hnond, A.
K ing, K.

2004

E d m o n to n ,
Canada

D escribes suicide attem pts and risk
factors am ong runaway adolescents.

Seeks o u t hom eless youth’s views o n
their su p p o rt needs and preferred
support program s.

•

37% had previously attem pted suicide;

• female runaways were significantly m ore likely
than m ales to attem pt suicide;
• staff m em bers in shelters need to be trained to
assess suicidaHty at intake.
• Estim ates 1900 hom eless in E d m o n to n , 10% o f
w hich are youth;
•

C urrent needs o f youth are n o t m et;

• Identified need for increased or im proved
em otional support, m ore support fo r developing
healthy self esteem and identity, non-judgm ental
people and unconditional support desired;

V an Leeuw en

2004

D enver,
U.S.

W hitbeck, L. B.
H oyt, D . R.
Ackley, K. A.

1997

U.S.

Exam ines three housing program s
designed to m eet needs o f youth
aging out o f care.
C om pares runaw ay and hom eless
youth reports o f and parent reports
on m easures o f parenting, family
violence, and adolescent conduct.

•
•
•
•

housing is m o st critical need
financial aid and help to access services;
increased awareness o f services, inform ation.

num ber o f hom eless youth in D e n v e r has
increased m ore than 100% over 5 years.

• R eports from b o th youth and
parents / caretakers present similar portraits o f
families o f runaw ay and hom eless youth;
• Low er levels o f parental m onitoring, w arm th,
and supporriveness, and higher levels o f parental
rejection than com parison groups.
• Findings suggest th at the family situations as
depicted by hom eless and runaw ay y o u th are
realistic.

W hitbeck, L. B.
H oyt, D . R.
Y oder, K. A.

1999

U.S.

Exam ines a theoretical m odel o f risk
ampHfication to explain youth
hom elessness.

• W hen abused young people leave hom e (by
w hichever path), a negative trajectory is accentuated
by w hat they experience w hen on their own;
•

M aladaptive families and behaviours o f

137

rionaways select them into environm ents th at
perpem ate negative behaviours and negative
interaction styles.
• Learning to live in exploitive, dangerous
environm ent involves learning to be antisocial.

138

A ppendix B - Key Inform ant Q uestions

Whitehorse Youth Service Providers
Name:
Position/ Agency:
Mandate:
Date:
Questions:
1.

H ow long have you been w orking in the area o f youth hom elessness in W hitehorse?

2.

H ave you identified any trends?
-situation getting worse?
-any im provem ents?

3. W hat services are currently available for youth in W hitehorse if they are hom eless, or living
precariously?
4. W hat are the youth that you are seeing asking for m ost often?
5. W hat do you think about how W hitehorse has approached the problem ?
-w hat do we need to do m ore o f / less of?
-w hat are we n o t doing at all that we should be doing?
6. A re there any other com m ents you w ould like to make?

139

A ppendix C - U N B C Research Ethics Board A pproval

UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN

u/Jbc

BRITISH COLUMBIA
Research Ethics Board
MEMORANDUM

To:

Jane* LaCamp
30 -1 0 " Ava., WhMahoraa, Yukon

Kwpi^Tang
Social Work Program
From:

Alax MIchaloa
Chair, Raaaarch EOiIca Board

Data:

May 37. 2003

Ra:

Ethica Ravlaw 2003.0506.040
W h e re W ill I S le e p Tonight?

Thank you for submitting the modifications to your participant information sheet and
consent form for the above noted project as requested. The modification have
addraaaad the ooncama ralaad by the reviewers and your project is now approved.
Good luck In your research.
Sincerely,
"LX

Alex C. Mkhaloa, Chak
Research Ethics Board

140

Appendix D —Participant Recruitment Poster

Adolescent Women
Homelessness

and

•

Were you ever homeless as a teen?

•

Did you ever have nowhere to sleep?

•

Did you ever have to exchange favours for

food and/or shelter?
•

As a teen, did you ever feel unsafe in your

home, but have nowhere to go?
I am researching adolescent women's homelessness,
and trying to advocate for help and social change.
If you answered YES to any of the questions above,
I would like to talk to you - Please call me.
Janet 668-4904

(evenings and weekends)

A small honorarium wül be paid to participants.

141

Appendix E - Interview Questionnaire
In your w ords, w hat do you think “hom elessness” means?
Follow up questions W ho can it happen to?
W hat does having a “hom e” m ean to you? (shelter, safety, personal
space, sense o f belonging, ...)
W hat if you have a safe place, b u t it isn’t your hom e?
W hat happened that caused you to leave hom e? H o w /W h y w ere you homeless?
Follow up questions D id you leave m ore than once?
D id you ever live “in care” ?
I f so, were you still hom eless, or did you have a hom e then?
H ow old were you?
Can you describe w hat you did, and w hat happened to you, while you were homeless?
Follow up questions D id you ever get into “trouble” while you were homeless?
H ow did you survive?
D id you do things that you normally w ouldn’t do that were unsafe?
(If so, can you talk about these?)
H ow do you think hom elessness in the N o rth m ight be different from
hom elessness in the south?
D o you feel Hke a m em ber o f a community?
Follow up questions W hat do you think “ com m unity” is?
D o you feel supported by friends, family, or any one else?
W ho do you m m to for help w hen you need it?
W hen you were a teen, did you have som eone to help you?
W hat do you think your fum re wiU be Hke?
Follow up questions D o you think you wiU be hom eless again?
W hat about any children you m ight have?
W hat could o r should have been done to help you?
W ho should have helped you?
H ow could your hom elessness, o r its cause, have been prevented?
Based on your experience, w hat do you think could be done to either help prevent adolescent w om en’s
hom elessness, or help young w om en w ho are homeless?
Follow up questions W ho should help?
G overnm ent, famihes, neighbours, healthy famihes...?
W hat is the cause o f m o st young w om en’s hom elessness?
H ow m any other young w om en do you know w ho w ere/are homeless? (FoUow up w ith when?,
simultaneously? H ow old are/w ere they?)
A re there som e w om en you know w ho m ight have som ething to teU me?

142

Appendix F - Participant Information Sheet

My nam e is Janet Le Cam p and I am studying adolescent w om en’s experiences o f hom elessness in
W hitehorse. I am trying to understand and docum ent how adolescent w om en define hom elessness,
w hat their experiences are before, during, and after hom elessness, and how our com m unity can
support hom eless adolescent w om en and prevent fum re homelessness.
P art o f my research will involve interviewing young w om en w ho have experienced adolescent
hom elessness according to their ow n definition o f w hat hom elessness m eans. I wiU also facilitate a
focus group after the interviews, and invite the participants from the individual interviews to attend.
All interviewees will receive a small honorarium for giving m e their time, and sharing their experiences.
1 understand you have experience w ith this topic and you are interested in participating. Y ou may
w ithdraw at any time, or decline to answer particular questions. Y our participation will help to provide
inform ation about adolescent w om en’s hom elessness w hich m ay be used to help adolescent w om en in
the fumre.
Y our inform ation wiU be used as part o f my thesis for my M aster’s degree in C om m unity H ealth w ith
the University o f N o rth ern British Columbia. I f w arranted, it m ay be used to advocate for social
change or to support a proposal for specific services, at som e tim e in the fumre. T he details o f the
interview wül be stored at the U N B C archives.
I f you have any questions about this project, feel free to contact m e at (867) 668-4904.
T hank you for your assistance.

143

Appendix G - Interview Consent Form
I understand that Janet Le Cam p is conducting a study and is interviewing a num ber o f young w om en
w ho experienced hom elessness as an adolescent.
This consent is given on the understanding that Janet Le Cam p and the University o f N o rth ern British
Colum bia (UNBC) and Y ukon College shall use their best efforts to ensure that my identity is n o t
revealed, w hether directly or indirectly, unless I have signed paragraph 5.
I understand and agree that the inform ation I have given to Janet Le Cam p in our interview o f [date]
may be:
•

recorded and reproduced;

•

used by Janet Le Cam p in the production o f a thesis;

•
stored as part o f the archives o f U N B C and Y ukon College, and m ade available to researchers
for study, reproduction, and recording;
•
used in a published w ork in print or by other technologies by Jan et Le
Y ukon College.

Cam p or U N B C or

I hereby waive any claim against Janet Le Cam p, U N B C , Y ukon College, their employees, directors,
officers, agents, and pubHshers w ith respect to the use o f said inform ation, provided it is used in
accordance with this agreement. I do this freely and w ith full knowledge o f the legal consequences o f
this consent.

Name:__________________________

Date:_____________________

Signature:______________________

Witness:,

1 hereby give my further consent to the use o f my nam e, a n d /o r details about my Hfe w hich may
directly or indirectly reveal m y identity.

Signature:_________________________
Witness:______________________

Date:______________________