« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
REFUGES FOR WOMEN, CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE IN SCOTLAND
Chapter 3: Accommodation Provided in Refuge
Introduction
This chapter reviews the experiences, views and preferences of all interviewees on the accommodation provided in refuges. It begins by exploring how women found out about refuges, why they decided to use this accommodation, and how easy they found it to get a place. It then examines women and children's expectations and experience of the accommodation provided in refuge - focusing both on physical standards and design, and issues related to the sharing arrangements. The chapter ends by reporting women, children and workers' priorities and preferences for refuge accommodation.
Finding Out About Refuge
Women found out about WA refuges in a wide variety of ways. Citizen's Advice, the police, and local authority housing and social work departments were all mentioned. GPs were important sources of contact for some women. Others got in touch after seeing adverts on TV or in newspapers, or finding the number in Yellow Pages or the phone book. In several cases, friends or family members were the source of information, sometimes because they themselves had experienced refuge. Some women interviewees felt that WA should 'advertise more', and said that they found it difficult to identify with the women in some Government adverts:
'I had no black eyes, I had black and blue everything else, I'd even seen the ad but I didn't think I'd had enough hidings…'
One woman felt that literature aimed at abused women should be integrated with material on other women's health issues:
'Many women will not pick up a leaflet solely on domestic abuse as to be found with it could put them in a vulnerable situation.'
Deciding to Move into Refuge
Women generally said that they opted for refuge because they were 'in a desperate situation'. Either they had no family to turn to, or did not want to put their family through any more:
'If I went to my mother's, he would only turn up there and shout abuse at her, I couldn't put her through it… If he knew where we were, we'd get no peace.'
Being a 'burden' or 'embarrassment' to family was often mentioned, and as one woman commented: ' … you try to hide a lot from your family. They judge you, or try to tell you what to do.' Refuge was also perceived to provide greater protection from ex-partners: 'it's the security thing, you feel more secure.'
Similar comments were made by workers in reflecting on why women opted for refuge:
'I think the women have tried relatives. But their partner comes to find them, and threatens them, and they're not getting the break to sort themselves out, to establish what they want. It also means involving their family, and they feel guilty about that. Women's Aid can provide support and counselling once they come in.'
Gaining Access to Refuge
In some areas visited, women reported that they could move into refuge immediately and had no problems finding a place. In others, a major shortage of places was reported by workers and/or women (see also Chapter 1). Only a minority of women reported that they had any choice over location or type of refuge accommodation, but there was little complaint about this so long as it was a safe area for them:
'You just want out, you don't care where you're going, you're just happy to get away.'
Expectations of Refuge Accommodation
Women typically anticipated refuge to be:
'A big house, all the families together. You would have your own room, but everything else is shared.'
The overwhelming emotion was one of relief to be somewhere safe, and this meant that the physical standard of accommodation was not their immediate concern:
'You just want to get away, you're no really thinking "What's it going to be like, who am I going to be sharing with?" Maybe once you're in there, you'll think "Ooh, this is shared. It's all new to me."'
Children were generally extremely nervous about moving into refuge, with some thinking it would be 'rough like a prison' (10 year old boy) or 'tatty and full of cobwebs' (9 year old boy). One 14-year-old young woman explained:
' I was scared. I didn't want to go because I didn't know who would be there, how they were gonna treat us…it was just this big building and I didn't know what was going to happen and we walked in… but then as time went on then I found out it was all right.'
Overall Impressions of Refuge Standards and Design
Given the low or uncertain expectations women and children had of refuge, most were pleasantly surprised that it was not as bad as they had feared. Children in particular often said they were pleased it was not as 'grotty' or 'mucky' as they'd assumed or seen on TV. However, the standard of physical accommodation varied enormously amongst the refuges we visited or that were described to us (see also Chapter 2). Some families had stayed in well designed, purpose built accommodation which they unanimously praised - 'The refuge was fantastic'; 'It's comfortable, clean, you've got everything you need'. On the other hand, some interviewees had stayed in poor quality refuges located in unsuitable old buildings. A young woman living in one such refuge commented:
'My room's like an attic room, so I sleep on the couch in the living room. The staircase is dead steep, and being pregnant I am watching out for myself. I've not spoken to anyone about this, I don't see the point. The window isn't working either. And I hit my head on the roof because it's slanting.'
Workers in this WA group also described the accommodation they offered in negative terms:
'There is only one room per family in the shared refuges, unless there is a teenager. I just think I wouldn't like to be there… the size…the bunkbeds… not enough room to store your stuff, there may be five people using a room and there is only a wardrobe and a set of drawers. People generally try to make the best of it, they tend not to moan to us.'
Two issues emerged as overwhelmingly important for women and children in their perceptions of refuge: security and sharing. Security concerns were largely focused on external security, particularly to stop intrusion by ex-partners, although other issues also emerged. Sharing was a source of concern that dominated most focus groups and this reflected some strong feelings of dissatisfaction with present provision.
Security
External security was the most important physical design issue for almost all of the women we interviewed. Again, there were some sharp contrasts in experiences (see also Chapter 2). One purpose built refuge was praised in this respect by the residents:
'Apparently, my husband found out [where I was], but this building acts as a deterrent… He found out through my daughter, but they don't know what flat you're in, and it's very secure.'
But in some poorer quality refuges a sense of security was lacking, as is clear from the comments of this young woman: 'Our close is horrible, dark, lights not work. Scary door bangs open at night…I feel less secure because of the close.'
Children also placed great emphasis on security in refuge - prioritising 'securer doors', CCTV and alarms, particularly to stop their dads getting in. Even quite young children stressed the importance of feeling safe in refuge:
'When we got here Mum said we'll be safe here because there's cameras around the building and everything and that made me feel much better.' (10 year old boy)
'[Felt] safe because locks on door and no men.' (7 year old girl)
However, the threat from ex-partners was not the only safety concern mentioned by interviewees. In a few areas harassment from the surrounding community was also an issue: 'The windows were always getting panned in at X… they were always petitioning, they didn't want the refuge there' (woman refuge resident). Also, for many of the women and children from ethnic minorities, racial harassment was the predominant worry (see Chapters 5 & 6).
In shared refuges, internal security was also important. Most families had lockable doors on their bedrooms in shared refuges, and this was very important in making them feel secure, especially at night. One woman who had been in refuge several times explained:
'We never used to have locks on our doors five year ago, I didn't like that, you didnae ken who would go in your room.'
Only in one urban centre did women report not having locks on their bedroom doors, and this was a source of great disquiet: 'What I didn't like is that you didn't have a key to your door.'
Sharing
The bulk of the conversation in focus groups related to the shared nature of (most) refuge accommodation (see Chapter 2). As well as exploring women and children's general feelings about sharing accommodation with other families, we look specifically at their views on shared bathrooms and kitchens, and how they feel about mothers and children sharing bedrooms.
Sharing with Other Women/Families
Women and children's views on sharing accommodation with other families were, on the whole, very negative. However, it is important to acknowledge that a number of women said there were both good and bad aspects of sharing and it all came down to 'personalities':
'They've both got their good points, shared refuge versus a flat on its own. In the shared refuge, there's always someone there to speak to. But if you want to get on your own, then a flat is better. In shared refuge, you can go to your room, but you're confined to that room, you cannae get peace, there's that many kids about. And the cleanliness issue…'
Many women clearly appreciated the emotional and social support they received from other women in refuge who had 'been through the same experience'. This peer support was valuable in helping them to realise '…you're not alone. Usually you think you're going off your head, but you find you all have the same characteristics, and realise it's the abuser, it's no me.' Children also valued the peer support they found in refuge (see Chapter 5). However, as will be discussed below, it is not necessary to share facilities and living accommodation to gain this mutual support in the refuge context.
The overwhelmingly negative reaction to sharing we encountered in the focus groups was articulated by one woman as:
'Shock. 'You've got ideas about how to bring up your kids, and then you're in this shared house, different bedtimes, dinner times, your kids might be early bedders, theirs might not. If their kids are getting away with something, it's difficult to keep your level of however you bring up your children, your discipline. And you've only brought the bare essentials with you. And there can be a clash of personalities, and you're cooped up in one room. It's why lots of people go back, they can't adjust to living with all these people… You feel very vulnerable in these places, a lot of people cannae handle it, especially with their kids.'
The children and young people who had stayed in refuge were, if anything, even more vehement in their dislike of shared accommodation than the women residents - often describing it as 'horrible':
'…I didn't like it 'cos you don't get that much privacy and sometimes there's wee bairns and they're always noisy and they're up late at night greetin' and that and you can't get to sleep.' (13 year old boy)
'…noisy ladies, not tidy, don't want to share with strangers.' (8 year old girl)
Friction was most often noted in relation to standards of cleanliness and ideas around bringing up children, with workers indicating that tensions often related to what might appear relatively trivial matters, for example, children helping themselves to other people's food. However, some women reported more serious incidents of violence, intimidation or theft within refuges that had left them traumatised. This was especially the case in one major urban centre where one woman explained: 'Can be scary sharing. Not everybody is in the same boat.' There seemed to be a general sense of an intimidating/disruptive environment in some of the refuges in this city, with remarks such as:
'The doors would be banging, smoke alarms going off…'
'I spoke to everyone, said hello, but you knew the ones who were drunk, who'd been up all night, who were noisy…'
Some women emphasised that their vulnerability when they first entered refuge made it all the more difficult to cope with intimidating or even just 'strange' behaviour:
'Although you've got the abused thing, you've got other things going on as well, and that could just tip the scale, I mean, and just not be able to deal with it. Normally you would, but sometimes you're all over the place.'
It was clear that many women were primarily concerned about sharing refuges with women with drug, alcohol or mental health problems:
'If they are an alcoholic or drug addict, it would be ludicrous to share, they should be on their own. If it's two normal abused women, then why not?'
A critical dimension of the problems identified by both women and children was high turnover in refuge, meaning that people didn't get to know or trust each other: 'Can be difficult when people are moving in, then moving out all the time' (a woman resident) . One 11-year-old boy said his second time in refuge was more difficult than the first because: '…there was more people coming in and out'. An issue raised by women in numerous groups was the notion that: 'There were people there who were not there [in refuge] for the right reasons, [but] there to get a house quicker.' Most workers dismissed these claims as 'myths', but one commented: 'Sometimes people are just using us, that whole thing of "Are you in for abuse or a hoose?"'
Many of the women who had stayed only in single occupancy refuge flats insisted that they 'couldn't have gone into shared'. One said: 'If it had been shared I wouldn't have come. I would have put up with it.' Another woman who had been sexually assaulted before entering refuge explained:
'The sharing - I couldn't have coped, I came here from hospital. I was black and blue all over, I'd never have coped. I always wanted to be in the bath all the time. I couldn't walk about, couldn't wear underwear because of the cuts. I couldn't have done that in shared accommodation, I couldn't have coped.'
For others, it was their children who couldn't have handled sharing:
'My son couldn't have coped. My son's obsessive, he needs the privacy of his own wee space, his own home. A shared kitchen would be a no go.'
Women who had not used refuge overwhelmingly identified sharing as what had put them off:
'For me it was fear. I didn't know what I was going into. I'd heard stories from people who'd been in them and hadn't liked it. I would rather go home and take it than go into that place… … And the sharing, I've seen a few people in these places, through the homeless units and that, with needles and stuff, and with the wean I wasn't going to go in there.'
'… I couldn't handle it. Sayin "that's mine, that's mine, you're stealing my stuff, your kids have done this, and done that." I've moved fae getting a kicking, so I don't want another. People are so rough and ready in these places, and it's those ones who can hack it.'
Two points should be noted here: first, that women did not always draw a clear distinction between homeless units and refuges, particularly in urban areas; and second, women with children were particularly reluctant to share for fear of exposing them to drink, drugs and other malign influences.
Finally, a concern about shared accommodation raised by many children and young people, but no women or workers, was smoking. Some young people felt that they should never have to share with anyone who smoked, while others said that there should at least be no-smoking living rooms provided in all refuges.
Sharing Bathrooms or Kitchens?
Women and children were almost universally opposed to sharing either bathrooms or kitchens with other families. However, if facilities did have to be shared, there was a strong and consistent preference for this to be kitchens rather than bathrooms. Families, it was argued, could more easily accommodate each other in kitchens than in bathrooms - ' You can have a schedule for the kitchen, but you can't have a schedule for the bathroom' (woman refuge resident). Sharing of kitchens was not viewed as unproblematic: difficulties over hygiene and stolen food were often mentioned by both women and children, and almost all of those interviewed were in favour of lockable kitchen cupboards in shared kitchens (these were provided in only a minority of refuges, see Chapter 2). Nonetheless, women and children generally felt that it was far more tolerable to share cooking and eating facilities than toilets and baths. Women with children were particularly reluctant to share bathrooms:
'You need to have your own bathroom, especially if you have kids. You can let the kids splash for 20 minutes, you're not bothering anyone. Instead of all going into the bathroom, then all going back to the bedroom. And you don't know who's been in before you.' (woman refuge resident)
'Sharing a bathroom killed me. I had to bleach it all the time, and not let the kids use it.' (woman refuge resident)
Children and young people were even more strongly opposed to sharing bathrooms than their mothers:
'It's quite annoying, you can get all changed with a towel round you and you go for a bath and there's somebody in it and you can't get in it.. When I was in, about seventeen people used them or something. We had to wait to get a bath and that, had to wait in a big queue… didn't like getting changed and walking down the corridor with a towel round you and someone in it… It would be better if everyone had their own bathroom.' (11 year old boy)
Children's reluctance to share bathrooms related not only to the inconvenience involved, but also to a general sense of disgust at shared toilet/bathing facilities ( 'minging'; 'Ma found floaters, yuk'; 'cos you didn't know where they'd been, where they'd wiped it… That's cheesy'). There was also some fear expressed by children about using shared bathrooms along corridors away from their rooms and mothers, especially during the night. One eleven-year-old boy explained that for his little brother:
'…if he was scared of going out he'd just watched a scary film or something and he wouldn't like want to go to the bathroom or something so he could just walk from his room into the bathroom so that would be even better for him.'
Workers tended to agree with both women and children on this issue:
'I think sharing a bathroom is a big issue. It's something as simple as someone who doesn't clean the bath down. Hygiene wise, it's a big issue. Although we do get arguments in the kitchen, they're not as drastic.'
Despite these frequent disputes over hygiene, most workers were opposed to the hiring of professional cleaners for refuges on the grounds that this would undermine the 'self-help' ethos of WA:
'You don't want the women to feel incapable. They've been told they're no use for anything. You're actually saying "Yeah, you're responsible, you're capable." Sometimes we use a rota if it's not working.'
As Chapter 2 reported, while women are virtually always responsible for cleaning their own flats/bedrooms in refuge, a small number of WA groups have made other arrangements with respect to the shared/communal areas.
Mothers Sharing Bedrooms with Children
Women were divided on the topic of families sharing bedrooms: some mothers took comfort in having their children in the same room as them, but other women saw it as highly problematic. One woman described sharing a room with her children as a 'nightmare':
'One would wake the other, who would wake me. And there was no cot, so the baby was in the bed, and they fell out. And I'd be going to bed at 8 o'clock, what else was I going to do?'
But another woman in the same focus group responded:
'I'd be the opposite. My boy wanted to sleep with me. I felt guilty because there were three other beds. I didn't talk to the workers about that.'
While sharing was seen as especially inappropriate for male and older children, some very young children, of both sexes, also expressed a strong dislike of sharing a bedroom with their siblings and mother. In fact, the majority of children were firmly against the idea of sharing with their mums, although some seemed more relaxed about sharing with a sibling. Almost all interviewees agreed that it was important for mothers and children to have a choice about whether to share a bedroom or have a separate space of their own. As one worker commented: 'They should have the option of privacy at least.' This is clearly far from being the case at present, with women 'always' having to share a bedroom with their children in more than 80 per cent of shared refuges (see Chapter 2).
Preferences for Refuge Accommodation
We asked all interviewees their views on the most appropriate form of refuge accommodation. We offered three broad options, based on the existing accommodation types outlined in Chapter 2:
- shared refuges: a flat or house in which families share facilities such as kitchens, living rooms and bathrooms. This is the traditional, and most common, form of refuge;
- cluster refuges: a number of separate, single occupancy flats grouped together in the same building/complex. We sought views on clusters with and without communal facilities (common areas for women and children to use, outwith their own living accommodation);
- dispersed flats: individual, single occupancy flats spread across an area.
We review below people's responses to these alternative forms of refuge accommodation in the order they were most preferred.
Cluster Refuges
The clear preference of most women and children interviewed was for cluster refuges ( 'flats and a communal area'). One woman summed up the feelings of the majority:
'My idea of a refuge would be a building, with different units, but all go through the one secure door. There would be a communal area for women who want to chat, and an area where kids can play. But at the end of the day, you can go in your own door and shut it. But you still have the support there. It's about giving people security but also privacy.'
Women in another focus group described their ideal as follows:
'Not sharing anything…'
'But if you want company there is a communal room…'
'And if you want staff, they are there.'
Almost all the children and young people felt similarly - their preference was for 'flats all joined together in a giant house, with your own wee flat.' Children who had experienced a purpose-built cluster refuge of this type were especially enthusiastic:
'Tell them if they build one then this is the best, there's not one as good as this.'
All of the children interviewed wanted communal children's rooms in these cluster refuges (discussed further in Chapter 5), and almost all of the women were clear that a communal area/lounge was also essential for them:
'For company. You're stuck in the flat 24 hours a day with the weans, you're in shock, you want company.'
However, most women felt that they would need an 'excuse' or purpose to go to a communal area other than simply social interaction (it is also notable that only three out of the nine shared living/meeting rooms in existing cluster refuges was reported as 'often' used by women for informal interaction, see Chapter 2). One woman who had stayed in a cluster refuge with a communal area explained why she found it helpful for a staff office to be located adjacent to it:
'I think you need a common factor for introduction purposes. I used to use "is there any mail for me?"… you have to have a reason, at first especially. And there'd be someone else here, and you'd end up chatting…'
Workers in the same refuge commented:
'…generally the women come down to see us, then they stay for a coffee and end up chatting to the others, it depends on who is there at the time.'
A key advantage identified by both women and children in the cluster model was that there could be one (well-secured) external door to the refuge, as well as internal front doors to their own individual flats:
'It's about keeping your own door off the street, like in a sheltered complex…' (woman interviewee)
Another woman liked the idea of:
'… a sealed building…Giving security within your own living space, but also having a main entrance, with buzzer system - Feeling safe is of utmost importance.'
Similarly, children and young people, without any prompting, talked about the importance of having a 'big front door' as well as a door to your own flat.
Most, though not all, of the WA workers interviewed also favoured 'cluster plus communal' refuges, for similar reasons to those given by the women and children:
'People need privacy, they need to be able to get away. But they need the good aspects of communal living as well, through a shared lounge, a meeting room, shared laundry, that kind of thing, to allow women to share, and to interact.'
Workers in a WA group who had already acquired a purpose-built refuge of this kind were very enthusiastic:
'This is the future of how refuges should be. This is the flagship.'
For them, it was all about choice:
'I think this is the best of both worlds. You can be private, you can mix. You've got the choice. We had communal refuge, it was a nightmare.'
They also thought it important that the accommodation was purpose built rather than adapted:
'If you move into a building that was something else before, the money for the structural work necessary is never there. It makes financial sense in the long-term, the standards benefit the women and children.'
Dispersed Flats
For a minority of women who wished greater privacy/anonymity, a dispersed 'scatter flat' with 'floating support' was preferred; for these women even the cluster model of single occupancy flats was too intense:
'When I even think of it, wee close, all these units, people running around, I couldn't handle it. I would prefer to be on my own.'
This preference for dispersed flats was most common amongst women in the 'non-access' focus group, several of whom said they would have used refuge if they had known these flats were available, so long as they weren't in a 'rough' or 'slum' area. One woman in this group said:
'..a dispersed flat would have been ideal for me. Not all close together, that might be good for single people maybe, but not for kids.'
A small number of children and young people, mainly from ethnic minority backgrounds, also said they would have preferred just to have their 'own house': failing this, their second choice was the 'cluster plus communal' model discussed above.
WA workers generally favoured the provision of a limited number of dispersed flats in their area, both to satisfy demand from those who did not want to share, and to accommodate groups for whom shared arrangements might not be suitable. Examples of the latter group included women with drug/alcohol habits, women with mental health problems, women with male children aged over 16, and women who had previously behaved inappropriately in refuge e.g. by giving out the refuge address. However, workers did point out the resource-intensive nature of providing support to families in dispersed accommodation:
'Satellite properties are going to create problems. Women don't have immediate access to women's workers. If they have problems with drugs or alcohol, they need access, and they find it difficult to get access when they need it.'
'One downside of the self-contained house, is if they are not keeping it clean we won't hear about it. In communal refuge, we will.'
One group of workers thought it important that these flats (or 'safehouses') should change every couple of years so that the addresses don't become known or stigmatised.
Shared Refuges
None of the women or children interviewed actively preferred shared refuge accommodation. A few women who had only experienced shared housing seemed content with this model, and, as noted above, some did say there were ' good points to sharing'. But even amongst this group there was a preference for greater privacy and self-containment so long as some communal element was retained. Thus when the idea of a 'cluster plus communal' refuge was put to them, they were much keener on this than continuing with the shared model. As one said: 'If you want to speak to someone you can, if you want your own space, you've got your own house.'
A few workers seemed attached to the shared model, at least as an option, and reported that in service reviews in their area some women preferred the shared refuge to having their own self-contained flat. However, the 'cluster plus communal' model was not given as an option in these surveys; our evidence would suggest that it is likely to be much more popular than shared where it is available.
Conclusions
The key messages emerging from this chapter are that:
- the physical standards of refuges vary enormously, from high quality, purpose built provision, to poor quality accommodation located in unsuitable old buildings;
- external security (from ex-partners and other intruders) and internal security (from other families in refuge) is a top priority for both women and children;
- while some women with experience of shared provision reported that it had its 'good' points, most of those interviewed were very negative about sharing facilities, particularly bathrooms, with other families. Disputes about standards of cleanliness and care of children were most common, but more serious complaints about violence, intimidation and drug/alcohol misuse were also made in relation to shared refuges, especially in deprived urban areas. Children were almost entirely negative about sharing facilities with other families, and were even more strongly opposed to sharing bathrooms than women. Many children and young people, but no women or workers, voiced objections to smoking in refuge;
- some women found comfort in sharing a bedroom with their children while in refuge, whereas others stressed the importance of the space and privacy afforded by separate bedrooms (particularly for older and male children). Children were generally very unhappy about sharing a bedroom with their mum, although some were more relaxed about sharing with a sibling. All interviewees felt that it was important for families to have a choice over whether to share or not;
- almost all of the women who had not used refuge said that sharing with other women/families was what had deterred them;
- by far the most popular model of refuge amongst all interviewees was that of a 'cluster' of single occupancy flats with communal areas also provided for both women and children. This model satisfied women and children's need for space and privacy, while also enabling them to gain mutual support and a sense of safety from being around other families in a similar situation. A minority of women and children preferred dispersed flats, and most workers favoured access to some such flats in their area for groups for whom any form of shared/clustered provision was inappropriate. No women or children actively preferred shared refuges, but a small number of workers seemed to have some attachment to this model.
« Previous | Contents | Next »