« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
REFUGES FOR WOMEN, CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE IN SCOTLAND
Chapter 4: Refuge Services for Women
Introduction
This chapter reviews services for women living in refuge. The key issue is the support role of WA workers. The chapter begins by reviewing women's general experiences of support from workers, before looking in greater detail at the location and availability of refuge workers. It also examines attitudes towards move-on support, and consultation and involvement of women in refuges, before presenting some observations on the apparent variation in support needs between the urban and rural/semi-rural areas we visited. It concludes by reviewing women's priorities and preferences in relation to future refuge provision.
The Role of Workers
Workers play a varied and crucial role in the work of WA. As well as administering the refuge services, they provide support to women and children during an extremely difficult and stressful process. Here we outline two issues that emerged in focus groups about the nature and availability of the work done with women, but first we provide some overall impressions.
Overall Impressions
Most women we spoke to were very happy with the support they had received from WA workers, and particularly appreciated the 'non-judgemental' and 'empowering' approach taken:
'They're always there, they don't judge you, they just sit and wait till something clicks in you so that you won't go back anymore. They sit and support you through it.'
They found the practical help offered by WA invaluable: 'They have power. And for 24 hours a day they are always at the end of a line…' The general sense of knowing that 'You've got Women's Aid behind you' felt very empowering to these women, particularly in dealing with other agencies such as the police and housing providers. The emotional support they received was just as important, with numerous women commenting on the 'confidence' they had re-gained with the help of workers. This had not only enabled them to piece back together their shattered self-esteem, but allowed them to take control over their lives, and in some cases even stand up to their abusive ex-partners. Children also appreciated the support their mothers had been given in refuge, often emphasising how 'mum felt safe' there. One 12-year-old boy said: 'Mum liked it here and if my family like it then that's all that matters to me'.
Level and Nature of Support
Although there could be different approaches taken by workers within the same WA group, the main difference was between WA groups in both the level and nature of support given to women residents. Two broad approaches emerged: called here 'pro-active' and 'reactive'.
In some refuges, workers took a very pro-active approach in providing both practical and emotional support to women, but strove to deliver this in an 'empowering' way that bolstered, rather than undermined, their self-esteem and confidence:
'You have to be very careful and very skilled in making women not come to depend on us. I know it sounds like a contradiction, but the ongoing counselling is a process of empowering the women. Saying "You are strong, powerful, look at what you have done, you've left, you've gone through refuge, you are strong and powerful".'
This approach was very much appreciated by the women who experienced it: 'I was overwhelmed by the generosity'. Some of these women even described WA workers as ' guardian angels' and 'part of the family'. Women were especially enthusiastic about those who seemed to do more than they were paid for: 'With X, if she hears something is wrong, she'll phone you even if it's out of hours.'
However, in other WA groups, there seemed to be a more reactive approach taken, with women saying: 'You're left to your own devices, told that there's someone there if you need them.' Comments from workers in one of the WA groups concerned reinforced this reactive image:
'We say we're available to speak to them whenever they want.'
'We give support to one particular woman every time we see her. It's pretty unusual though, I think most women want to cope on their own. You can speak to a woman for an hour, and she doesn't go away feeling any better.'
This approach seemed to reflect a different interpretation of WA's self-help ethos from that of the more pro-active groups: 'I feel sometimes we're not giving enough support… but we're careful... we're not trying to create extra dependencies.' Women in the refuges provided by this group defended the workers - 'I couldn't fault any of them'; 'I think they're doing as much as they can to help' - but this was a strikingly less enthusiastic endorsement of the workers' role than where a more pro-active approach was taken. In a recent service review of the group's refuges one respondent had commented:
'You say if we need support, just ask. But not all women are strong enough to ask, so you should ask more often.'
In another WA group where a reactive approach appeared to be taken, the women were much more critical, and particularly resented workers sharing personal information about their circumstances with each other:
'When I moved in, I thought there would be support. I expressed my feelings to one member of staff, then they all knew. I thought I'd have a key worker. Sometimes you just want to talk to one person.'
However, sharing of information between staff was not identified as a problem by women in other refuges, so this resentment seems to have been a product of the lack of trust between women and workers in this group. In another apparently reactive group, women praised individual workers' efforts, but clearly would have appreciated more contact and support:
'I just phone the office, they don't visit. Sometimes they are very busy, in a meeting…If you can't speak to them, you go to a friend for comfort. So they need more.' (woman resident)
The relatively small number of workers interviewed in the study (22) means that it is not possible for us to comment on the relative balance between pro-active and reactive approaches across WA groups in Scotland. The impression we gained, however, was that the pro-active approach was most common amongst women's workers based in refuges, and amongst children's support workers (see Chapter 5). It seemed somewhat less common amongst women's workers based in off-site WA offices.
Availability of Workers
The second issue that emerged in discussions about workers related to the hours and place they were available. The apparent relationship between on-site offices and a pro-active approach to support has just been highlighted, and the role of workers in providing a focal point for interaction between women residents was discussed in Chapter 3. Virtually all of the women and children who commented felt that it was best for workers to be based within the refuge instead of, or in addition to, an off-site office. One woman said: 'I like it; it's a security thing.' Workers who were located in on-site offices noted how the low-level, day-to-day contact this afforded helped in building up relationships with women: 'You can sense what's going on because you're here.' Another group of workers described their on-site office as a 'magnet' for women and, especially, children:
'You can see how people are doing, how they are feeling, whether they are having a good day or a bad day, etc. You can pick up on that.'
'Even women who won't come forward to tell you stuff, you'll still see them, and see how they're getting on, and get the odd chat here and there.'
Only one group of workers seemed averse to the idea of being based in refuge:
'We need the separation because we need for the women to be able to pop in and see us, and we need the refuge address to be far away enough from the office to stay confidential.'
In other areas, the need for both off-site offices and refuge-based workers was stressed.
The second aspect of worker availability related to hours worked. Although generally very satisfied with the support provided, many women had been surprised when they first moved into refuge that staff 'went home at 5 o'clock'. One woman commented:
'I was under the impression that a worker would be there all the time. That wasn't the case. After teatime you're on your own, and some of these women are tough, women you'd be scared of walking along the street, people you wouldn't normally mix with.'
Women from across the focus groups expressed disappointment at the lack of (non-emergency) weekend and evening cover (see Chapter 2), as they often felt that this was when they most needed someone to be there for them and their children. One woman said:
'Weekends are hard for me. It's the weekends when my husband is off work, and he would be in X [town the refuge is located in], and try and snatch the kids. I had to stay indoors with the kids, I found I didn't want to go out at weekends, and my dad couldn't come here, and I was worried if I went there he would try to snatch the kids. I know the workers have to have time off though…'
Nevertheless, there were mixed views on 24-hour staffing: some women said they would welcome it because it would make them feel safer ( 'a worker there at night would be a great comfort'); others felt it would be intrusive. Workers were generally against 24-hour support as they felt it would undermine the self-help ethos of WA, although some could see why women and children might like it:
'Because at two or three in the morning, your problems seem hideous, you can't sleep. Most women are bad sleepers, and you can see that they'd want to wander down and chat…'
'The children would like us here 24/7. I think there are pros and cons, promoting independence versus being here 24 hours a day, there are two sides.'
All of the women interviewed were anxious that there should be effective emergency cover by WA on a 24-hour basis, and this was provided in some areas we visited. However, the out-of-hours service in one major urban area was consistently reported as inadequate and unresponsive:
'Outwith office hours, stuff happens, you try to page the workers, but they say they didn't hear it.'
In another urban area we visited, there was no 24-hour service. The workers reported that they were on-call till 10pm and then there was an answer machine. We asked what women should do if they couldn't reach them:
'We tell them they have the same rights as any citizen. If they are in fear, or if they need medical help, then they should call on the relevant services. We find they usually get a good response, most women say they come out quite quickly.'
Urban/Rural Differences
From the accounts given by both women and workers, complex additional problems, such as alcohol or drug dependency, seemed to be far more prevalent in urban refuges than those located in rural or semi-rural areas. This meant that WA workers in urban areas faced a greater challenge in creating a safe and supportive atmosphere in their refuges, particularly their shared refuges, than workers elsewhere. Paradoxically, however, these were the very places where relationships between women and workers often seemed most 'distant'. This was probably partly accounted for by the greater numbers of both women and workers in urban WA groups, and also, crucially, the large size of some refuges in these areas (see Chapter 2). The (off-site) location and (reactive) ethos of workers in some of these groups may also be contributory factors.
There were also specific, but different, problems highlighted in relation to refuges in rural and semi-rural areas. There was great concern over the absence of local specialist services, such as mental health services, rape crisis services, abortion advice, and drug rehabilitation services. Even access to mainstream social work services could be difficult. This absence of local services, coupled with limited public transport, meant that workers had to spend a great deal of their time ferrying women to appointments with other agencies.
Moving On and Support
Many women described being reluctant to move on from refuge: ' It was frightening to start all over again', but most workers reported that it was rare for a woman to stay in refuge any longer than was necessary to gain reasonable housing for her family. In only one refuge did women report any pressure from WA workers to move on before they felt ready, and in the main women said they were supported to decide what was best for them: 'You can stay till you feel you want to move on.'
Women, especially in urban areas, reported that the location of housing was the most important issue they had to consider in moving on:
'Furniture is the least of your worries, you can always replace it. It's the area…'
'Aye, you cannae clean outside.'
The quality and speed of rehousing varied enormously from area to area and this inevitably impacted on the average length of stay in refuge. Workers occasionally commented that women could be rehoused too quickly, before they'd had time to get their 'strength' back, or, more commonly, too slowly, so that by the time they'd been allocated accommodation they were either frustrated or too 'comfortable' in refuge. Women from a range of areas praised the help and advice they received from WA workers when they got housing offers:
'My worker said "You don't need to take it, stay here." Normally they won't push you.'
The availability of move-on support was universally welcomed by the women interviewed, and undoubtedly increased their confidence about leaving refuge: 'They don't just let you go. I was worried about that.' Many women stressed that support wasn't forced upon you, but it was important to know it was there if you needed it. The importance of the social contact provided by move-on workers was emphasised:
'You've lost all your support network, you've only your weans…'
'You're in a new area, you don't know anyone.'
Women liked a combination of approaches to follow-up support - being able to both drop in to the office/attend organised groups and to receive visits/go on outings with workers:
'Sometimes you want to get out, other times you might not feel up to it.'
'It was fantastic to get a visit.'
In some (small) WA groups this follow-on support could be of a very informal nature, as one worker explained:
'Even when a lot of women are rehoused, they pop in on their way to school, on their way to the shops… we don't mind that, we're not a drop-in but they need the support.'
One woman highlighted the isolation and fear women can face if follow-on support from WA is unavailable:
'Once I'd left refuge it felt like being back to square one and very unsafe, left to get on with it, with no emotional back up or support.'
Consultation/Involvement
When we asked workers about women's involvement in the running of refuge, the following response was typical:
'They do in the day to day things, the practicalities, e.g. bedtimes. You've got to have that flexibility, so yes they have a big input. Organised through house meetings. But the main rules, e.g. no men, no they have no say.'
Women similarly reported that they had no say about the main rules or facilities in refuge, but this did not seem to be a problem for them. Such consultations as had taken place on the more fundamental aspects of refuge were usually ad hoc rather than regular or systematic, and were more often than not prompted by one-off service reviews. In several places women or workers mentioned that regular 'house' meetings had been discontinued because so few women turned up or because of pressure of other work. However, workers in all refuges were frequently involved in ongoing, informal negotiations to resolve day-to-day disputes and personality clashes, and periodically called ad-hoc house meetings to deal with specific problems that had arisen:
'They [house meetings] used to be regular, maybe once a week. But the pressure of work, etc has meant that it only happens when there is a problem. It would be good to have them regularly, and then have an event or something afterwards. The refuge workers' workload had increased so much, we have got to the stage where house meetings are only organised when we can see a crisis looming, and we try to head it off at the pass, e.g. a woman will come to you and say "I've had it with so and so…", but they tell you not to say it was her who brought it up, so you call a house meeting.' (refuge worker)
'It's more of an ongoing thing, a more informal approach. We have, or rather used to have refuge meetings, getting people together, but it's difficult at the moment… But they come down to discuss repairs, charges etc.. and we can end up with four or five women down here at one time. They're no slow to say if there is anything bothering them.' (refuge worker)
Few women seemed to have perceived that WA was organised on a 'collective' basis, and none thought that this was relevant to the service they received.
Priorities
We asked both women and refuge workers about their priorities for future investment in refuge provision, and in particular whether more workers/support or better buildings/more spaces should be prioritised (see Chapter 2 for the survey results on priorities). There was a very mixed response to this, but one woman summed up a lot of the feelings of others:
'If it's a communal refuge, then the workers are more important. If it's self-contained accommodation, then the building, or a better area is more important.'
We also asked whether women or children's support workers should be the priority. There was a very mixed response to this from workers in the focus groups - depending on what they felt there was a shortage of in their area (in the questionnaire survey, children's support workers were more often prioritised, see Chapter 2). Many women felt that if mothers were properly supported there would be less need for children's support workers: '…if the women are settled and OK emotionally and mentally, then it will be better for the kids'; 'the women would look after their ain.' However, another focus group of women felt that children's support workers and facilities should be the priority:
'Some kids don't express their feelings to their parents/mothers, so it would be nice if they could have a children's worker to talk to if they wanted to.'
Conclusions
The key messages emerging from this chapter are that:
- most women interviewed were very happy with the practical and emotional support they had received from WA workers, and particularly valued the 'non-judgemental' and 'empowering' approach taken. WA groups which took a 'pro-active' approach to supporting women were particularly highly praised by the women in their refuges, whereas women were less positive in relation to those groups which took a more 'reactive' approach, and in one case were heavily critical;
- women and children preferred refuge workers to be based within the refuge rather than at an off-site office, and workers based in on-site offices felt that the day-to-day contact this afforded was important in building up relationships with women;
- more extensive weekend and evening cover was seen as desirable by most women interviewed. However, there was only limited support for 24-hour staffing of refuges amongst women, with workers generally against this. Women were very anxious, however, that there should be an adequate 24-hour emergency service provided by WA, and this was not available in the two urban areas we visited;
- all women interviewed very much welcomed the availability of follow-on support, and liked the idea of both drop-in facilities/groups and visits when they moved into their own place;
- there was little formal consultation with women over the 'main' rules and running of refuge. However, workers were regularly involved in ongoing, informal negotiations with women about day-to-day matters, often calling ad-hoc house meetings to deal with specific problems as they arose;
- complex additional problems, such as alcohol or drug dependency, seemed particularly prevalent in urban refuges, making it more difficult to create a safe and supportive atmosphere in these refuges than in refuges located elsewhere. In rural and semi-rural areas, the absence of local specialist services, coupled with limited public transport, meant that workers had to spend a great deal of their time ferrying women to appointments with other agencies;
there were very mixed responses in relation to whether 'workers' or 'buildings' should be prioritised in developing future refuge provision. Women generally felt that if mothers were adequately supported, their children would have less need of children's support workers, but some women felt that support for children should be the top priority in refuge services.
« Previous | Contents | Next »