UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

One parent families : their housing needs Hood, Nancy E. 1976

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1976_A8 H66.pdf [ 4.57MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0093792.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093792-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093792-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093792-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093792-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093792-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093792-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093792-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093792.ris

Full Text

ONE PARENT FAMILIES - THEIR HOUSING NEEDS by NANCY E. HOOD B.A., Queen's University, 1974 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES School of Community and Regional Planning We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 1976 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced deg ree at the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t ha t t he L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and s t u d y . I f u r t h e r ag ree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y pu r po se s may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Depar tment o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Depar tment o f The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Co l umb i a 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date ABSTRACT The work began as a response to a question put forth by a person involved with housing for single parents, "What i s the best kind of housing for one parent families?" In answer to this question the accommodation requirements of this group must be explored. The purpose of this thesis i s to delineate these needs and to suggest ways in which these housing needs should be met. The Canadian work on single parents (Canadian Council on Social Development, 1972; Guyatt, 1972; Schlesinger, 1975) does not focus specifically on housing but does identify i t as a problem or issue for the single parent group. In keeping with the methodologies of the f i r s t two studies cited, a survey of organizations which serve one parent families was conducted. In addition two case studies of housing projects in the Vancouver-Victoria area, the YWCA Group Homes and the Bishop Cridge Xejntre for jthe_jFjrm£ly^ formed part of the research design. Findings were obtained through questionnaires, interviews and group meetings. Some of the encounters were video-taped to be used later in feeding back the results to the study participants. Through these feedback sessions and analysis of the findings of a literature review, the survey of organizations and the two case studies, a number of conclusions were drawn. These conclusions about the housing needs of one parent families were presented in terms of four issues which repeatedly emerged in the research: Income Discrimination Isolation versus Integration Childcare and Support Services. i i I n s u f f i c i e n t income was found to be the greatest housing problem f o r the one parent family. A u n i v e r s a l income maintenance scheme would ameliorate t h i s problem with the fewest possible d i s t a s t e f u l side a f f e c t s f o r the c l i e n t group. However, i f t h i s i s not f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t e schemes f o r s i n g l e parent f a m i l i e s are suggested. Di s c r i m i n a t i o n because they are parents on t h e i r own and because they have c h i l d r e n was also a great concern. Landlord r e j e c t i o n because of s i n g l e parent status can be discouraged by bringing such i n j u s t i c e s to the a t t e n t i o n of the Human Rights Commission. The r e a l answer to t h i s problem however l i e s i n a s o c i e t a l change i n a t t i t u d e towards s i n g l e parenthood. I s o l a t i o n versus Integration r e f e r s to the controversy about housing designed e s p e c i a l l y f o r a c l i e n t group or housing people u n i d e n t i f i a b l y within the context of the r e s t of the community. I t was found that both approaches not e i t h e r alone, are required to meet the divergent needs of one parent f a m i l i e s . An integrated approach to the d e l i v e r y of services f o r s i n g l e parent f a m i l i e s i s required with both patterns of housing. Co-ordination would ensure that through the p r i v a t e and p u b l i c sectors a system of ser v i c e s from c r i s i s or t r a n s i t i o n s h e l t e r s to housing subsidies would be a v a i l a b l e . Childcare and support ser v i c e s are the second greatest need expressed by the s i n g l e parent. Both of these services permit the parent to gain independence. The i n t e g r a t i o n of these into the r e s i d e n t i a l environment would achieve t h i s i n the most e f f i c i e n t way p o s s i b l e . Suggestions regarding the funding and the l o c a t i o n of service f a c i l i t i e s are also p r o f f e r e d . i i i A l l of these issues have been discussed elsewhere. What i s s i g n i f i c a n t i s that these issues are i d e n t i f i e d as housing needs. These issues are i n e x t r i c a b l y l i n k e d i n the minds of the s i n g l e parents who must make decisions about housing. This i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p points to the h o l i s t i c approach necessary i n the d e l i v e r y of housing s e r v i c e s to one parent f a m i l i e s . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION THE NEED FOR STUDY TERMS AND CONCEPTS DEFINED THE NATURE OF THE INQUIRY CHAPTER TWO - ONE PARENT FAMILIES: THE LITERATURE THE NATURE OF SINGLE PARENTHOOD THE ONE PARENT FAMILY - THE SOCIETAL CONTEXT The Canadian Context The American Experience The B r i t i s h Context a) The Netherlands b) Germany c) Scandinavia THE SCANDINAVIAN EXAMPLE - A SPECIAL CASE SUMMARY CHAPTER THREE - REGARDING THE METHODOLOGY THE USER NEED STUDY THE ACTION RESEARCH STANCE THE ONE PARENT POPULATIONS THE THESIS FORMAT - FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION CHAPTER FOUR - YWCA GROUP HOMES THE HISTORY OF THE GROUP HOMES THE HOUSING NEEDS OF THE GROUP HOMES RESIDENTS THE FINDINGS THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF GROUP HOMES SUMMARY CHAPTER FIVE - BISHOP CRIDGE CENTRE FOR THE FAMILY BACKGROUND INFORMATION THE HOUSING NEEDS OF THE BISHOP CRIDGE/HAYWARD HEIGHTS RESIDENTS V Page THE FINDINGS 33 SUMMARY 37 CHAPTER SIX - ORGANIZATIONS WHICH SERVE ONE PARENT FAMILIES 39 ORGANIZATIONS QUERIED - THE METHOD 39 ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED 40 Big Brothers 40 Big S i s t e r s 4° B.C. Indian Homemakers Association 40 Crossreach Single Parents 41 Family Place 41 Parents Without Partners 41 Project Parent 42 Tr a n s i t i o n House 42 Vancouver and D i s t r i c t Public Tenants Association 43 Volunteer Grandparents 43 The Workshop 43 THE FINDINGS 44 Income 44 a) Emergency Housing 44 b) Income Mix 45 c) A Culture of Poverty 46 Discrimination 47 Services 48 Location Requirements 48 The P h y s i c a l Design of the Environment 49 THE ROLE OF THE ORGANIZATION 49 SUMMARY 50 CHAPTER SEVEN - THE HOUSING NEEDS OF ONE PARENT FAMILIES: SYNTHESIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ,51 THE ISSUES 51 THE INTERRELATEDNESS OF THE ISSUES 52 RECOMMENDATIONS - AN ISSUE ORIENTATION 54 Income 54 Discrimination 57 Is o l a t i o n versus Integration 59 Childcare and Support Services 61 SUMMARY 64 LITERATURE;; CITED 65 APPENDIXliA: Housing Needs of One Parent Families, Questionnaire 67 APPENDIX B: Housing Needs of One Parent Families, Questionnaire 74 v i Page APPENDIX C: Bishop Cridge Centre for the Family "Threshold": P o l i c y f o r Hayward Heights Rental Accommodation 81 APPENDIX D: The Bishop Cridge Centre for the Family, A p p l i c a t i o n f o r Rental Accommodation 83 APPENDIX E: Question Schedule f o r Organization Membership Interviews 86 APPENDIX F: Human Rights Case Test of New B.C. Code, Newspaper A r t i c l e 87 APPENDIX G: Census and S t a t i s t i c a l Information Concerning the One Parent Family 88 VIDEOTAPE: Located i n the Special Collections Division of the Library v i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would l i k e to thank Penny Gurstein f or her co-operation i n an a f f i l i a t e d research project; my readers, Henry Hightower and Ann McAfee, for t h e i r guidance and constructive c r i t i c i s m ; the si n g l e parents who so w i l l i n g l y contributed time and information; the s t a f f people from the organizations, the YWCA Group Homes, and the Bishop Bridge Centre for the Family. F i n a l l y I would l i k e to say a s p e c i a l thank you to the fellow members of the consulting c o l l e c t i v e , E. C u l l and J . Davidson for creating such a stimulating environment i n which to work and for f a i t h f u l l y renewing t h e i r partner's s p i r i t . v i i i You see two men, a woman and some ch i l d r e n walking on the street and you think i t s a family. Then you see two women, a man and a c h i l d . Is that a family too? How do you describe these new rel a t i o n s h i p s ? The family as we know i t didn't always e x i s t . These emerging l i f e s t y l e s evolved from needs and contexts, they are dynamic. The people are a l i v e , interested, searching. They are r e j e c t i n g the idea of one d e f i n i t i v e mode imposed forever. Jacques Gagne Assistant Executive Director Vanier I n s t i t u t e of the Family 1. CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION Increasingly the working d e f i n i t i o n of family, "one mother plus one father plus two and a h a l f children equal one average Canadian family," i s becoming untenable. Changes i n family structure and s o c i e t a l values have resulted i n an increasing d i v e r s i t y of l i f e s t y l e s . Communal l i v i n g , informal family formation and the emergence of the one parent family present challenges to those people, including planners, who are designing s o c i a l and housing p o l i c y and programs i n Canada. THE NEED FOR STUDY Comparatively l i t t l e i s known about a type of family which comprises almost ten percent of a l l Canadian f a m i l i e s . According to the 1971 census, 478,745 of the 5,070,685 fa m i l i e s i n Canada are headed by one parent. Families headed by a male sin g l e parent numbered 100,680 while 378,065 fa m i l i e s had a one-parent female head (see appendix for a d d i t i o n a l census data). This thesis i s the outcome of a question posed by a person involved with si n g l e parent housing: I've had c a l l s i n v i t i n g me to submit proposals f o r housing f o r sin g l e parents. The money i s there but I don't know what to ask f o r . What i s the best kind of housing for single parents? This thesis i s intended as an i n i t i a l step i n ^ planning housing f o r ' ' one parent f a m i l i e s . ' -Itvis an attempt to go beyond - 1 the e x i s t i n g Canadian studies, to incorporate studies conducted i n other countries and survey research i n the Vancouver/Victoria areas of B r i t i s h Columbia and to extend the knowledge base concerning the housing needs of one parent f a m i l i e s . The purpose i s to delineate the housing needs of one parent f a m i l i e s i n order that planning might be more responsive to 2. t h i s segment of society. The conclusion of t h i s research i s that housing needs and s o c i a l service needs, or de l i v e r y systems to meet these needs, cannot, at l e a s t f o r one parent f a m i l i e s , be planned separately. Housing i s a s o c i a l service, subsidized or not. S o c i a l services cannot substitute f o r appropriate housing. TERMS AND CONCEPTS DEFINED The Canadian census defines a "one parent family" as, "one parent with an unmarried c h i l d regardless of age, or a man and/or woman with a guardianship c h i l d or ward under 21 years of age." When the term one parent family i s used i t includes parents who are: 1. Widowed, divorced, separated, deserted and unmarried; 2. Male and female parents; 3. Those who are currently receiving s o c i a l assistance and those who are s e l f supporting (the "working poor" and the middle income group); 4. Those who have become heads of one parent f a m i l i e s during the past year and those who have had a longer experience; 5. Those with preschool c h i l d r e n , those with latency age .. ch i l d r e n and those with adolescents; 6. Those who are members of one parent organizations and those who are not. (Canadian Council on S o c i a l Development, 1971, p. 4) The terms "one parent f a m i l i e s " and " s i n g l e parent f a m i l i e s " are used interchangeably i n t h i s t h e s i s . The concept of "user need" i s e s s e n t i a l f o r an understanding of the research design. As long as the terms are defined broadly, i t would probably be generally accepted that the needs of people are of two kinds, p h y s i c a l and psychological. Food, clothing and she l t e r are examples of p h y s i c a l needs. I l l u s t r a t i o n s of psychological 3. needs might include the need for a f f e c t i o n , the need f o r experience and the need for a sense of status and s i g n i f i c a n c e . ( S o c i a l Planning Council of Metro Toronto, 1961, p. 2) An examination of the housing requirement of one parent f a m i l i e s involves both the p h y s i c a l and psychological aspects of the concept. Therefore, the term "housing" r e f e r s to the she l t e r i t s e l f and to the r e l a t e d services. Another means of need has also been considered - t h i s i s s o c i e t a l need. Defined i n the context of s o c i a l planning, a s o c i e t a l need i s f e l t or expressed need which, "the community has acknowledged as a need and fo r which i t has accepted some measure of c o l l e c t i v e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ( S o c i a l Planning Council of Metro Toronto, 1961, p. 2). Housing for one parent f a m i l i e s i s i n the process of becoming a s o c i e t a l need. This process has two parts, 1) a need the community accepts as such, and 2) the recognition that the s a t i s f a c t i o n of the need i s at l e a s t i n part a community r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . One aim of t h i s thesis i s to present the f e l t needs of one parent f a m i l i e s so that these needs may gain further acceptance as s o c i e t a l needs. THE NATURE OF THE INQUIRY I f t h i s study were to be characterized i n one word i t would be " i n v e s t i g a t i v e " . The purpose, as stated, i s to i d e n t i f y needs. This i s a pioneering e f f o r t with respect to the e l u c i d a t i o n of the housing service requirements of the one parent family i n the Canadian context. When the housing needs of one parent f a m i l i e s have been dealt with i n a q u a l i t a t i v e manner further work w i l l be required to ascertain the exact magnitude of the need. This l a t t e r task, the determination of the magnitude of the demand for housing services, i s not within the terms of reference of this thesis. While there is no attempt to delineate the magnitude of the needs of one parent families, in the specific housing services examined wherever possible some comment is made concerning the adequacy of a service. The need in these cases is assessed in terms of the total number of applications for a service versus the number that are able to be accommodated. Time and budget constraints made a traditional random sample approach prohibitive. As the concern was with the qualitative rather than quantitative aspects of housing need three single parent populations were chosen. The residents of the two housing projects and the members . of the various single parent organizations are not necessarily a repre-- -sentative sample of the one parent families in the Lower Mainland. However, the selection of two working models of one parent family housing plus a survey of organizations i s an attempt to draw from the broadest spectrum of the single parent community in terms of age, income and l i f e s t y l e . The research process consisted of three phases. The f i r s t phase of the research involved a review of the literature concerning the one parent family. The second phase concerned the determination of needs. Information from two groups of single parents, the residents of the Vancouver YWCA and the residents of the Bishop Cridge Centre for the Family in Victoria, i s presented in the form of two case studies. The results of a survey of organizations which serve one parent families are also discussed. The third phase of the research involved information dissemination ac t i v i t i e s . The findings, recommendations and the videotape have been presented to various groups, for example the B.C. Human Rights Commission, 5. the YWCA Housing Committee and Group Homes residents, the Bishop Cridge St a f f and residents, the p r o v i n c i a l o f f i c e of The Status of Women, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation - regional o f f i c e s t a f f . This chapter has outlined the author's concern that a greater knowledge base concerning one parent f a m i l i e s be obtained i n order that the most s u i t a b l e housing programs and p o l i c i e s may be formulated. Towards that end t h i s thesis i d e n t i f i e s the housing needs of one parent f a m i l i e s . On the basis of these some recommendations and di r e c t i o n s for further study are i d e n t i f i e d although the primary purpose involves the d e l i n e a t i o n of the housing needs of one parent f a m i l i e s . Chapter Two discussed methodological approaches used i n t h i s t h e s i s . Chapter Three reviews the pertinent l i t e r a t u r e , the background l i t e r a t u r e about the nature of sing l e parenthood and the p o l i c y and research documents from other countries, notably Great B r i t a i n , Sweden and Denmark. Chapters Five through Six discuss the three populations, research methodologies employed and findings. In Chapter Seven the conclusions and recommendations are presented. 6. CHAPTER TWO - ONE PARENT FAMILIES: THE LITERATURE In t h i s chapter some of the l i t e r a t u r e concerning the nature of sin g l e parenthood i s reviewed. P o l i c i e s and programs from other countries are examined. Following t h i s discussion the needs of si n g l e parents which are i d e n t i f i e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e are presented. THE NATURE OF SINGLE PARENTHOOD In the Introduction the one parent family i s defined i n terms of one adult and one or more ch i l d r e n with l i t t l e emphasis on how the family came to be a one parent family. This i s a conscious d e c i s i o n i n an attempt to narrow the focus of the study. Although i t i s not pursued i n t h i s thesis the how and why of one parent family formation i s necessary for an understanding of t h i s f a m i l i a l phenomenon. Sprey i n an a r t i c l e which emphasizes methodological considerations states, "the s p e c i f i c type of single parenthood - bereavement, divorce, separation, or unwed motherhood - i s of great importance" (Sprey, 1975, p. 49). He proceeds to discuss sin g l e parenthood, " i t s major empirical manifestations" and the problems which often r e s u l t . Many of:the concerns one parent fa m i l i e s face have causal r e l a t i o n s h i p s with the c r i s e s which resulted i n the one parent family formation, for example the death of a spouse. The one parent family i s an aberration from the s t a t i s t i c a l norm and i t i s s o c i a l l y stigmatized because of the absence of one parent and because of the c r i s i s which brought the family about. This produces a s i t u a t i o n where, "given the r e c i p r o c a l nature of emotional r o l e behavior, i t i s highly doubtful that a l l obligations of that nature can be absorbed by the remaining parent" (Sprey, 1975, p. 50). 7. Much of the emphasis i n the l i t e r a t u r e concerning the one parent family i s placed on the s o c i a l psychological needs of the family, what Sprey r e f e r s to as "emotional r o l e behavior". There are three divergent responses to these s o c i a l psychological needs offered. The service approach, contributions p r i m a r i l y by s o c i a l workers, advocates the e s t a b l i s h -ment of services to meet the needs of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r c l i e n t group (CCSD, 1972; National Council on I l l e g i t i m a c y , 1968; Nicholson, 1968). The s e l f - h e l p or mutual support a l t e r n a t i v e i s suggested by an i n t e r n a l organization f o r s i n g l e parents (Clayton, 1971). A combination approach, the outcome of a c o l l a b o r a t i v e project by an organization and a government service agency i s also documented (Department of National Health and Welfare, 1974). Buckland i n "Toward a Theory of Parent Education: Family Learning Centers i n the P o s t - I n d u s t r i a l Society" suggests family education programs as a means of preventing family c r i s i s . Many a f f l u e n t middle-class f a m i l i e s function at a psychological s u r v i v a l l e v e l , while other fa m i l i e s s t i l l struggle at a p h y s i c a l s u r v i v a l l e v e l i n a society which has not yet established p r i o r i t i e s i n terms of human well-being. Families tend to f e e l bewildered by change r e s i s t a n t and reactive,, not having been taught any s k i l l s f o r the management of change. (Buckland, 1972, p. 151) A s i g n i f i c a n t proportion of the l i t e r a t u r e i s concerned with one of the si n g l e parent categories mentioned by Sprey - unwed motherhood. The experience of unwed mothers i n New York over a s i x year period i s docu-mented i n a study by Sauber and Corrigan. The emotional and f i n a n c i a l problems of young mothers are examined from a micro perspective. In terms of t h i s thesis the most s i g n i f i c a n t f i n d i n g concerns the changes i n the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the housing occupied as the one parent family s t a b i l i z e s . 8. !That some of these mothers and t h e i r f a m i l i e s must l i v e i n inadequate and crowded housing, and that they, l i k e other young f a m i l i e s e i t h e r i n an e f f o r t to improve t h e i r quarters or for other reasons, have moved from place to place, i s already clear from the data presented. For the group as a whole, however, the housing conditions found to e x i s t when the f i r s t - b o r n was nearing the age of s i x years appear some-what better than the housing occupied by the young f a m i l i e s when the f i r s t - b o r n was le s s than eighteen months of age. To some extent, these improvements r e f l e c t the f a c t that many have moved to homes of t h e i r own, decreasing the crowding that existed when they l i v e d with t h e i r parents or others, and fewer may be l i v i n g i n the temporary quarters they may have had to e s t a b l i s h f o r themselves when they f i r s t became parents with an infant to care f o r . (Sauber, 1970, p.80) A Vancouver based study (Pernios, 1-969), also from, a micro perspective; .establishes an inventory of problems fexperienced by the si n g l e mothers l i v i n g i n co-operative homes (see page 20). The past and - anticipated problems of the mothers are ranked and weighted as follows: Past Problems Rank Order: 1. Daycare 2. Income management 3. Personal adjustment 4. L i v i n g arrangements 5. Ch i l d rearing and care 6. Getting along i n the community 7. Employment 8. Sex education 9. Job t r a i n i n g 10. Family court action 11. Health Weighted Score 113 97 90 88 79 76 67 51 43 40 26 Anticipated Problems - fewer problems were anticipated than had already been experienced. Rank Order: 1. Daycare 2. C h i l d rearing and care 3. L i v i n g arrangements 4. Income management 5. Personal adjustment Weighted Score 92 85 82 81 71 9. "Those areas of greatest concern to 60c or more of the mothers included: daycare, income management, personal adjustment, c h i l d rearing and care, and getting along i n the community" (Poulos, 1969, pp. 10-12). The e a r l i e r l i t e r a t u r e which i s not discussed here focusses on i l l e g i t i m a c y . The disappearance of t h i s term i n l a t e r writings i s perhaps i n d i c a t i v e of a chancing s o c i e t a l a t t i t u d e towards single mothers. This change i s also r e f l e c t e d i n a d e l i g h t f u l n a r r a t i v e by K l e i n , The Single  Parent Experience. Her topic i s s i n g l e parenthood as an a l t e r n a t i v e l i f e s t y l e , the experience of those who have chosen the ro l e of sing l e parenthood. Many of these people opt for communal l i v i n g arrangements. This i n t e r e s t i n g group of s i n g l e parents, an unknown but assuredly small proportion of the t o t a l one parent population, i s not dealt with s p e c i f i c a l l y i n t h i s t h e s i s . THE ONE PARENT FAMILY - THE SOCIETAL CONTEXT The needs of the one parent family must be considered within the lar g e r s o c i a l structure. Two empirical studies i n p a r t i c u l a r attempt t h i s through a comparison of one and two parent The r e l a t i o n s h i p of the s i n g l e parent to the rest of society i n terms of h i s or her s o c i a l and economic p o s i t i o n i s the topic of a p o s i t i o n paper by a l o c a l chapter of a si n g l e parent organization. The socio-economic aspects of sing l e parenthood are discussed i n a paper by Campbell, a member of the Parents Without Partners organization (see Chapter Four f o r inform-ati o n concerning t h i s organization). Working from the assumption that s i n g l e parent f a m i l i e s have d i f f e r e n t costs and d i f f e r e n t problems than two parent f a m i l i e s , the author goes on to make s p e c i f i c recommendations con-cerning housing support services and f i n a n c i a l assistance: 10. Housing: It i s recommended that subsidized housing be provided, integrated with the community at large rather than i n low income or si n g l e parent segregated high density areas. This in t e g r a t i o n with the rest of the community i s seen as a way of encouraging single parents and t h e i r c h i l d r e n "to maintain a reasonable s o c i a l l i f e , and for the chil d r e n p a r t i c u l a r l y to get the advantages of a wide spectrum of background and education among t h e i r f r i e n d s " . The i n t e -gration of single parent f a m i l i e s into apartment buildings with a maximum of 15% of the units to be inhabited by one parent f a m i l i e s i s suggested i n terms of l o c a t i o n . Any single parent housing which i s planned should a f f o r d "easy access to stores, recreation and childcare f a c i l i t i e s and pu b l i c transportation". Income: Government intervention i s necessary to ensure the payment of support and suggest that outstanding payments should be "treated as delinquent Income Taxes". The payment plus a processing surcharge would be taxed back and passed along to the one parent family concerned. There i s also a need f o r f i n a n c i a l assistance. A sing l e parent family allowance i n addition to the s o c i a l assistance allotment, according to need, should be incorporated i n the childrens' allowance i n one parent f a m i l i e s (Campbell, Parents Without Partners, unpublished paper). The Canadian Context In 1972 increasing i n t e r e s t i n the one parent family resulted i n two studies, the Guyatt study sponsored by the Vanier I n s t i t u t e f o r the 11. Family and the Canadian Council on S o c i a l Development Investigation. Guyatt i d e n t i f i e s f i n a n c i a l need as the greatest problem of one parent f a m i l i e s followed c l o s e l y by t h e i r need to be included i n the community (for information from the 1971 census substantiating Guyatt's thesis see Appendix on Census and S t a t i s t i c a l M a t e r i a l ) . Housing represents the largest outlay f o r the family. "More adequate p u b l i c support i n the form of a guaranteed annual income and/or a greatly increased family allowance to s i n g l e parents" i s recommended. Support services and subsidized daycare services are also required i n greater numbers. The CCSD study focussed p r i m a r i l y on a survey of s i n g l e parent serving organizations. The report makes s i m i l a r recommendations to those offered by the Guyatt study. A separate subsidy f o r the one parent family i s not advocated. Support and daycare services and the incorporation of these into the r e s i d e n t i a l envir-onments are suggested. Preventive Family L i f e Education akin to that put f o r t h by Buckland i s also recommended. The need for a c e n t r a l organization of s i n g l e or sole parents, to act as a consultative service and information centre i s deemed necessary. The American Experience The trend towards sin g l e parenthoos i s increasing i n the U.S. and t h i s i s marked by the f a c t that the proportion of f a m i l i e s headed by mothers have, over the l a s t decade, increased ten times f a s t e r than husband and wife f a m i l i e s . The growth rate i n female headed f a m i l i e s has increased from the f i f t i e s , through the s i x t i e s to the seventies. In terms of s o c i a l p o l i c y the U.S. i s not a leader. The recent work by Ross and Sawhill describes the p l i g h t of white and black s i n g l e mothers, but recommends l i t t l e change. They simply advocate: / 12. ... opportunities for women to earn an adequate income and to make young women aware of the risks they face in their adult years. But in the meantime, there w i l l be a need for other kinds of support: income maintenance programs which do not unwittingly exacerbate family instability, and private transfers similar to current alimony and child support payments but placed on a new and more equitable basis. (Ross and Sawhill, 1975, p. 173) The British Context The findings of a government sponsored research inquiry concerning one parent families in Britain were published in 1974. This represents six years of research, and is the most thorough study of the one parent family in existence. The report makes some 230 recommendations. For the purposes of this thesis the most salient are drawn to attention. In view of their findings that one parent families "have many of the expenses of two parent families and some additional expenses" and that "generally they have considerably lower income than other families there is a need for extra help," financial assistance for one parent families is recommended (Finer, 1974, p. 266). This help should be in the form of a Guaranteed Maintenance Income Allowance (GMA), on a non-contributory basis. Housing was found to be the largest single problem after financial d i f f i c u l t i e s . These d i f f i c u l t i e s include inadequate income for rental payments and to pay for household furnishings. It should be noted that the majority of Finer's recommendations have not been implemented. The GMA has not been adopted due to financial restrictions and because i t i s means tested and this contravenes government policy. A housing grant for furnishings has been instituted. The Finer Committee recommended the GMA after considering the schemes of other countries. In an appendix to the Finer Report, "Income Mainten-ance for One Parent Families In Other Countries" the policies of the 13. Netherlands, Germany and the Scandinavian nations are discussed. Before proceeding to a b r i e f statement concerning these p o l i c i e s i t i s s i g n i f i c a n t to note that no country surveyed " t r e a t s such fa m i l i e s (one parent) as absolutely d i s t i n c t from or as completely i d e n t i c a l to two parent f a m i l i e s " (Cockburn, 1975, p. 21). The p o l i c y patterns of the d i f f e r e n t countries are summarized: a) The Netherlands: When compared with Germany and Scandinavia, the Netherlands "goes as f a r as any nation i n t r e a t i n g a l l families a l i k e " (Cockburn, 1974, p. 21). One and two parent fa m i l i e s enjoy " f a i r l y high family allowances". A few "concessions" are made for the one parent family. b) Germany: P o l i c i e s and programs here provide f o r tax allowances, subsidies for kindergartens and housing for working si n g l e mothers. There i s a strong work o r i e n t a t i o n and the parent i s encouraged to seek employment. Programs f a c i l i t a t e t h i s . c) Scandinavia: Tax exemptions and income maintenance are geared to the one parent family. These programs plus housing allowances are "designed to be heavily dependent on the presence of chi l d r e n " . A program for support payment advance, a scheme where support i s guaranteed by the government i n the event of a default i s i n e f f e c t . 14. It i s worthwhile noting that i n a l l of the European countries where p o l i c i e s were examined the problem of one parent family d e f i n i t i o n i s not a s i g n i f i c a n t problem, as i t i s i n the United States. The problem of cohabi-t a t i o n does exist but the evaluators indicate program design can control for this. THE SCANDINAVIAN EXAMPLE - A SPECIAL CASE It would be an exaggeration to say that there are no housing problems for s i n g l e parents i n Scandinavia. However a quote from some correspon-dence does indi c a t e that the housing s i t u a t i o n i s somewhat bright there. " I t i s the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the l o c a l governments to attend to the s o c i a l needs of a l l i t s inhabitants. Due to a heavy investment program i n b u i l d i n g we have at the moment no shortage of f l a t s i n Sweden." This picture painted by a government department may be overly o p t i m i s t i c , however the invest-ment program for housing f o r single parents i n Scandinavia i s long established. In 1939 Mothers Aid,Centres and C o l l e c t i v e Houses were b u i l t i n Denmark. An integrated program i s av a i l a b l e to the mothers, from post-natal care i n convalescent homes to c o l l e c t i v e houses where interim accommodation i s provided. A d e s c r i p t i o n of these c o l l e c t i v e homes follows: Through the combined e f f o r t s of Mothers Aid and a private foundation (Egmont H. Petersen's Fund) appartment houses with c o l l e c t i v e f a c i l i t i e s , the so - c a l l e d C o l l e c t i v e Houses, were established i n Copenhagen with 100 f l a t s and i n Arhus with 48. Most of the f l a t s are intended f or mothers with one c h i l d and consist of one l i v i n g room, a small room for the c h i l d , a kitchenette and a bathroom. A few of the f l a t s are designed f or mothers with two chi l d r e n and have an extra room. The f l a t s are rented furnished and at a reasonable p r i c e . Creches and kindergartens have been opened i n connection with the C o l l e c t i v e Houses. The purpose of these houses i s to give the sin g l e mother and her c h i l d s e c u r i t y i n pleasant surroundings during the d i f f i c u l t t r a n s i t i o n period a f t e r the baby's b i r t h . She can rearrange her l i f e , s t a r t to work, secure a permanent 15. f l a t and perhaps begin vocational t r a i n i n g . Through the contact with s o c i a l workers and doctors of Mothers Aid casework help and p s y c h i a t r i c help are a v a i l a b l e concerning any problems which may a r i s e . A few regulations i n the C o l l e c t i v e Houses are necessary, but on the whole the mothers are considered completely p r i v a t e people with r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for themselves and the c h i l d . The apartments are rented f o r a s p e c i f i e d period -usually for two or three years. I t i s f e l t that si n g l e women with c h i l d r e n should not be 'segregated' i n s p e c i a l houses f o r a long time. In the long run i t w i l l no doubt be better for them and t h e i r c h i l d r e n to l i v e among other fa m i l i e s under ordinary conditions. When they have been helped through the d i f f i c u l t i e s of." the t r a n s i t i o n period they must move out to make room for others who need a s s i s t -ance to a new s t a r t . (Skalts, 1973, p. 18) In Norway a 1973 report indicates that f a c i l i t i e s for single parents were l i m i t e d but planning for mothers' homes was underway. In Norway and i n Sweden p i l o t p rojects which assume a preventative stance to family breakup have been established. Perhaps information from government sources should be viewed somewhat s k e p t i c a l l y . However, the evidence does suggest that there has been a concerted attempt to e s t a b l i s h an integrated program for service d e l i v e r y to single parents, i n Sweden and Denmark i n p a r t i c u l a r . The integrated approach to the p r o v i s i o n of services f o r the one parent family i n Scandinavia could be p r o f i t a b l y studied by the a r c h i t e c t s of our own s o c i a l p o l i c y . SUMMARY The review of the l i t e r a t u r e has brought a v a r i e t y of issues to the centre stage. The needs of si n g l e parents are socio-psychological and socio-economic. The one parent family's problems concern income, housing, daycare, community r e l a t i o n s and emotional s t a b i l i t y . Several solutions i n terms of p o l i c i e s and programs have been examined. These are important guides to the recommendations which are formulated Chapter Seven. 17. CHAPTER THREE - REGARDING THE METHODOLOGY This chapter outlines the methodological approach employed. THE USER NEED STUDY In a discussion about user/heeds research three types are i d e n t i f i e d : F i r s t l y studies of a p a r t i c u l a r area, usually undertaken i n conjunction with a housing programme or redevelopment scheme, to ascertain both the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the population and t h e i r expressed needs. Secondly, studies of user response to a p a r t i c u l a r type of house, or item of equipment such as the heating system, to provide feedback to the designer. The t h i r d type are more s t r a t e g i c studies, the aim of which i s to generalise concerning needs and orders of p r i o r i t y among users. (Hole, p. 2) This thesis i s of- the th i r d kind, what H o l e c a l l s a s t r a t e g i c user need study.-Several suggestions are made by Hole on the basis of a review of user studies i n B r i t a i n . The f i r s t concerns the r e l a t i v i t y of need: But since standards of comfort and amenity vary f o r one society to another, or throughout the h i s t o r y of a sing l e society, one returns to a s o c i a l d e f i n i t i o n of need, i e . r e l a t i v e to the stage of economic development i n a l l s o c i a l norms of a p a r t i c u l a r society. (Hole, p. 3). The r e l a t i v i t y of needsdoes not mean that they are so ephemeral as to make user research not worthwhile. I t does mean that needs change. What i s now a need was once considered a luxury. As s o c i e t a l achievements and expectations r i s e i n terms of the provision of housing so are people's concepts of need expected to r i s e . The needs of the one parent family are expected to r e f l e c t the c u l t u r a l expectations and needs that are i d e n t i f i e d i n t h e i r society. The second point Hole makes i s i n response to the c r i t i c i s m , "People do not know what they want". He suggests that a useful approach i s to 18. obtain information concerning the user's own dwelling, h i s or her l i k e s and d i s l i k e s and from there proceed to present other a l t e r n a t i v e s . He asserts that, "Faced with meaningful a l t e r n a t i v e then, people are w e l l able to discriminate". This has influenced questionnaire and interview design i n t h i s t h e s i s . His t h i r d suggestion involves a problem of e f f e c t i v e communication between researcher and the a r c h i t e c t s of b u i l d i n g and program design. In response to the suggestion that i n order to be e f f e c t i v e the needs must be communicated, a video tape h i g h l i g h t i n g the concerns of the one parent f a m i l i e s forms an i n t e g r a l part of the research methodology. THE ACTION RESEARCH STANCE Experience with other research endeavours has demonstrated that the information gathering process i s more successful when there i s an interchange of information between the researcher and the users. In addition, there i s a moral o b l i g a t i o n to provide something i n return f o r the knowledge which has been shared. In keeping with these sentiments, feedback sessions were held with those who have input into the research process. Interviews with some of the p a r t i c i p a n t s were taped. These video-taped interviews were then shown at a meeting of study p a r t i c i p a n t s and served as a focus f o r the group meeting. The group meeting was also taped and became a part of a documentary tape h i g h l i g h t i n g the housing issues of concern to one parent f a m i l i e s . This completed videotape which accompanies t h i s thesis has been viewed by people from Vancouver Ci t y H a l l , the Department of Human Resources, CMHC l o c a l and regional o f f i c e s , and p r o v i n c i a l and n a t i o n a l s t a f f members of the YWCA. As t h i s thesis i s w r i tten the information dissemination process continues. 19. It was found that video tape, i n sp i t e of some cinematic insuf-f i c i e n c i e s , served as an e f f e c t i v e communication and data c o l l e c t i o n t o o l . A d e s c r i p t i o n of the use of video tape, the advantages and problems of the medium and a c r i t i c a l commentary on the video tape which accompanies t h i s thesis have been appended f or those intere s t e d i n the p o t e n t i a l of video as a planning t o o l . THE ONE PARENT POPULATIONS The decision to choose two housing projects and a survey of organiz-ations has been influenced by the one parent family studies of the Canadian Council on S o c i a l Development (CCSD) and Guyatt, both i n 1971. These studies focus on one parent organizations i n t h e i r research designs, hence the s e l e c t i o n of organizations which serve one parent f a m i l i e s as one of the population. In addition to the organizations contacted the CCSD i n t e r -viewed some 113 sing l e parents. The study does not in d i c a t e that t h i s was a random sample of the population. In view of the fac t that drawing such a sample would involve much greater f i n a n c i a l resources than were a v a i l -able f o r the preparation of t h i s t h e s i s , the decision to choose two case studies was made. YWCA Group Homes and Bishop Cridge were chosen. These two populations represent d i f f e r e n t age groups (YWCA mothers tend to be a younger group) at d i f f e r e n t stages i n the l i f e cycle (the Bishop Cridge c h i l d r e n are p r i m a r i l y school age, those i n Group Homes are under three years of age). THE THESIS FORMAT - FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION The two case studies and the survey of the organizations are presented i n separate chapters. The presentation of these i s designed to r e f l e c t the emergence of issues i n the research process. Knowledge 20. gathered from the Group Homes mothers influenced the questions asked the representatives of the organizations. The issues and recommendations which emerge from the process of l i t e r a t u r e review, f i e l d research with the three populations i s then summarized i n a concluding chapter. Some r e p e t i t i o n i s recognized but'the desire that the thesis r e f l e c t the research PROCESS made t h i s the decision necessary. 21. CHAPTER FOUR - YWCA GROUP HOMES For the woman who doesn't want to stay on welfare, the going can be rough. Finding a job that pays enough, a place to l i v e , someone to look a f t e r the chil d r e n and friends to lend moral support presents such a massive stumbling block that i t often deters her from even making an i n i t i a l e f f o r t . (Carson, 1975, p. 9) One s o l u t i o n to t h i s dilemma i s a group home. The group home concept implies shelter and support but depending on the management and the philosophy the r e s u l t s may vary. A group home may be a place where people l i v e communally independently of any organization or agency. A l t e r n a t i v e l y a great deal of cont r o l over the l i v i n g s i t u a t i o n can be maintained by the use of house parents. The term group home as i t i s used i n t h i s chapter charts a middle course between these two extremes. The group home f o r the purpose of t h i s thesis i s a place, p h y s i c a l l y i t may be a house or apartment, where women l i v e cooperatively under the guidance of a homes d i r e c t o r , a representative of the supporting agency. A group homes model for sin g l e mothers and t h e i r c h i l d r e n i s operated i n Vancouver under the auspices of the YWCA. THE HISTORY OF THE GROUP HOMES In September, 1966, the Children's A id Society of Vancouver suggested that an i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y committee be struck "to consider the problems of unmarried parents and t h e i r c h i l d r e n " ( B r i t i s h Columbia P r o v i n c i a l Government, 1972, p. 61). The Committee recommended the establishment of group homes for unmarried mothers with the pr o v i s i o n of daycare. The existence of cooperative homes f o r unmarried mothers came to the attention of the Children's Aid Society. By August 1967 a home had been established by a young mother with an eighteen month 22. old son. The Children's Aid Society provided a grant for furnishings for the cooperative and occupant-governed house. By August 1967, there were three such homes. F i n a n c i a l support and services such as counsel-l i n g were provided by a number of agencies and departments. A p r o v i n c i a l evaluation report r e l a t e s : Meetings were set up among these agencies i n order to devise a formula f o r financing and giving on-going service and i t i s worth noting that the young women who composed the c l i e n t group were d i r e c t l y involved i n the discussions and planning i n at l e a s t one of these meetings. Much emphasis was placed on preserving the .. indigenous character of the project. (YWCA, 1972, p. 65) Early i n 1968 budget pressures were f e l t . I t became necessary to purchase major appliances f o r the homes and to secure the services of a group worker. I t became clear that the o r i g i n a l intention of f i n a n c i a l s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y was no longer v i a b l e . The d i r e c t o r s of the YWCA agreed to assume the managerial r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the homes which would be p r o v i n c i a l l y funded. The f i r s t Group Home committee composed of YWCA board members and Group Homes residents met. i n May 1968. Since 1968 there has been a change from a "communal house model" for four families, e s s e n t i a l l y s i n g l e family dwellings with one c e n t r a l kitchen, one or two bathrooms and a separate bedroom for each mother and c h i l d , to a "cooperative house model".with no more than two f a m i l i e s sharing a u n i t . A unit may be an apartment or house. A cooperative house may a c t u a l l y be an apartment b u i l d i n g . The important feature i s that t h i s o f f e r s the residents more privacy but cooperative purchasing, b a b y s i t t i n g and planning for the t o t a l house are possible. The childcare program i s an important part of Group Homes l i f e . The Group Homes have a daycare centre for c h i l d r e n 18 months to 4 years. •23V The centre i s used by the residents and by other one parent f a m i l i e s i n the surrounding community. Some of these parents are former Group Homes residents. In 1975 a f t e r operating for eight years and undergoing a number of changes i n those years the model was undergoing "evaluation. The Group Homes s t a f f has witnessed a movement away from the communal l i v i n g i d e a l so popular at the inception of the program. Individual suites which a f f o r d greater privacy are more i n keeping with the needs of most mothers. Contact with Group Homes was made as they move into t h i s new phase which could permit greater freedom for the i n d i v i d u a l mother within the c o l l e c t i v i t y . A meeting was c a l l e d by the Director of Group Homes to discuss the p o s s i b i l i t y . o f a housing study concerning the needs of one parent f a m i l i e s . The p r i n c i p l e purpose of t h i s interchange between the residents and the researcher was to ascer t a i n whether the residents were w i l l i n g to p a r t i c i p a t e i n such a study. The answer was:affirmative and enth u s i a s t i c . THE HOUSING NEEDS OF THE GROUP HOMES RESIDENTS Information about Group Homes was obtained from a review of project records from the inception of the pro j e c t , and through a survey of group homes residents. Twenty Group Homes' residents, past and present, were contacted. Nine of the t h i r t e e n residents l i v i n g i n the homes completed questionnaires (see Appendix) and discussed t h e i r views concerning the Group Homes model. Two of the women chose not to p a r t i c i p a t e and two others were i n the process of moving and could not be reached. Attempts were made to contact the women who had l i v e d i n Group Homes between 1972 and 1975. This y i e l d e d eleven completed questionnaires. Due to a lack 24. of forwarding addresses or information concerning the whereabouts of many past residents i t proved impossible to reach many. THE FINDINGS Af t e r many conversations, a few group discussions and analysis of the questionnaires, a number of s a l i e n t issues were i d e n t i f i e d . The major concerns of the majority of the mothers were expressed p a r t i c u l a r l y w e l l by one mother who i d e n t i f i e d four major housing and housing-related needs: The need to have other g i r l s i n the same s i t u a t i o n to r e l a t e to. The need to have a free babysitter to allow me to have a break every now and again. The need f o r a day care centre nearby for me to be able to get some work. The need for an adequate house for a reasonable p r i c e . She went on- to say that Group Homes met these needs. You-can t a l k about problems you have with your child~and i f other si n g l e parents have had that problem i t can be solved. You r e a l i z e someelse has the same problems and you're not alone and you can l i v e and enjoy l i f e and solve problems i n time. ' Many of the women stressed the importance of the sharing experience i n Group Homes. The need to have, "someone who understands the d i f f e r e n t things I go through" surfaces repeatedly. I t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y supportive to have other people around who are interested i n learning to "parent" as well as having the opportunity to " t a l k about problems with your ch i l d r e n and get another point of view i n r a i s i n g c h i l d r e n " . Residents form study groups to examine s p e c i f i c issues usually related to c h i l d -care. In the past the study groups have involved mothers and fathers 25. from the community, s t a f f from the YWCA daycare as well as women from Group Homes. The study group uses common readings, for example Children  the Challenge, as a basis for discussion. Generally the exchange of bab y s i t t i n g services works w e l l . This can be a source of tension i f a mother emotionally pressures the other women to take the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for her c h i l d . Instances of t h i s kind are ultimately resolved by the residents and the Group Homes Dire c t o r . Severe and continuing tensions are often an i n d i c a t o r that a mother i s not suited to the l i f e i n Group Homes and i t s underlying cooperative philosophy. Daycare i s an extremely important feature of Group Homes. One of the major aims of the program i s that the mother i s able to pursue c e r t a i n goals which w i l l eventually lead to her "independence" (YWCA, 1972) . A mother can place her c h i l d i n daycare and then i s able to go to school or obtain employment. Several mothers state that they would l i k e to be able to spend more time with t h e i r young c h i l d r e n but f e e l they have to "get ahead i n the world". This tension between nurturing one's c h i l d and seeking f i n a n c i a l independence i s a problem faced by many single parents. In Group Homes there are mechanisms for management of this type of tension. In the daycare centre s e t t i n g the chi l d r e n are exposed to s t a f f and to other adults. The daycare centre, located c e n t r a l l y i n a large house, serves as an informal meeting place for the mothers, able to i n t e r a c t with other c h i l d r e n and adults other than t h e i r parents. The rent a-mother i n Group Homes pays i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower than the rent she would pay for s i m i l a r accommodation i n the open housing market. The sharing of f a c i l i t i e s and furnishings, things such 26. as laundry appliances, lawn mowers, etc., represent savings that individual consumption would not realize. Once the building is purchased, with-the exception of one building where rent is subsidized, the homes pay for them-selves, ie., the rent the women pay covers most operating costs. Major maintenance costs are absorbed-by the Province. Group Homes mothers are assured of accommodation they can afford. Because of this they are not totally pre-occupied with rental worries and they are able to expend their energies in more profitable ways. This expenditure contributes to their further economic and emotional independence. Both current and past residents identified problems they encountered during their Group Homes sojourn. The d i f f i c u l t i e s the mothers mentioned as primarily those encountered in group li v i n g : "I have to remember the place is not only mine and I have to consider my room-mates as far as decorating goes. . There was a lack of privacy. There was a lack of choice of room-mates. Couldn't get along with one of the g i r l s . The house was never really clean.' The usual complaints of housecleaning. We always seemed to be defending our child to each other - nothing really drastic. Discussion with the project director reaffirmed what past residents said about the problems of group li v i n g . When the rules of their cooperative community become too restrictive many of the women have come to the realization they are ready to leave. The majority of residents who contributed to the study through interviews or questionnaires were very positive. It should be noted that the views of past residents who did not enjoy a similarly positive 27. experience may not be represented. This i s explained by the fact that the decision was made not to contact certain past residents when i t was f e l t , in view of information obtained from the director and other residents, that such an exchange would not be profitable in terms of data collection because of severe emotional upheavals in the l i f e of these past residents. The Group Homes director related a number of instances where, in spite of the selection process, a number of applicants unsuited to a cooperative livi n g arrangement did become residents. These people often stayed only a short while or i f they were a disruptive and destructive influence they were asked to leave. It should be noted that the Group Homes experience can and has proven beneficial for those in need of emotional support. The Group Homes model is not equipped to deal with people who suffer from severe mental imbalance. In the past the admission of such mothers has proven to be detrimental to the incoming mother herself and other house residents. The interpersonal dynamics of Group Homes cannot be overemphasized. The benefits the residents and their children receive are largely a function of the amount of commitment the mothers are willing to give. Because the benefits which may be derived from Group Homes l i f e are so dependent on the resident, great onus is placed on the director who oversees the admissions process. The selection process of necessity must identify those women who would neither benefit from nor contribute to the other mothers in the Group Homes. In an attempt to do this the interviewing process is extensive and may include resident mothers. THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF GROUP HOMES The importance of Group Homes because of the emotional support they provide has been emphasized. The goal of increasing confidence and 28. contributing to the development of a productive and independent i n d i v i d u a l can be attained. But at what cost? An evaluation study of the YWCA Group Homes found that, "The cost of keeping'a mother and c h i l d i n the Group Homes can be ha l f the cost of putting the c h i l d i n care and the mother on s o c i a l assistance." (YWCA, 1972, p. 58) This assertion i s substantiated with the following f i g u r e s : Group Homes Care Total budget fig u r e 1972-73 $42,528 Operation cost per month for 4 houses 3,544 Cost per month for one house 886 Cost per month for : '.:: mother and c h i l d $ 221 Separate Care Mother on S.A. $102 Child i n care ($11 per diem) 330 Cost per month for mother and c h i l d $432 If the mother i s on the opportunities program and s t i l l r e c e i v i n g assistance or i n on a manpower grant the t o t a l cost i n Group Homes i s s t i l l l e s s . Homes cost $221 S o c i a l Assistance 175 $396 If the s i n g l e mother i s employed and l i v i n g i n Group Homes there i s a s i g n i f i c a n t saving i n money. If the sin g l e mother i s b r i e f l y r e c e i v i n g S o c i a l Assistance or on a manpower grant there i s s t i l l a saving i n public money when she l i v e s i n a Group Home, but more important i s the benefit to the c h i l d and the mother from the Group Home a u x i l i a r y services which become an investment•in human resources for the future good of the community. SUMMARY The s t a f f of the YWCA i s cognizant of the changing accommodation needs of the sin g l e parents. In response to these changes the s t a f f would l i k e to accommodate the mothers i n i n d i v i d u a l suites within a cooperative building. Achievement of this goal i s dependent on the priority and funding given to Group Homes by the Province. There is every reason to believe that with the improving status of the single mother and the changing pattern of the family the demand for moderately priced housing like Group Homes w i l l increase. The human benefits which can result for mothers and children are significant. In addition, the cost of supporting a mother and a child in Group Homes can represent half the cost of supporting a child in care and a mother on social assistance. In terms of the realization of human potential and the cost of housing and services, the Group Homes model deserves serious consideration. CHAPTER FIVE - BISHOP CRIDGE CENTRE FOR.THE FAMILY The Bishop Cridge Centre for the Family i s a non-profit society that provides low r e n t a l housing and childcare services f o r one parent f a m i l i e s . The centre i s located i n V i c t o r i a and i s managed by a non-p r o f i t society. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The centre began i n 1873 as the B r i t i s h Columbia Protestant Orphans Home. In 1969, sensing the changing need f o r r e s i d e n t i a l care of chil d r e n , the society constructed twenty-nine townhouses and established daycare, a f t e r school and summer programs for the residents and for single parents i n the surrounding community. The Centre, incorporated, i n the same townhouse courtyard s e t t i n g , three group l i v i n g homes f or r e s i d e n t i a l care of chil d r e n by substitute parents. The twenty-nine garden apartments and three group l i v i n g homes (hereafter r e f e r r e d to as Hayward Heights) are situated on a wooded twelve and a h a l f acre s i t e i n V i c t o r i a . There are laundry f a c i l i t i e s on the premises and a major shopping area i s within walking distance. The actual units are a t t r a c t i v e b r i c k construction. The kitchen and j o i n t dining and l i v i n g rooms are on the f i r s t f l o o r , the bedrooms and bathroom are on the second f l o o r . Rents for these units are s i g n i f i c a n t l y below market p r i c e i n spite of a rent increase e f f e c t i v e October 1, 1975. Number of Bedrooms i n Unit Previous Rent Rent Af t e r Increase 2 bedroom 3 bedroom 4 bedroom $115 $148 $168 $129 $166 $188 31. Daycare, a f t e r school and summer programs f o r c h i l d r e n are a v a i l a b l e on the s i t e . O r i g i n a l l y the housing and accompanying services provided by the Cridge were intended to be of interim nature. This was not made expressly clear to the o r i g i n a l tenants. This unfortunate fa c t i s recognized by the s t a f f and the board of the Cridge. In an e f f o r t to c l a r i f y the interim nature of tenancy at Hayward Heights a "Threshold" p o l i c y was issued (see Appendix) to current tenants i n June 1975. In the future, tenants w i l l enter into an agreement with the Centre whereby the duration and conditions of tenancy are expressed i n a written form (see Appendix) and a contractual understanding between lessee and lessor w i l l be reached. Many of the f a m i l i e s who moved to the Cridge f i v e years ago s t i l l reside there because the rent i s within t h e i r means and due to the p r o v i s i o n and proximity of childcare service. Others remain simply because they have no other place to go. Exorbitant rents and near zero vacancy rates leave l i t t l e a l t e r n a t i v e but to remain i n Hayward Heights. Many of the tenants f e e l threatened by the "Threshold" p o l i c y which states, Unless exceptional circumstances can be shown, the maximum period of time which any one family may be be expected to reside i n the premises i s three years. (see Appendix) When queried about tenant anxiety regarding t h i s p a r t i c u l a r clause, the s t a f f stated that there had been e f f o r t s to reassure tenants that the p o l i c y i s i n no way a dictum foreshadowing mass e v i c t i o n . The f a c t that each family s i t u a t i o n would be i n d i v i d u a l l y examined was stressed but did l i t t l e to assuage the fears of the Hayward Heights residents. A tenant housing committee to act as l i a i s o n with the board and s t a f f was struck in response to the anxiety and resentment tenants f e l t towards the Cridge 32. management. The a c t i v a t i o n of a tenant housing committee and the r e c e p t i -v i t y of the current board of interchange i s a recent development at the Centre. Administrative and personnel changes at the Cridge have resulted i n p o l i c y and program evaluation by the s t a f f and the board. Contact with the Bishop Cridge Centre for the Family was established as the residents committee was getting underway. THE HOUSING NEEDS OF THE BISHOP CRIDGE/HAYWARD HEIGHTS RESIDENTS In the administration of questionnaires at the Centre the purpose was to gather information concerning housing needs of one parent f a m i l i e s and to assess the Cridge's accommodation, Hayward Heights i n terms of the org a n i z a t i o n a l goals of the Centre: 1) good q u a l i t y housing i n a t t r a c t i v e surroundings at a moderate r e n t a l for one parent f a m i l i e s ; 2) many services which allow the mother to seek employment and not have the burden of concern of her chi l d r e n . (Bishop Cridge Centre for the Family, pamphlet) I n i t i a l l y the researcher v i s i t e d the Cridge and interviewed the Assistant Director and another s t a f f member. It was agreed that the researcher would make a second v i s i t to interview the residents. This i v i s i t was preceded by a l e t t e r of introduction. The researcher spent three days and evenings i n V i c t o r i a and interviewed twenty-two of the twenty-nine residents. One of the tenants had recently moved and the unit was vacant. The remaining s i x residents were away or did not choose to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the study. The researcher used a questionnaire (see Appendix) as the basis for the interviews. The questionnaire addressed three sets of issues: 33. 1) the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the housing needs of f a m i l i e s , 2) the adequacy of current accommodation ( i e . Hayward Heights) i n meeting these needs, 3) the d i f f e r e n c e , i f any, between the housing needs of one parent f a m i l i e s and those of the general population. In the following section the r e s u l t s of the questionnaire interviews are summarized. THE FINDINGS Before moving to Hayward Heights the tenants had various types of accommodation. The greatest number (41%) l i v e d i n s i n g l e family dwellings (no d i s t i n c t i o n was made regarding the type of tenure). The other fam i l i e s had l i v e d i n duplexes (27%), apartments (23%) or townhouses (9%). There were three reasons why people were unable to obtain t h e i r desired accommodation: 1) places were beyond f i n a n c i a l means, 2) land-, lords did not want child r e n , and 3) they did not want to rent to si n g l e parents. Many people (33%) were r e s t r i c t e d by a combination of these f a c t o r s . When asking s p e c i f i c a l l y about experiences encountered when looking for accommodation the majority of the Bishop Cridge residents (64%) s a i d they had d i f f i c u l t y f i n d i n g a place that would have c h i l d r e n and the same number indicated d i f f i c u l t y f i n d i n g a landlord who would have a sin g l e parent as a tenant. The Hayward Heights residents were asked to r e l a t e the "hassles" they encountered when looking for housing. The s t o r i e s they recounted were a l l d i f f e r e n t and a l l involved di s c r i m i n a t i o n i n one form or another sometimes overt, sometimes masked. The landlords t o l d me they didn't want to rent to a woman on her own' because these kinds of women entertain too many men. Pets are f i n e , but you might as well k i l l your kids i f you want to l i v e i n V i c t o r i a . I applied to rent a place through a r e a l estate agency. They turned me down because 34. I was a si n g l e parent and l a t e r when they thought I might make trouble about t h i s they wrote me a l e t t e r of apology but I didn't get the place, they had rented i t to someone else.' I was l i v i n g i n t h i s house for eight months when the landlord found out about my divorce. He raised"the rent f o r t y d o l l a r s because he said I was a greater r i s k being a divorcee. I had been a good tenant for eight months but that didn't seem to matter. When I moved out of that place and was looking f o r a duplex, I would j u s t say "I l o s t my husband eight months ago." I don't l i k e l y i n g although what I say i s true i n a way. I t r e a l l y makes a differ e n c e i f the landlord thinks I'm a poor widow instead of a "wicked divorcee". The respondents were asked to define the housing needs of t h e i r f a m i l i e s . The v a r i e d responses include: reasonable rent (27%); s u f f i c i e n t space (27%); adequate laundry f a c i l i t i e s (23%). The need that i s most frequently expressed i s the requirement for enough bedrooms (50%). Many of these mothers sleep i n the l i v i n g room to provide t h e i r c h i l d r e n with greater privacy. Less than h a l f of the respondents (45%) stated that Hayward Heights housing was the kind of accommodation they sought. Nearly one-third (32%) f e l t that they did not f i n d the housing'they were seeking and almost one-quarter (23%) had mixed views. When asked about p o s i t i v e and negative aspects of Hayward Heights housing f o r both parents and ch i l d r e n an equal number (41%) cite' the reasonable rent and the childcare programs. A majority (64%) i n d i c a t e the understanding from others i n s i m i l a r circumstances i s a d i s t i n c t advantage. More than h a l f say that l i v i n g with a l l si n g l e parents i s not a good idea. Some of t h e i r comments may explain the divergent points of view. When a l l one parent f a m i l i e s l i v e together the kids forget about two parent f a m i l i e s . They think that marriage can't work. 35. Here your neighbours understand you. They went through the same thing. I don't think there would be that under-standing with two parent family neighbours. I t i s easier to l i v e here, none of the kids have fathers so they aren't jealous of each other f o r that reason. "I f e e l i t i s necessary to move back into the mixed community - get away from problem f a m i l i e s . Less than one-quarter (23%) f e e l that l i v i n g with other one parent f a m i l i e s i s h e l p f u l to them. Others have mixed feel i n g s (14%) or were i n d i f f e r e n t (14%). When asked about the idea of one parent l i v i n g together i n the community, fewer (20%) have negative f e e l i n g s than when asked about the personal s i g n i f i c a n c e of l i v i n g with other one parent f a m i l i e s . The same number (32%) have mixed attitudes towards the general idea of some type of one parent family community while more than one-quarter (27%) look favourably on t h i s type of l i v i n g arrangement. When asked i f l i v i n g with other one parent f a m i l i e s i s b e n e f i c i a l for the chi l d r e n , an equal number react p o s i t i v e l y and negatively. I t might bother my kids.to l i v e i n a mixed community. They are used to other one parent f a m i l i e s . I think two parent f a m i l i e s would make my kids f e e l jealous. Kids who have fathers tend to brag about i t . At least here there are other children i n the same boat. Kids can be c r u e l . One parent f a m i l i e s l i v i n g together i s a good idea for an interim period - to 'get started'. I don't see how i t could be done any other way. We are perceived as a 'separate' community. The kids f e e l i t . They are teased about i t and some have even been beaten up over i t . * ' Residents were asked about the i d e a l kind of accommodation for t h e i r f a m i l i e s and to consider a l t e r n a t i v e s to the kind of housing a v a i l a b l e now - a l t e r n a t i v e s i n terms of design, p r i c e and amenities provided. Many of the residents i n d i c a t e t h e i r f i r s t preference and then a second and perhaps f i n a n c i a l l y more f e a s i b l e choice. The great majority (73%) would l i k e to l i v e i n a house. More than one-third (36%) would prefer a house i n the country. Most often the f i n a n c i a l l y more f e a s i b l e choice i s a duplex or townhouse. As a group the mothers interviewed were people who had experienced l i f e as part of a two parent family. They were asked to examine two parent family l i f e versus one parent family l i f e and to answer the question: "Are the housing needs of one parent f a m i l i e s any d i f f e r e n t from those of the general population?" About one-third (32%) of the residents f e e l that the needs are not d i f f e r e n t while h a l f of the respondents (50%) say the needs are d i f f e r e n t . Needs Not.Different: The needs are not d i f f e r e n t . With the housing c r i s i s , f a m i l i e s with fathers have j u s t as many problems. The needs aren't d i f f e r e n t , with subsidies women make ju s t as much money as men do. Everybody with kids has the same problems. The needs are the same. I t i s : more d i f f i c u l t i f there i s only one income.v Needs Are D i f f e r e n t : If you only have one cheque coming i n , i t i s much harder rent-wise. You have to cope with problems by yourself and i t i s good to be around others who under-stand. It i s harder to f i n d a place because of prejudice against one parent f a m i l i e s . ' The needs are d i f f e r e n t e s p e c i a l l y f or the young single parent family. Support and daycare . are both n e c e s s i t i e s . • There i s enough housing f o r everyone but s i n g l e parents r e a l l y need a place to get on t h e i r feet. Landlords would rather rent to a man - who usually has more money anyway.' 37. •Single parents have more d i f f i c u l t y f i n d i n g accommoda-t i o n because of discrimination. People's at t i t u d e s toward si n g l e parents must be changed.V SUMMARY In terms of meeting the organizational goals established by the Centre several changes are necessary. F i r s t of a l l f a m i l i e s with younger c h i l d r e n who would use the childcare programs should be housed i n Hayward Heights. The i n e r t i a on the part of the current, many of them o r i g i n a l , tenants prevents t h i s from being accomplished. Communication between the Cridge management and Hayward Heights residents i s needed. One of the tenants expressed hope that the Tenant's Housing Committee would be concerned with a l t e r n a t i v e housing, i e . , would help the tenants f i n d housing so they could move away from the Cridge when they are no longer i n need of the kind of support and services provided by the Centre. This a f f i r m a t i v e action stance i s an excellent suggestion. The Cridge could and perhaps should, i n view of past misunderstandings about the nature of the accommodation, play an active r o l e i n f i n d i n g accommodation for people when they are ready to leave. Frequent exchange between tenants, the board and s t a f f concerning issues such as the financing of the Cridge could only preclude many misunder-standings . The Bishop Cridge Centre f o r the Family provides a p a r t i c u l a r kind of accommodation for one parent f a m i l i e s . The childcare programs which have a r e l i g i o u s o r i e n t a t i o n are an i n t e g r a l part of the l i v i n g experience the Bishop Cridge Centre affords. Not a l l parents would agree with the method of i n s t r u c t i o n . However, t h i s kind of housing should be a v a i l a b l e as one of a range of types of accommodation for one parent f a m i l i e s . The Bishop Cridge Model, a townhouse c l u s t e r with childcare f a c i l i t i e s l i k e the YWCA Group Homes i s a working example of one parent housing i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The housing provided by the Cridge i s intended to be interim accommodation and when t h i s basic premise i s not adhered to ce r t a i n administrative problems such as the problem of one parent family d e f i n i t i o n , are raised. The concept developed by the Cridge i s a good one. While the idea of a private sector providing t h i s type of accommodation i s a t t r a c t i v e , the f i n a n c i a l f e a s i b i l i t y of such an undertaking i s uncertain i n view of r i s i n g costs. The pub l i c sector could p r o f i t from the experience of t h i s p r i v a t e l y conducted housing project. The Cridge Model i s one further example of the way i n which the divergent housing requirements of one parent f a m i l i e s can be met. CHAPTER SIX - ORGANIZATIONS WHICH SERVE ONE PARENT FAMILIES This chapter has a twofold purpose. Following a b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n of each organization the information from the eleven organizations concerning the housing requirements of one parent f a m i l i e s i s discussed. Secondly, the r o l e of these-.organizations i s analyzed i n terms .of the needs the organizations meet and the possible r o l e they could play i n bettering the l o t of one parent f a m i l i e s . The r a t i o n a l e for the designation of organizations which serve one parent f a m i l i e s as one of the three populations i n the study i s discussed i n Chapter Two. The d i s t i n c t i o n made by Guyatt concerning types of organizations, 1) government agencies, 2) voluntary agencies 3) s e l f - h e l p groups, has not been employed since most of the organizations discussed receive government"funding of some kind, use the services of volunteers, and began as s e l f - h e l p organizations. ORGANIZATIONS QUERIED - THE METHOD A l i s t of organizations which serve the needs of one parent f a m i l i e s was compiled. The organizations were contacted and o f f i c e r s or s t a f f were interviewed (Interview Schedule, see Appendix). Members or users of some of the organizations contacted the researcher i n response to notices placed i n the organizations' newsletters. An interview schedule was designed In l i g h t of Issues previously raised by si n g l e parents i n th i s research process. I t should be noted that the information from the 40. representatives of the organizations was gathered a f t e r the work on the YWCA Group Homes and the Bishop Cridge Centre for the Family had been completed, and a number of recurring issues had been i d e n t i f i e d . These issues influenced the nature of the interview schedule used i n interviewing other organizations. ORGANIZATIONS CONTACTED Other organizations were contacted, however, only those organizations which provided information concerning the needs of one parent f a m i l i e s and those which are mentioned i n Chapter Six are described. Big Brothers are men who, on a volunteer basis, provide guidance and friendship to f a t h e r l e s s boys. The majority of the L i t t l e Brothers come from low income f a m i l i e s . Many of the boys l i v e i n public housing. The boys share t h e i r problems with the Big Brothers and often these involve problems with housing. Big S i s t e r s i s a s i b l i n g organization designed to help g i r l s i n need of a f r i e n d i r r e g a r d l e s s of the number of parents i n the family. The majority (60%) of L i t t l e S i s t e r s are from f a m i l i e s headed by s i n g l e mothers, 20% are from f a m i l i e s headed by si n g l e fathers. B.C. Ind ian Homemaker s' As so c i a t ion i s an organization of Indian women funded under the Native P a r t i c i p a t i o n Program. The Homemakers are a c t i v e i n human r i g h t s , education, c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s , and immigration, to c i t e only a few of t h e i r concerns. They were approached because of the i n t e r e s t they have expressed regarding housing for native ch i l d r e n (status 41. and non-status) and the p r o v i s i o n of daycare.. Crossreach Single Parents i s an organization designed to provide support for the s i n g l e parent. The membership., 60% are single mothers, 40% sin g l e fathers, help i n the operation of a drop-in centre for the parents. Meetings f o r parents are held i n various locations throughout the c i t y and are conducted by s t a f f leaders. P r i o r to March 31, 1976 Crossreach was funded by the Vancouver S o c i a l Planning Department. They plan to continue as a voluntary organization i n s p i t e of the lack of funding. Family Place i s a centre i n Dunbar-West Point Grey funded by the Vancouver Community Resources Board. The centre.is used by non-working parents during the day, p r i m a r i l y by non-working mothers with pre-school c h i l d r e n . The s e t t i n g i s informal, a l i b r a r y about family l i f e and c h i l d rearing, coffee brewing and a v a i l a b l e s t a f f counsellors to chat and organize Family Place a c t i v i t i e s . Crossreach Single Parents use Family Place and other members of the community such as seniors are being encouraged to p a r t i c i p a t e . Parents Without Partners i s an international non-profit educational and s o c i a l organization for s i n g l e , separated, divorced and widowed parents. Members are parents with and without the custody of t h e i r c h i l d r e n . The members of the Chapter contacted are p r i m a r i l y i n t h e i r t h i r t i e s and f o r t i e s . There are approximately equal numbers of single mothers and single fathers. Parents Without Partners forms a lobby for si n g l e parent needs and to t h i s end have published a paper, "The Socio-Economic Needs of Single Parent Families". 42.. Project Parent is a daycare/drop-in centre funded by the Vancouver Resources Board. Its purpose is to improve the self image of i t s members, 90% of these single parents are on welfare, and to present alternatives and options open to them. Two groups of twenty parents v i s i t the Project Parent Centre twice weekly. In the Centre's converted warehouse the members use the activity room, kitchen and laundry f a c i l i t i e s while their children are cared for by daycare staff. This service attempts to meet the needs of single mothers who are experiencing emotional instability. The Project Parent staff organize the activities at the Centre, counsel as well as chauffeur many of the mothers and children to the Centre. Transition House i s a refuge for women and children in a c r i s i s situation. Funding is provided by the Provincial Government. The Transition House i s a large duplex with six bedrooms, two living rooms and a shared kitchen. The residents share meal and the cooking and cleaning responsibilities. Women may stay at Transition House for a maximum of one month. There is no charge for the food or shelter provided. The House staff advise the women on legal, health and housing matters. The staff essentially provide friendship and referral to legal aid and other services. The permanent staff is augmented by teenagers involved in the Teenager's Opportunity Program, a provincial program that gives monetary incentives to social assistance recipients who perform volun-teer work of some kind. Although the allowable period of residence is one month, women are encouraged to make their own plans and move along due to the great demand for Transition House services. There have been as many as twenty-seven 43. f a m i l i e s i n residence although the House can comfortably accommodate ha l f that many. There are as many as seventy f a m i l i e s each month who must be turned away because the House i s f i l l e d to capacity. Vancouver and D i s t r i c t Public Tenants Association i s an organization of public housing tenants' groups. I t s purpose i s to a f f e c t the planning of p o l i c i e s and programs for public housing. One parent f a m i l i e s headed by women comprise 65% of the public housing tenants. Many of the Associa-tion's concerns about accommodation, rec r e a t i o n and daycare are a r t i c u l a t e d i n terms of the p a r t i c u l a r needs of the one parent family. Volunteer Grandparents i s a non-profit p r o v i n c i a l l y funded society that brings together senior c i t i z e n s and ch i l d r e n without grandparents i n the Lower Mainland. Three-quarters of the fa m i l i e s who are interested i n findi n g a grandparent are one parent f a m i l i e s . The surrogate grandparent f i l l s a gap and sense of i s o l a t i o n which can e x i s t when there i s only one parent and often no other r e l a t i v e s i n the Mainland area. The grand-parents who p a r t i c i p a t e also f i n d i t a g r a t i f y i n g experience. The child r e n and grandparents engage i n a c t i v i t i e s that any f a m i l i a l twosome might. They walk, t a l k , go to the park together. The Workshop i s an Outreach Manpower Program i n the West End of Vancouver. Its purpose i s to help si n g l e parents and older women re-enter the work force. The s t a f f of t h i s program were consulted because of t h e i r knowledge about the needs of single parents i n the high density apartment m i l i e u of the West End. Interviews with representatives from these organizations provided i n s i g h t f u l information concerning housing needs of one parent f a m i l i e s . 44. THE FINDINGS As outlined i n the chapter concerning methodology, the presentation of the study i s intended to convey the process of discovery that was involved i n t h i s research enquiry. At the point when the contact was made with the organizations some major housing issues had surfaced repeatedly: income, disc r i m i n a t i o n , services. The findings of the survey of organizations which serve one parent f a m i l i e s are described i n terms of needs and these issues, l o c a t i o n requirements and the p h y s i c a l design of the environment. Income The organizations reaffirmed the findings of Canadian, B r i t i s h and American studies that the f i n a n c i a l need of one parent f a m i l i e s i s t h e i r greatest problem (Schesinger, 1975, p. 10). There i s general agreement that to obtain the kind of housing the parents would l i k e to have f or t h e i r f a m i l i e s more income i s r e q u i s i t e . Many sing l e parents, e s p e c i a l l y single mothers, are on s o c i a l assistance. Many other one parent f a m i l i e s would be termed low income."'" The various organizations i d e n t i f y a number of housing r e l a t e d problems that r e s u l t due to i n s u f f i c i e n t income. They o f f e r a v a r i e t y of solutions to the income issue, a) Emergency Housing: I n s u f f i c i e n t income or no independent income often means that a single mother must r e l y on the services of an agency l i k e T r a n s i t i o n House i n a time of emergency. When the l i m i t on the length of stay at S t a t i s t i c s are not a v a i l a b l e concerning the actual number of one parent families on government assistance i n the Vancouver area. In a Toronto based report female heads of f a m i l i e s with c h i l d r e n form the largest category of Family Benefit r e c i p i e n t s (James, 1973). 4 5 . T r a n s i t i o n House i s up the mother i f she has not been able to f i n d a place to l i v e at a p r i c e she can a f f o r d , i s often forced to return to an i n t o l e r a b l e m a r i t a l s i t u a t i o n . The need for a c r i s i s type of shelter l i k e T r a n s i t i o n House would continue to e x i s t even i f there were an adequate supply of housing and the mother had the e f f e c t i v e demand necessary to secure such housing. If single parents did have s u f f i c i e n t income to secure housing, the turnover would be greater and T r a n s i t i o n House would be able to more adequately meet the demand of sin g l e mothers i n c r i s i s . b) Income Mix: The idea of income mix has recently come i n vogue and two opposing views regarding i t are expressed by the organizations. Income and age mix i s desirous because of the v a r i e t y i t would introduce into our some-times s t e r i l e and i s o l a t i o n i s t urban environment. The Volunteer Grand-parent Organization envisages an urban community with d i f f e r e n t age groups and income mixes l i v i n g i n proximity to one another. The type of environment brought about by human mix i s a step toward r e p l i c a t i n g a community akin to the small town concept. The opposite view i s expressed-by the Vancouver-Public Housing and Tenants Association. They view income mix politically as a movement away from subsidized housing -by means of d i f f u s i n g low income people across the c i t y .to make them l e s s v i s i b l e and "easier to ignore". In addition, the p o s s i b i l i t y of i n i t i a t i n g s e l f - h e l p educational and r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s , said to be emerging currently i n public housing, i s diminished. The view against income mix i s not n e c e s s a r i l y held by a l l or even most members of the Vancouver Pub l i c Housing and Tenants Association. It i s , however, an issue to be r a i s e d when considering the merits and costs of income mix. c) A Culture of Poverty: Repeatedly the sense of f r u s t r a t i o n and disillusionment i s c i t e d as a problem for si n g l e parents with i n s u f f i c i e n t income. Public housing i s sometimes the only f i n a n c i a l l y f e a s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e and here the wearing away process i s not i n any way ameliorated. A number of parents i n the organizations voiced the concern that t h e i r c h i l d r e n would be influenced by what seemed to be a " s o c i a l assistance - public housing syndrome". Oscar Lewis' culture of poverty was referred to by a couple of parents. On the basis of t h i s study nothing can be s a i d regarding any generated influence, however an Ontario government study lends some credance to the fears expressed. Women reared by t h e i r mother only (as opposed to a two parent family) are more than twice as l i k e l y as those > reared by two parents to report that t h e i r parents received welfare.' (James, 1973, p. 80) The se v e r i t y of the housing problem i n s u f f i c i e n t income can present i s r e f l e c t e d i n a scenario by a member of the Big Brothers Organization. A mother on s o c i a l assistance was l i v i n g i n a two room basement apartment and paying $155 f o r rent. One of her chi l d r e n had been very s i c k a number of times due to the dampness and cold i n the s u i t e . They were unable to obtain a d d i t i o n a l money for rent. Before such monies could be secured the public health nurse had to step i n . F i n a l l y , with a statement from a doctor saying that i f the family continued to l i v e under i t s current circumstances the c h i l d could d i e , money was obtained. 47. Discrimination The si n g l e parent's search for r e n t a l accommodation i s often fru s t r a t e d by landlord r e f u s a l s on the basis of the prospective tenant's marital status and sex. This i s true for si n g l e fathers and mothers. This i s mentioned as a factor by the representative of each of the organ-i z a t i o n s . The following true l i f e experience r e l a t e d by one of the organizations c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e s d i scrimination as a housing problem for sin g l e parents. • I am a 29 year o l d mother, my son i s aged 6 and I am separated and rec e i v i n g no income other than from my s e c r e t a r i a l p o s i t i o n which nets $500 per month. I have been i n Vancouver three months. My f i r s t two weeks were spent i n a tent on the beach. I then managed to get i n t o an apartment with another woman and her c h i l d . This was a three bedroom apartment and cost me $150 per month as my share of the rent. However, with the two ch i l d r e n and the landlord l i v i n g below, problems arose and I f e l t forced to move out of the s i t u a t i o n . It took me two weeks to f i n d that apartment looking each day and spending approximately four hours each day. Most r e p l i e s to advertisements were met with 'sorry no kids and no pets'. This i s rather heartbreaking and also seems to have given my son a complex about him being the cause of our not being able to f i n d a proper place to l i v e i n . On moving out of the apartment, I spent one f u l l week looking and answering ads i n between keeping my hours at work. I was f i n a l l y forced to take a sing l e room 18' x 10' approx. with two mattresses on the f l o o r , a chest of drawers and a chair. I share two e l e c t r i c hot plates with two other .'Basement Tenants' with whom I also share the unlighted r e f r i g e r a t o r and shower/toilet,. There are mice (as the room I now have was formerly the 'cool room,and "food storage'). It i s s t i l l quite a cold room although there i s an old fashioned heater now set up i n the room. The basement i s very badly l i t and i s also the excess storage place for the landlord, h i s wife and chi l d r e n . The entrance i s at the back of the house and i s also u n l i t . For t h i s I have to pay $100 per month. I found that rooms advertised for $60— $80 were immediately increased to $100 because df my son, the excuse given being that more heating and e l e c t r i c i t y was used, which i s u t ter nonsense as we cannot co n t r o l the heating and usually take a shower together to eliminate long periods i n the shared bathroom. 48. Services The organizations suggest that c e r t a i n services such as daycare-are important. In addition support services such as c r i s i s and drop-in centres which help parents during t h e i r t r a n s i t i o n into single parenthood are also necessary. For reasons which, w i l l be developed i n the section on l o c a t i o n requirements the overwhelming majority of organizational spokes-people f e e l these services should be incorporated with the housing. Day care centres i n apartment buildings are often c i t e d as an example of the kind of i n t e g r a t i o n d e s i r a b l e . Location Requirements It i s important that the one parent family f i n d accommodation on a transportation route, as many do not own v e h i c l e s . This was stressed by a l l the organizations. In Vancouver, areas such as K i t s i l a n o and the West End are favoured due to the proximity of services and the general community acceptance of si n g l e parenthood. In view of the great demand for places i n K i t s i l a n o and the West End a number of the single parents suggested that residence elsewhere i n the c i t y could be acceptable. The spokesperson from the B.C. Indian Homemakers Association also indicates that residence i n the c i t y i s important f o r c u l t u r a l reasons. Concern i s expressed that whether Indian si n g l e mothers are accommodated i n s i n g l e parent housing or whether they l i v e independently, i t i s important that they be close enough to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the Indian community, for example the Indian Friendship Centre. A Vancouver c i t y l o c a t i o n would f a c i l i t a t e t h i s . The suburban chapter of Parents Without Partners voices concern about the exclusion of the single parent from neighbourhood s o c i a l l i f e i n the suburban s e t t i n g . Problems of r a i s i n g c h i l d r e n i n high density areas, i n high r i s e s f o r example, lead t h i s organization to state a preference for medium density housing with, "easy access to stores, r e c r e a t i o n and childcare services, and pu b l i c transportation". The Physical Design of the Environment In terms of design the sing l e parents express needs which are t y p i c a l of any family, privacy and play space f o r chi l d r e n for example. The s i n g l e parents place great importance on communal space i n apartment buildings because of the i s o l a t i o n one parent can f e e l when chi l d r e n are the only people to t a l k with. The concept of shared space i s perhaps the most important design feature f o r the one parent family. In terms of community and s o c i a l planning c e r t a i n organizations, Family Place and Volunteer Grandparents f o r example, discuss the need to group housing to f a c i l i t a t e i n t e r a c t i o n among peer and d i f f e r e n t age groups. In planned developments s o c i a l space should be set aside for family places. A c t i v i t i e s and programs designed to combat loneliness and support single parents would then be a v a i l a b l e i n the home environment. THE ROLE OF THE ORGANIZATION "Organization as a s u r v i v a l imperative" (Bertrand, 1972, p. 1), i s perhaps an appropriate phrase to capture the purpose of an organization. The organizations contacted f u l f i l l the needs of single parents sometimes by v i r t u e of the fac t that the parents f i n d f u l f i l l m e n t through p a r t i c i -pation i n the group. There i s , however, another r o l e to be played by the organization and t h i s concerns a f f e c t i n g change. Modern c i v i l i z a t i o n depends l a r g e l y on organizations as the most r a t i o n a l and e f f i c i e n t form of s o c i a l grouping known. By coordinating a large number of human actions the organiza-t i o n creates a powerful s o c i a l t o o l . ( E t z i o n i , 1964, p. 1) Although Parents Without Partners as an international organization does attempt to affect the decision making process, through submission of briefs for example, single parents have not become a lobbying force of any significant strength in this country. This is not the case in Britain where the National Council for One Parent Families is a most vocal group. Reasons for this difference in p o l i t i c a l activism is beyond the scope of this thesis. However, there is a potential for coalition of Canadian organizations which serve one-parent families. This may be the way to make the needs of one parent families into focus and to i n i t i a t e action. SUMMARY In this chapter the findings of the survey of organizations which serve one parent families have been discussed. The potential for these organizations to organize and act in unison has also been explored. In the following chapter these findings along with those of the two case studies are brought together. SI-CHAPTER SEVEN - THE HOUSING NEEDS OF ONE PARENT FAMILIES SYNTHESIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The previous chapters of t h i s thesis involved the findings of a l i t e r a t u r e review, case studies of the YWCA Group Homes and the Bishop Cridge Centre f o r the Family, and a survey of organizations which serve the one parent family. The purpose of t h i s chapter i s synthesis. The needs of the one parent family as they emerged from the review, case studies, and survey are summarized. Further recommendations concerning ways i n which these needs can be met and areas which merit a d d i t i o n a l research are discussed. THE ISSUES Certain needs of the si n g l e parent and h i s or her family have been brought out i n the l i t e r a t u r e . In our own country the studies by Guyatt and the Canadian Council on S o c i a l Development emphasize the need for support services and childcare assistance. Guyatt suggests that s i n g l e parent f a m i l i e s l i v e i n le s s adequate housing than t h e i r two parent family counterparts. Reasons for t h i s are discussed by a number of authors c i t e d e a r l i e r , however, a l l of the s a l i e n t issues are covered in the Report of the Committee on One Parent Families, the Finer Report. This i n c l u s i v e report stresses that "housing problems c l o s e l y r i v a l money problems as a cause of hardship and stress to one parent f a m i l i e s " (Finer, 1974, p. 357). S o c i a l work support services such as family counselling and childcare services are also deemed important for the one parent family. These concerns were r e f l e c t e d i n the findings of the case studies and survey of organizations. In a d d i t i o n , a fourth concern emerged as a c e n t r a l housing re l a t e d issue for the one parent family -52. discrimination. The substance of this issue was discussed in the l i t e r a -ture by Sprey, however, the profundity of the barrier in obtaining accommodation became apparent from the f i e l d research. Four housing related issues emerged from the literature review, case studies and organizations survey: income, discrimination, isolation versus integration,"'" and support and childcare services. A l l of these, perhaps with the exception of isolation versus integration, are discussed elsewhere with reference to the one parent family. Perhaps the most significant finding of this research is the interrelatedness of these issues. This theme deserves further elaboration before the individual issues are explored at length. THE INTERRELATEDNESS OF THE ISSUES Throughout the research the assertion was made by professionals that there is no housing problem faced by one parent families. What they have is an income problem. The single parents themselves care l i t t l e for the planners and bureaucrats' battles over concepts and semantics. As far as they are concerned when they look for accommodation they are forced, due to a lack of effective demand and competition for very tight supply, to accept the dregs of the housing market. The one parent family spends the largest proportion of their income on housing and they consider lack of funds as a housing problem. ^ This issue w i l l be developed later. Briefly i t involves the question of whether one parent families should be accommodated independently in the community or integrated within the general community in single parent housing of some kind (isolation). Isolation perhaps has a nega-ative connotation. This is not intended. The term 'isolation versus integration' although used in a somewhat different sense was coined by Sylvia Goldblatt in a paper by the same name in W.E. Mann, Canada: A  Sociological Profile, 1968. 53.. Suppose for a moment that income is not an issue for the one parent family. What other needs do they have? Child care and support services, for example are important. The question arises, ut are these necessarily related to housing? As things exist now they are not generally related to housing although examples where they are related have been discussed, for example, Transition House,. Group.Homes•and Bishop Cridge. The. parents stress however, the need for these to be incorporated within the residential environment, i f not within the actual, building ..then in the context of the surrounding community. This is the kind of thing Family Place is attempting to accomplish. In the current tight housing situation even i f the parent finds accommodation which he or she can afford, even i f support and childcare services are located nearby or transit makes these accessible, by virtue of the fact the parent is a single parent he or she is often automatically considered a problem tenant and because of this i s denied housing. The one parent family needs to obtain housing and to do this they must have adequate income and discrimination must be thwarted. In order that they are able to function they require childcare services within a reasonable distance of the home environment - the closer the better. Support services depending on theremotional st a b i l i t y of the parent are also a consideration. Income should not be considered independently of the need for chil d -care, should not be considered independently of the reality of landlords' perceptions of the one parent family, and should not be considered independ-ently of the single parents need for emotional support ... what is needed is a h o l i s t i c approach in the delivery of housing services to the one parent family. 54. RECOMMENDATIONS - AN ISSUE ORIENTATION Income It i s clear that one parent f a m i l i e s tend through low income security and factors promoting excessive mobi l i t y , to be channelled into i n f e r i o r types of housing. (Finer, 1974, p. 365) "The average income of two parent fa m i l i e s has been compared to the average incomes of fa m i l i e s with single male heads or female heads, and i t has been shown that the average family income of single parent f a m i l i e s i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower, p a r t i c u l a r l y i f the sing l e parent i s a woman. (Guyatt, 1972, p. 59) The lower income makes pr o v i s i o n of standard of l i v i n g almost an i m p o s s i b i l i t y . The need for a d d i t i o n a l income to obtain, among other things, a better standard of housing, i s substantiated i n the l i t e r a t u r e and by the f i e l d research. The need for t h i s i s attested to i n the Finer Report which states, A good and secure home i s e s s e n t i a l to successful family l i f e . There i s an important sense i n which t h i s holds p a r t i c u l a r l y true for one parent f a m i l i e s , i n that the presence or absence of housing conditions may we l l t i p the balance on whether such f a m i l i e s surmount or succumb to the f i n a n c i a l and s o c i a l handicaps from which they are apt to s u f f e r . (Finer, 1974, p. 357) There i s evidence to suggest that a single parent i s often "forced into s u b s t a n t i a l extra expenses" for things such as household maintenance, chil d c a r e , investment i n "time saving" appliances such as a clothes dryer, convenience foods, etc. These extra expenditures may "equal or even exceed the saving to the household of not maintaining the other parent" (Finer, 1974, p. 266). What can be done to a l l e v i a t e the problem of i n e f f e c t i v e demand for housing? In view of greater need of one parent f a m i l i e s and = a f t e r ^ -examining p o l i c i e s of Denmark, Norway, Sweden, The Federal Republic of Germany and the Netherlands, The Finer Committee on One Parent Families recommends, "A Special One Parent Family Allowance" (Finer, 1974, p. 284). The guaranteed maintenance allowance (GMA) advocated by the B r i t i s h committee i s i n keeping with t h e i r goal of, guaranteeing to lone parents a s u f f i c i e n t l e v e l of mainten-ance to o f f e r them a r e a l choice between working and staying home to look a f t e r the child r e n , without inequity to low-income two parent f a m i l i e s . The allowance has two parts, the childcare. allowance for the adult which "would be extinguished by the time income reached about the l e v e l of average male earnings, and the c h i l d benefit which would continue to be payable to a l l lone parents, whatever t h e i r income" (Finer, 1974, p. 285). The s i g n i f i c a n c e of the income program i s that i t recognizes the greater need of one parent f a m i l i e s . The GMA as proposed by the Finer Committee would allow a parent to stay at home with the chil d r e n or to go to work gaining economic advantage by doing so. A si n g l e payment f i g u r e would be established f o r the adult and another for the c h i l d so as to avoid as much as possible d e t a i l e d i n q u i r i e s as to family circumstances. The embarassment and anxiety over maintenance payments and c h i l d support from the spouse would be avoided i f such a scheme were adopted. Any payments from the spouse would be passed over to the authority up to the l e v e l of the GMA benefit (Finer, 1974, p. 295). The GMA accomplishes what the maintenance advance schemes i n the Scandinavian countries do but i s integrated into a h o l i s t i c scheme which i s applicable to a l l single parents i r r e g a r d l e s s of t h e i r sex or i f they are working or looking a f t e r t h e i r c h i l d r e n . The B r i t i s h government chose not to implement the GMA for two reasons: 56. ... f i r s t l y because i t i s means tested and i t i s the Government's objective to reduce dependence on means-tested b e n e f i t s , not extend i t , and secondly because i t would be extremely expensive. (correspondence with the Dept. of Health and Security, July 1975) It should be noted that no suggestion of d i r e c t l y adopting such a program as GMA is:being suggested. The program was t a i l o r e d to the e x i s t i n g B r i t i s h s o c i a l p o l i c y . I t i s the goals which are achieved by the GMA which are of s p e c i a l importance. Beside the c r i t i c i s m s regarding means te s t i n g and expense the issue of cohabitation i s also raised when such a -program i s considered. •••''„ When i s a single parent a single parent? The problems of enforcing a cohabitation rule are obvious. The second problem involves the economic advantage which would be presented to one parent f a m i l i e s . Government p o l i c y could create d i s i n c e n t i v e s to formal family formation. Economic advantage could make the two parent family l e s s a t t r a c t i v e than the one parent family. When planning p o l i c y which s p e c i f i c a l l y aids s i n g l e parents, consideration must be given to the possible resultant problems as well as the advantages. In the c r o s s - c u l t u r a l study of income mainten-ance schemes for one parent f a m i l i e s by Cockburn for the Finer Committee cohabitation has not been found to be a cause f o r concern nor an admini-s t r a t i v e problem i n the countries studied. When an audience s p e c i f i c p o l i c y such as the GMA i s implemented monitoring i s recommended. Cockburn found that the s o c i a l worker i n e f f e c t monitors the s i t u a t i o n and "there can be l i t t l e question of concealment and ambiguity" (Cockburn, 1974, p. 46). The f i e l d research and l i t e r a t u r e review prompt the following recommendations: 57. 1. I t i s suggested that the advantage of providing aid s p e c i f i c a l l y for one parent f a m i l i e s be considered. An in-depth examination of p o l i c i e s i n other countries could prevent mistakes and suggest ways of handling the problems of single parent d e f i n i t i o n and di s i n c e n t i v e s to two parent family formation. The problem of stigma i n a program directed at a p a r t i c u l a r group i s recognized. Trade-offs must be made, between the advantages of a d d i t i o n a l income versus the disadvantages stigma brings. An adequate u n i v e r s a l scheme for income maintenance i s d e f i n i t e l y preferable but i n the interim a d d i t i o n a l funding for the one parent family i s suggested i n view of t h e i r greater need. 2. U n t i l such time as a guaranteed income program i s introduced, some form of housing subsidy program, responsive to both one and two parent family needs, should be adopted. 3. It i s recommended that a "maintenance advance scheme" be established. The monthly maintenance or c h i l d support would be paid d i r e c t l y to the parent with c h i l d custody by the government and would therefore be guaranteed. The spouse, usually the husband, would remit payment to the government. 4. A furnishings grant or low i n t e r e s t government loan would enable the sin g l e parent to equip a home to a reasonable standard without going deeply into debt. Discrimination Discrimination i s one of the major problems the one parent family must deal with when looking for accommodation. Housing i s d i f f i c u l t f o r many people to f i n d but seemingly s i n g l e parents are near the bottom of landlords' l i s t s of acceptable tenants. Often the only reason for the 58. landlord's r e f u s a l to rent i s the fa c t that the prospective tenant i s a s i n g l e parent. Discrimination was the second most s i g n i f i c a n t issue (after childcare) i d e n t i f i e d by the si n g l e parents from the Group Homes and the Bishop Cridge. " Members of various organizations are concerned about the image of the si n g l e parent. In a discussion with them pu b l i c education i s seen as a means of changing t h i s image. Discrimination stands i n the way of obtaining housing even i f the family has adequate income. What can be done about the d i s c r i m i n a t i o n against the single parent? The d e c i s i o n by the B.C. Human Rights Commission i n favour of a s i n g l e parent i n part presents an answer to t h i s question. The Warren case (see Appendix) w i l l serve as a reminder to landlords but many single parents who are unaware of the l e g i s l a t i o n would not make a formal protest. But p u b l i c a t i o n and enforce-ment of the Human Rights Act are not s u f f i c i e n t . In Saskatchewan, the Director of the Human Rights Branch has made extraordinary e f f o r t s to see that the code, as i t applies to housing d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , i s s t r i c t l y enforced. As a r e s u l t , some homeowners have l e f t rooms unrented rather than face the p o s s i b i l i t y of renting to people they do not f e e l are des i r a b l e . As a r e s u l t the Human Rights advocates i n Saskatchewan have been chained with "zealousness (that) has caused a housing shortage" (Gordon, 1975, p. 9). As a r e s u l t the d i s c r i m i n a t i o n laws i n that province have been made more "palatable". I t i s not enough to simply enforce the law. The reasons why landlords choose not to rent to one parent f a m i l i e s must be understood and d i s p e l l e d . 59. In response to the issue of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n the following recommenda-tions have been formulated: 1. It i s recommended that the public education program by the Human Rights Branch inform single parents of t h e i r r i g h t s e s p e c i a l l y those r i g h t s which apply to housing. 2. Further, the B.C. Human Rights Commission, through an education program of some kind, should attempt to change the stereotypic image of s i n g l e parents. Such a program could be aimed at landlords' organizations for example. I s o l a t i o n Versus Integration What i s the best l i v i n g environment for the one parent family? Should the one parent family be housed, that i s integrated, with the rest of the community, or are there advantages to separate housing for parent families, that i s i s o l a t e d from the rest of the community? The findings of the case studies and survey of organizations indicate that both patterns are necessary to meet the divergent needs of one parent f a m i l i e s . A s i n g l e mother with an infant and l i t t l e parenting experience may desire cooperative or communal housing with others i n s i m i l a r circum-stances. Others want to l i v e i n a small single parent housing complex where daycare, a f t e r school and summer programs are a v a i l a b l e f o r c h i l d r e n on the premises. Others want to l i v e independently i n the community perhaps aided by a housing subsidy. People with'ithis l a t t e r preference may or may not choose to p a r t i c i p a t e i n groups designed to a s s i s t the sin g l e parent family. The parents, p r i n c i p a l l y women, who want to l i v e i n some kind of housing for one parent f a m i l i e s indicate they want to..do so fo r varying periods of time. Desired length of stay ranges from 60. " u n t i l I f i n i s h my t r a i n i n g and can a f f o r d a place of my own" to "when my c h i l d r e n are ready to leave home". Sprey indicates that si n g l e parenthood i s often a t r a n s i t o r y stage i n the l i f e cycle due to the remarriage of many sing l e parents (Sprey, 1975). As evidenced by the research i n addition to the length of time the family i s a one parent family i t s needs are dependent -on the age of the parent and the emotional and economic s t a b i l i t y of the family u n i t . There are many ways to meet the many needs. What i s required i s some coordination to ensure the needs are being met to the best of society's a b i l i t y . One gap which has been i d e n t i f i e d i n the Vancouver area serves to i l l u s t r a t e . The les s adequate mothers who keep t h e i r babies cannot carry t h e i r share of the . r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n t h i s kind of Group Home. Instead they need a. home with a l i v e - i n house mother. (YWCA, 1972, p.'41) What can be done about the need to provide housing along the I s o l a t i o n versus Integration continuum? 1. I t i s recommended that a wide v a r i e t y of accommodation, provided by the public and private sectors, be made a v a i l a b l e to one parent f a m i l i e s . At present i n Vancouver, T r a n s i t i o n House and YWCA Group Homes are only able to meet a f r a c t i o n of the need. 2. The Province should fund more emergency housing l i k e T r a n s i t i o n House. According to current a p p l i c a t i o n s at l e a s t two more centres l i k e T r a n s i t i o n House are required to meet the needs women and t h e i r children face i n Vancouver. 3. It i s recommended that accommodation with l i v e - i n s t a f f be provided for single parents who require more support than the Group Homes model i s intended to provide. Emphasis would be placed on achieving emotional . . - s t a b i l i t y . ' 4. The demand for placement i n YWCA Group Homes i s such that at l e a s t three more houses could be f i l l e d immediately. A d d i t i o n a l P r o v i n c i a l funding would make t h i s possible. 5. The m u n i c i p a l i t i e s could also provide housing for one parent f a m i l i e s . Buildings which are acquired as part of a land assembly plan could be used f o r Group Homes. 6. A housing subsidy would enable one parent f a m i l i e s to "integrate" with the r e s t of the community should they so desire. 7. The p r i v a t e sector should be encouraged to provide accommodation for one parent f a m i l i e s . The P r o v i n c i a l Government should monitor the type and quantity of housing that comes: onto the market and f i l l the "gaps". Childcare and. Support Services In the case studies, survey of organizations and l i t e r a t u r e review the importance of childcare was repeatedly stressed. The term childcare rather than daycare i s employed because some parents do s h i f t work or attend night classes so a f a c i l i t y needs to be a v a i l a b l e i n the evenings as w e l l as the daytime. The reasons for t h i s need as expressed i n a statement from the Finer report: Of p a r t i c u l a r importance for mothers with c h i l d r e n i s the p r o v i s i o n of accommodation which incorporates f a c i l i t i e s f o r the care of young c h i l d r e n , p a r t i c u l a r l y when the mother i s working or i s undergoing t r a i n i n g and t h i s need i s being i n c r e a s i n g l y recognized. (Finer, 1974, p. 59) In a paper describing an i d e a l environment the r e l a t i o n s h i p of the service f a c i l i t i e s to the place of residence i s described: 62. Conceptually the b u i l t - i n environment i s a model i n which the family i s the hub of the wheel and a l l services which the family requires as a functioning and v i a b l e system are so arranged that they are r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e to the family. Based upon advanced technology, these services are servants of the family rather than the other way around. For the young dual-career family i t i s important that they have day-care and after-school services. Instead of following the t r a d i t i o n a l pattern of lo c a t i n g "mother-helper" a c t i v i t i e s i n a settlement house, church, or other c e n t r a l l y located area of the community, we would b u i l d such services i n our model community so that they are integrated with the apartment, townhouse, duplex, or single-family home s t y l e o f - l i v i n g . ' (Sussman, 1970,.p. 12) The i n t e g r a t i o n of childcare f a c i l i t i e s has been successful i n r e s i d e n t i a l environments such as the Bishop Cridge Centre f o r the Family. This "maximum i n t e g r a t i o n " i s an i d e a l . Should t h i s i d e a l not be possible the l o c a t i o n of housing f o r the si n g l e parent family, indeed, any family, should provide childcare .service f a c i l i t i e s i n proximity to the residences of the f a m i l i e s . The ass e r t i o n has been made.ithat c h i l d care f a c i l i t i e s should be"located within walking distance by the youngest c h i l d (Sussman, 1970, p. 15). The distant l o c a t i o n of childcare f a c i l i t i e s places even greater burdens on the family that has only.one parent to manage t r a v e l to and from the centre with the c h i l d . Support service f a c i l i t i e s are also important. A planned environment which incorporates Family Places, f o r example, i s an i d e a l to move toward. When new developments are being planned the in t e g r a t i o n of these services i s a must. The task i s much more simple than t r y i n g to f i t them into e x i s t i n g b u i l t environments. Some government incentives to private developers could f a c i l i t a t e the int e g r a t i o n of childcare and support service f a c i l i t i e s . The goal should be to move away from the centralism described by Sussman. The organization of service systems tend to c e n t r a l i z e , based on bureaucratic e f f i c i e n c y , and the consequences are that f a m i l i e s have to reach out of t h e i r homes i n order to obtain any type of service. I t i s quite common i n middle-class neighborhoods to see mothers bussing t h e i r c h i l d r e n to school i n t h e i r automobile, something they have done for years. In f a c t , a l l l i f e outside the family i s b u i l t around i n s t i t u t i o n s such as the church, the school, the l e i s u r e time f a c i l i t y . The r h e t o r i c i s that these agencies e x i s t for the:"family, but the empirical r e a l i t y i s that r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e concern i s given to what may be the desires of needs of the family. (Sussman, 1970, p. 10) In the environment which e x i s t s the actual support services are often dependent on government funding. As t h i s i s written a number of p r o v i n c i a l ..cutbacks have been discussed. While T r a n s i t i o n House and Family Place have obtained funding f o r another year, Crossreach Single Parents has had i t s funding terminated. Many of the support services f o r singl e parents operate on a voluntary basis.and Crossreach plans to continue i n th i s manner. To be t r u l y e f f e c t i v e i t i s necessary to h i r e s t a f f people and th i s i s possible only with government funding. This w i l l come about only when the process of becoming a s o c i e t a l need i s advanced further. As the community accepts the needs of one parent f a m i l i e s as s o c i e t a l needs the following w i l l be possible. 1. Developers should be encouraged, by means of incentives, to provide ch i l d c a r e f a c i l i t i e s i n t h e i r p r o j e c t s . 2. Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the p r o v i n c i a l govern-ments should enter into cost sharing agreements i n order that c h i l d care f a c i l i t i e s , which w i l l be used by people other than residents of a CMHC financed b u i l d i n g may be provided. This cooperation between the two l e v e l s of government would f a c i l i t a t e the construction of daycare or childcare f a c i l i t i e s . The r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for operating costs would of course remain with the province. 3. I t i s suggested that i n the planning of r e s i d e n t i a l developments the services which a s s i s t one parent f a m i l i e s be considered and space be provided within the planned developments. These could be required - j u s t as a c e r t a i n amount of green space i s r e q u i s i t e . 4. Funding of services such as Family Place and T r a n s i t i o n House should be given for longer than the current one year period to allow longer range planning by these organizations. SUMMARY This thesis delineates a number of housing needs of one parent f a m i l i e s . These needs are presented i n terms of issues. The recommend-ations which are offered are not a l l i n c l u s i v e . They do ind i c a t e the i n i t i a l steps which should be taken to meet the needs of one parent f a m i l i e s . The primary purpose of t h i s thesis i s to present the needs of one parent f a m i l i e s and to further the acceptance of these as s o c i e t a l needs as described i n the f i r s t chapter. It has been said that •- Action of any kind without research, whether i t i s to bring about change i n an i n d i v i d u a l group's values or behavior or to create new environments, i s f o l l y ; on the other hand, research without being followed with action is«stupidity. (Sussman, 1970, p. 6) As t h i s i s written the feedback process continues and the r e s u l t s are therefore appended to the t h e s i s . If t h i s thesis provokes some thought and discussion about the needs of the one parent family and the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the community then i t has served i t s purpose. 65. LITERATURE CITED Bertrand, A l v i n L. S o c i a l Organization - A General Systems and Role  Theory Perspective. Philadelphia, Pa.: F.A. Davis Co., 1972. Buckland, Clare M. "Toward a Theory of Parent Education: Family Learning Centres i n the Post I n d u s t r i a l Society," The Family  Co-ordinator, A p r i l 1972. Canadian Council on S o c i a l Development. The One Parent Family. Ottawa, October 1971. Campbell, E a r l . "Socio-economic Needs of Single Parent Families," unpublished paper presented to Parents without Partners, Chapter 153, Vancouver. Carson, Susan. "The Other Side," Weekend Magazine, February 22, 1975. Clayton, P a t r i c i a . "Meeting the Needs of the Single Parent Family," The Family Co-ordinator, October 1971. Cockburn, C h r i s t i n e and Hugh Heclo. "Income Maintenance for One-Parent Families In Other Countries: An Appraisal," Report of the  Committee on One-Parent Families, 1974. Department of National Health and Welfare. Peer-Professional Partnership:  A Unique Approach to Services for Separating Parents. Ottawa, A p r i l 1974. E t z i o n i , Amitai. Modern Organizations. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc., 1964. Finer, Morris. Report of the Committee on One-Parent Families. Department of Health and S o c i a l Security, Cmnd 5629, London, 1974. Gordon, Sheldon. " T e l l i n g i t l i k e i t i s i n Saskatchewan," F i n a n c i a l Post, July 26, 1975, p. 9. Guyatt, Doris E. One-Parent Family i n Canada. The Vanier I n s t i t u t e of the Family, 1971. Hole. W.V. "User Needs and the Design of Houses: The Current and P o t e n t i a l Contribution of S o c i o l o g i c a l Studies," unpublished paper from the Building Research Station, M i n i s t r y of Public Works, Great B r i t a i n . James, Jean M. Family Benefits Mothers i n Metropolitan Toronto. M i n i s t r y of Community and S o c i a l Services, 1973. 66. K l e i n , Carole. The Single Parent Experience. New York: Walker and Company, 1973. Morisey, P a t r i c i a G. "From Scandinavia to the Urban Ghetto Implications of the Scandinavian Welfare Programs," National Council on I l l e g i t - imacy, Unmarried Parents and Their Children, 1968. National Council on I l l e g i t i m a c y . Unmarried Parents and Their Children, 1968. Nicholson, J i l l . Mother and Baby Homes. London: A l l e n & Unwin, Ltd., 1968. Poulos, Susan. A Problem Inventory of Single Mothers. Vancouver: Children's A id Society of Vancouver, 1969. Ross, Heather L. and Isabel V. Sawhill. Time of T r a n s i t i o n . Washington: The Urban I n s t i t u t e , 1975. Sauber, Mignon and Ei l e e n Corrigan. The Six Year. Experience of Unwed  Mothers as Parents. Community Council of Greater New York, 1970. Schlesinger, Benjamin. The One Parent Family. Toronto: Un i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press, 1975. Skalts, Vera. Mothers' Aid in'Denmark. Det Danske Selskab, 1973. Soc i a l Planning Council of Metropolitan Toronto. Report on the Concept of  Needs and the Determination of P r i o r i t i e s , 1961. Sprey, Jetse. "The Study of Single Parenthood: Some Methodological Considerations," i n Schlesinger, The One Parent Family, 1975. Sussman, Marvin. "Construction of B u i l t - i n Environments: Housing Services," unpublished paper, Case Western Reserve University, 1970. YWCA. "An Evaluation of Group Homes for Single Parents," unpublished document, Vancouver, 1972. A P P E N D I X A Housing Meeds of One Parent Families 67. A research project is being conducted this summer on single parent families and their housing needs. Information is being sought concerning present difficulties in your housing situation as well as solutions that could alleviate the problems. The study will include a survey of housing-related comrmnity serv-ices such as day care, single parent organizations and financial and legal assist-ance. The final report will provide policy and design recommendations to aid government and private agencies in planning their housing programs. The YWCA is supporting this study and a section of a report will • look at Group Homes as a type of communal living. We feel i t is important that single parents identify the housing issues. We hope you will help us by f i l l i n g out the questionnaire. There is no need to sign your name as individuals will not be identified. Do give us your name i f you would like a copy of the report. Thank you. Penny Gurstein Nancy Hood N. Hood HOUSING NEEDS OF ONE PARENT FAMILIES 68 . 1. Row d i d you hear about Group Homes? 2. What vfere your expectations of Group Homes? 3. Before moving i n t o Group Homes what were your housing needs? Please l i s t housing r e l a t e d needs e.g., the. need to be close to some se r v i c e . "THE GROUP HOME EXPERIENCE 4 . Do you f e e l that Group Homes have met your needs? •5. Please l i s t the advantages of l i v i n g i n a Group Home, fo r you 6. Please l i s t those aspects of Group Home l i f e which you found bothersome f o r your c h i l d f o r you f o r your c h i l d 7. Was the daycare provided an important aspect of Group Homes? Please check l ) This was very important one 2) Important - 2 -3) Not anymore important than other aspects of Group Home l i f e 4) Not important 8. How did you feel about living with other single parents? Please check one. l ) this was most helpful Why? 2) this was not helpful 3) undecided AFTER MOVING OUT When you left Group Homes what kind of accommodation were you looking for? Please 1) an apartment check 2) one a room 3) a cooperative house 4) house 5) ' other - please specify 10. Were you looking for accommodation with another single parent? 1) Yes 2) No 11. Did you find the type of accommodation you had hoped to find? 1) Yes 2) No b) If you answered no, that is you were not able to obtain the kind of accommodation you wanted, please l i s t the reasons you were unable to find such a place? - 3 ~ 70, 12. What kind of accommodation did you move into? 1) an apartment 2) a room 3) a cooperative house, shared a place with others 4) house 5) other - please specify 13. Did you share the accommodation with another single parent? 1) Yes 2) No 14. After moving out did you make contact with any single parent organizations? 1) Yes 2) No 15. Did you maintain contact with Group Homes, perhaps through the daycare centre? 1) Yes 2) No • 16. Did you have any "hassles" trying to find a place that would take children? 1) Yes 2) No b) If yes please describe the kinds and number of difficulties encountered. 17. Did you experience any discrimination because you are a single parent? 1) Yes 2) No b) If yes please describe these experiences in detail. What do you think about single parents l i v i n g together i n the community? Did other people think you were different because you lived i n Group Homes? What kind of support was provided when single parents lived together i n a Group Home? How did this support influence/help one parent families? Do you think single parent families should l i v e separately i n the community, i.e. i t i s not important for single parents to group together? 1) Yes 2) No 3) Undecided a) Do you think a group situation i s a good one for single parents and their children? b) Would you have liked to remain i n group homes longer than you THE ALMOST IDEAL 72 If told to choose the kind of accommodation vie wanted we a l l might say a castle or mansion. Keeping in mind some economic constraints we would like to consider alternatives to the kind of housing available now ~ alternatives in terms of design, price and the amenities provided. When we assume some economic constraints we mean that we a l l can not live in castles. We do not mean that a person who can not presently afford anything else should be "satisfied" with substandard accommodation. The following questions are intended to bring out your ideas about housing and housing for one parent families in particular. 24. What kind of place would you and your child live in i f you could choose? (Please describe fully - e.g. large apartment on ground floor, etc.) 25. Where would you like to be located' and why? 26. What services are important to you and your child? (e.g. day care, drop-in centre) Please l i s t . 27. Where, in terms of the location of your residence, would you like these services to be located? (e.g. the school should be within two blocks) 28. Do you think the housing needs of one parent families are any different than those of the general population? We welcome any comments about this questionnaire or about the study in general. 73o - 6 - * We are interested in your ideas about the kinds of housing you would like to see for one parent families. If you have ideas about floor plans, building types, etc., feel free to sketch these on the back of the questionnaire. Thank you for completing this questionnaire. We realize that i t i s lengthy and has required some consideration. We sincerely hope our report wi l l have some impact on housing policy. If you are interested in receiving a copy of the report or more information about the results of our Group Homes research please note this on the questionnaire. Thanks again. APPENDIX B 74 July 19, 1975 Housing Needs of One Parent Families As part of the research concerning the housing needs of one parent families we are interested in the Bishop Cridge Family Centre and the housing i n Hayward Heights. We would l ike to know about the housing needs of your fam-i l y and the adequacy of your current housing in terms of these needs. The report that w i l l result from the research efforts i s intended to provide, policy and design recommendations for government and private agencies. Com-pleting the questionnaire w i l l help us i n formulating recommendations based on contact with as many one parent families as possible. Please indicate on your questionnaire i f you would l ike a copy of our findings and recommendations. Thank you. Penny Gurstein Nancy Hood N .B . Please return to N. Hood Information About Your Family 1. Number of children i n your family? 2. Ages of these children? 3. Age of family head? under 20 20 - 25 26 - 30 31 - 35 36 - 40 41 - 45 46 - 50 over 50 4. Family income (please check as many as applicable) Social Assistance Unemployment Insurance V.O.P. other Government Income f u l l time employment part time employment support from spouse Before you moved to Hayward Heights 5. How did you hear about the Bishop Cridge Centre? 6. How did you hear about Hayward Heights housing? 7. . What type of accommodation did you have before moving to Hayward Heights 8. Is th i s (Hayward Heights) the kind of housing you had hoped to find? 1) Yes . 2) No b) I f you answered no, that i s you were not able to obtain the kind of accommodation you wanted, please l i s t the reasons you were unable to find such a place. 9. When you were looking for a place did you have any "hassles" trying to find a place-that would have children? l ) Yes 2) No that would havs a on© parent family? l ) Yes 2) No b) I f you did experience d i f f i cu l t i e s please describe the number and kinds of "hassles" encountered. Your Hayward Heights Experience 10. Please outline the housing needs of your family. — J ~ . 77. .11. - Do you feel that your present housing adequately meets these needs? 1) Yes . 2) No b) Please explain why 12. Please l i s t the advantages of l i v i n g i n Hayward Heights, for the parent for the children 13. Please l i s t those aspects of Hayward Heights l i f e which you find bother-some . for the parent for the children important factor i n your decision to move to Hayward 1) This was very important 2) Important 3) Not as important as other aspects of Hayward Heights 4) Not important 14. Was the daycare an Heights? Please check one ~ 4 " 780 15. Were the after school and summer programs important factors in your decision to move to Hayward Heights? Please l) This was very important check one 2) Important 3) Not as important as other aspects of Hayward Heights 4) Not important 16. Do you make use of the Bishop Cridge Fajnily Centre services and facilities? 1) Yes 2) No b) Please outline why 17. If you answered yes to question 7 specifically how does your family use the Centre? (Please outline fully) 18. How do you feel about living with other single parent families? Please 1) this is most helpful check o n e . 2) this is not helpful 3) undecided . Please describe why you feel this way? - 5 -79 . 19. What do you think about one parent families living together in the community? Is this a good or bad idea and why? 20. Would you prefer to live elsewhere in the community? 21. Do you think living with other for the children? 1) Yes 2) No b) Please explain why. one parent families is beneficial 6 8 0 . The Almost Ideal I f to ld to choose the kind of accommodation we wanted we a l l might say a castle or mansion. Keeping in mind some economic constraints we would l ike to consider alternatives to the kind of housing available now - alternatives i n terms of design, price and the amenities provided. When we assume some economic constraints we mean that we a l l can not l i v e i n cast les . We do not mean that a person who can not presently afford anything else should be " s a t i s f i ed" with substandard accommodation. The following questions are intended to bring out your ideas about housing and housing for one parent families i n part icular . 22. What kind of place would you and your ch i ld l i v e i n i f you could choose? (Please describe fu l ly - e.g. large apartment on ground f loor , etc . ) 23. Where would you l i k e to be located' and why? '24. What services are important to you and your child? (e.g. day care, drop-in centre) Please l i s t . 25. Where, i n terms of the location of your residence, would you l i k e these services to be located? (e.g. the school should, be within two blocks) 26. Do you think the housing needs of one parent families are any different than those of the general population? We welcome any comments about this questionnaire or about the study i n general. Appendix C June, 1975 BISHOP CRIDGE CENTRE FOR THE FAMILY "THRESHOLD" POLICY FOR HAYWARD HEIGHTS RENTAL ACCOMMODATION The r e n t a l accommodation provided by the Centre i s designed to accommodate one parent f a m i l i e s of low income. It i s not expected that tenants w i l l consider the accommodation to be of a permanent nature over a period of years, but that i t may prove of assistance during times of family stress and u n t i l more long-term arrangements are made. Applications for tenancies are open to one parent f a m i l i e s with two or more dependent c h i l d r e n (each under eighteen years of age). One parent i s a person who i s e i t h e r : ( i ) unmarried, or ( i i ) separated due to desertion, i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y , long-term i l l n e s s or inc a r c e r a t i o n of spouse, or ( i i i ) divorced, or (iv) widowed Income. Applicants income from a l l sources must not exceed: i n the case of a parent with two c h i l d r e n $464 i n the case of a parent with three c h i l d r e n $536 i n the case of a parent with four c h i l d r e n $608 i n the case of a parent with f i v e c h i l d r e n $675 i n the case of a parent with s i x c h i l d r e n $737 i n the case of a parent with seven c h i l d r e n $799 i n the case of a parent with eight c h i l d r e n $861 Allowable income i s subject to annual adjustments. The 'one parent' s h a l l be the only r e s i d i n g adult i n the premises 5. If after commencement of residence the circumstances of a tenant change so that he or she no longer qualifies as a 'one parent' as defined in Rule 2, the tenant shall forthwith notify the Administration of that fact and the tenant shall be expected to vacate the premises within ninety days from the end of the month wherein the change of circumstance occurs. 6. Each tenancy is subject to annual review. 7. In the event that the family circumstances change so that there are less than two dependent children under age eighteen living in the home or the maximum income limits are exceeded, the matter of a continued tenancy shall be reviewed by the Admini-stration forthwith. 8. Unless exceptional circumstances can be shown, the maximum period of time which any one parent family may be expected to reside in the premises is three years. The above policy has been established to enable the Bishop Cridge Centre for the Family to assist and serve the maximum number of 'one parent' families in need. Thank you for your co-operation. APPENDIX D. THF. KTSHOP CRTDGE CENTRE FOR THE FAMILY APPT.TCATTON FOR RENTAL ACCOMMODATION 83. Mr. Miss Name Mrs. . Address (Surname) (Given Names) Telephone Number Marital Status: Married Widowed Divorced Separated Single Occupation Employed by: Length of Residence in Victoria Children to be housed Relationship Birthdate Occupation, School/Grade 10 Any change in family expected?, Monthly salary or Wages Social Assistance Family Support/Alimony Family Allowance Pensions Other Income Total Income (All Sources) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ When? (net) per month per month per month per month per month per month per month 84. Present Accommodation How Long? No. of Bedrooms Rent Why do you wish new accommodation? Ownership Have you ever owned a home?, Do you own a car? Furniture Assets Amount Creditors • Amount References Name Address Occupation Telephone No. 1 2 3 Family Doctor , Telephone Number Next of kin/or ' Telephone Number Relative or close friend (for Emergency contact) Services Required Day Care After School Education/ Social/Recreational Counselling Skills Available This information is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and the Bishop Cridge Centre may verify by enquiry. I have read and understand the policy statement on rental accommodation, and, in the event my application i s accepted, agree to be bound by i t s provisions. Date Signed Applicant ^  Application received by Staff Action The information concerning the Bishop Cridge Centre for th Family was provided by one of the residents on the Tenants Committee. 86. APPENDIX E Quest ion Schedule f o r O rgan i z a t i o n Membership In te r v i ews 1. How d i d you l e a r n about the "Hous ing Needs o f one Parent F a m i l i e s " r e sea r ch p r o j e c t . 2. What o r g a n i z a t i o n do you be long t o , e . g . Vo lun tee r Grandparents , C ross reach , e t c . ? 4. Desc r ibe your cu r r en t hous ing s i t u a t i o n a) the type o f u n i t e . g . house, apartment e t c . b ) the l o c a t i o n c) the cos t ( i f r e n t i n g ) 4. I s t h i s the k i n d o f accommodation you wanted? I f yes why? I f no why? 5. What s e r v i c e s a re impor tant t o you? e . g . daycare , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n e t c . 6. What s e r v i c e s would you l i k e t o gave? ( Se r v i c e s o the r than those c u r r e n t l y a v a i l a b l e t o y ou ) . Why? 7. Have you exper ienced any problems w i t h l a nd l o r d s ? 8. Have you been d i s c r i m i n a t e d aga i n s t because a ) you have c h i l d r e n ? b) you are a s i n g l e parent? 9. How do you f e e l about one parent f a m i l i e s l i v i n g toge the r? L i v i n g i n the same house perhaps? L i v i n g i n a s i n g l e parent hous ing complex? 10. Do you f e e l the hous ing needs o f parent f a m i l i e s a re any d i f f e r e n t than those o f the gene ra l popu l a t i on? MMiM w a n / 0 v . / o c itsi u r / v t w o x . L U U C APPENDIX F: She 'didn't suit property/ denied house DAVID BAINES scedent-setting case the rights of single against the rights lords to choose their was heard before a if inquiry Thursday, sse, which may de-: how much clout recently-proclaimed. Rights Code has, is : case of alleged sex '•nation since the m was enacted volves around the i of whether a land-is the right, in cer-es, to refuse rental lodation to a because she is a areht. «n Ruff, director human rights said the case will 1 important prece-1 determining what >n women have the new Human Jode. Lindsay Cleland, le landlords facing rge, said the out-all illustrate just jits a landlord has nine who will occu-, •operty. ive-member board ry, which is ap-by the minister of xler the terms of j, listened to more r hours argument •partment of labor 111 Kingsway. r Rod Germaine, l of the board, board will deliver ct in written form r date. Ann* Warren, of t Fifty-fourth, told d she saw a "for gn Oct: 9 on the, of a four-bedroom 2796 East Forty-lephoned Cleland, e co-owners of the' d arranged an ap-s t to see the prop-11, she said. Cleland asked her r circumstances « said, she told lad three children separated from,, Is NORENE WARREN . . . denied house She said Cleland then asked her if she thought she could look after the house and property, which is located on a double-size corner lot. She said she could. 'Mrs. Warren said she was very excited at the possibility of securing the house and thought her chances were so good she suspended her bouse hunt-ing while she awaited word from Cleland. . On Oct 15, she said, Cle-land told her he had dis-cussed the situation with the co-owner of the house, David Fowler, and had de-cided they did not want to rent to a woman who war "on her own." ^ .-• > He explained they were 1not worried about her abili-ty tor pay the*$35fc' per month rent, but were, afraid she would not be able to care for the yard properly, she said-r : Mrs. Warren said she > was so disappointed at the news that she began to cry. , Then, she said,.she became^ angry and eventually*!con-3 tacted the human rights branch. Human rights officer Hanne Jensen told the board she investigated Mrs. Warren's complaint and Cleland admitted that his sole reason for reject-ing her was his fear that a single woman would not be able to handle the proper-ty. She said she advised him that it was his perfect right as a landlord to make sure tenants mow the lawn, care for the garden or face eviction. But she said she in-formed him that anybody who refuses to rent accom-" modation on the grounds of sex and'marital status may be guilty of a breach of the Human Rights Code, pro-claimed Oct. 10. Cleland and Fowler testi-fied they had never heard , of the legislation until Miss Jensen began investigating j the case. The two men are part-ners in Souih Granville Holdings Ltd., which owns the property in question and two other properties. ! Cleland is the sole pro-prietor of F. A. Cleland . and Son, which manages 28"1 properties. Fowler has j been a salesman for the j ,firm for 14 years. ^ Both said they have a general policy not to dis-criminate against anybody , for any reason, as long as they appear to be responsi-ble people. "; They said they have sev-eral single women who rent property they own or manage. But they said it is their specific policy not to rent the double^ size corner lot to a single woman simply because they have learned through "bitter experi-ence" that a single woman is often incapable of caring for a> family and a large piece of property. Mrs. Warren, a licensed practical nurse,. said she holds • a regular part-rime job4, with the South Vancou-ver Health Unit as well as caring; for her three chil-• .w ' " *' • ... ' , ,- -dren, aged 11; 12 and 16. She said she adequately cared for large properties in the past. On one occas-sion, she said, she lived on a double lot and the land-lord complimented her on the condition she kept the property. But neither Cleland nor Fowler asked her any ques-tions about her gardening ability or past accommoda-tion. Neither did they ask her for references, she . said. 1 The men admitted they j rejected Mrs. Warren sole-ly because she did "not fit the category of tenant we were looking for." "Surely to God," said Cleland in a Dec. 18 letter to the human rights branch, "I, as an owner, have some right to say who occupies my property. "This is Canada we live in, not Russia. If Mrs. Warren wishes to pursue this matter further, it is her privilege. I have no in-tention whatsoever of apo-logizing to her or reconsid-ering renting the property to her." * The board of inquiry was told the property has al-ready been rented to anoth-er family. Meanwhile, Mrs. Warren has found a small-er, more expensive house. But Mrs. Warren said that although she is paying $25 more per month be-cause of the alleged dis-crimination, she is more concerned about the princi-ple than the money. Gary Carsen, assistant director of the human rights branch, said the branch contends Fowler and Cleland have violated the Human Rights Code. But since Mrs. Warren is not seeking financial com-pensation, be recom-. mended the board award ] only nominal damages in • her favor. \ Bill Black, a member of! the Human Rights Com-; ' mission, which serves an' educational and 1 i a s o n function between thej branch and the public,; agreed with Carsen. | He said he believes land-: lords should have the right to pick and choose their tenants as long as they do1 not abrogate the rights of j other people. In this case, he said, he felt Mrs. Vf^ nied. The board is empowered to force a person convict-ed under the code to make available any services de-nied the complainant. It can also order remun-eration of any financial loss suffered by the com-plainant and, in cases where there is proven dam-age to self-respect, the board can award up to $5,000 damages. -fife \ K ^ c a L A^ E 3 ^ ^ u H ^ ^ i N / V - j , ^ P ^ I L _ U , i ^ / < APPENDIX G: Census and S t a t i s t i c a l Information Concerning The One Parent Family The purpose of t h i s appendix i s to numerically i l l u s t r a t e the p o s i t i o n of the one parent family i n our society. The trend towards sing l e parent family formation i s demonstrated i n Charts 1 and 2. The components of the B.C. si n g l e parent population are described i n Charts 3 through 5. In.Chart 6 the economic p o s i t i o n of the one parent family i s examined by comparing the average incomes of one and two parent f a m i l i e s . The economic p i c t u r e i s broadened by the data of s o c i a l assistance r e c i p i e n t s from the Vancouver Community Resources Board. To demonstrate the adequacy of the s o c i a l assistance funding a v a i l a b l e to one parent f a m i l i e s some t y p i c a l budgets and t h e i r breakdowns are presented i n Charts 8 through 10. CHART 1: THE TREND IN CANADA In 1966 In 1971 Total # of Families 4,526,266 One Parent Families 371,855 One Parent Families as a Percentage of a l l Families 8.22% Tota l // of Families .5,070,680 One Parent Families 478,745 One Parent Families as a Percentage of a l l Families 9.44% In 1966 CHART 2: THE B.C. TREND Total # of Families 445,297 One Parent Families 35,534 One Parent Families as a Percentage of a l l Families 7.98% Total # of Families 533,625 One Parent Families 50,205 One Parent Families as a Percentage of a l l Families 9.41% In 1966 i n B.C., 8% of a l l f a m i l i e s were headed by one parent. In 1971 t h i s had r i s e n to 9.41%. In 1971 CHART 3: HEADS OF FAMILIES BY SEX AND MARITAL STATUS BRITISH COLUMBIA, 1971 MARITAL STATUS SEX TOTAL Male Female Married 487,915 98.74 14,240 36. 06 502,155 (Husband & Wife at Home) 483,425 97.83 — ; (One Spouse at Home 4, 490 .91 14,240 36. 06) Widowed 2,815 .57. 14,240 36. 52 17,240 Divorced 2,110 .43 8,405 21. 29 10,515 Never Married 1,305 .26 2,415 6. 12 3,720 TOTAL 494,145 100.00 39,485 100. 00 533,630 Source: Unpublished 1971 Census Data -Economic Development a v a i l a b l e from the Department of CHART 4: ONE PARENT FAMILIES BY SEX AND MARITAL STATUS OF HEAD BRITISH COLUMBIA, 1971 MARITAL STATUS SEX TOTAL Male Female N % N % Married, One Spouse at Home 4,490 41. ,88 14,240 36. ,06 18,730 Widowed 2,815 26. .26 14,420 36. .52 17,240 Divorced 2,110 19. .68 8,405 21. .29 10,515 Never Married 1,305 12. .17 2,415 6, .12 3,720 TOTAL 10,720 100. .00 39,485 100. .00 50,205 CHART 5: ONE PARENT FAMILIES BY SEX OF HEAD BRITISH COLUMBIA, 1971 SEX TOTAL Male Female N % N Number of Families 10,720 21.35 29,485 78.65 50,205 Source: Unpublished 1971 Census Data -Economic Development. a v a i l a b l e from the Department of NOTES ON CHARTS 3 - 5 These tables are for "head of Families", not"Heads of Households." The relevant Census d e f i n i t i o n s are: "Census Family: Consists of a husband and wife (with or without chi l d r e n who have never been married, regardless of age) or a parent with one or more ch i l d r e n never married, l i v i n g i n the same dwelling. A family may consist also of a man or woman l i v i n g with a guardianship c h i l d or ward under 21 years f o r whom no pay was received. The "HEAD OF THE FAMILY", i s the husband i n a husband-wife family, or the parent i n a one-parent family." "Household: A person or group of persons occupying one dwelling. It u sually consists of a family group, with or without lodgers, employees, etc. However, i t may consist of two or more f a m i l i e s sharing a dwelling, or a group of unrelated persons or of one person l i v i n g alone." As shown i n Chart 3, and as noted above, i n two-parent f a m i l i e s ("married - husband and wife at home") the husband i s designated by census procedures as the 'Head of the Family." The N's may be out by 5, due to Census rounding procedures. Guyatt i n The One-Parent Family i n Canada based on 1966 data i d e n t i f i e s economic problems as a major concern f o r the one parent family, i t has been shown that the average family income of s i n g l e -parent f a m i l i e s i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower (than the income of a two-parent family), p a r t i c u l a r l y i f the sing l e parent i s a woman. (Guyatt, 1971, p. 59). The 1971 census confirms t h i s a ssertion. CHART 6: In B.C. Average Income of One Parent Families i n 1970 $5,845 National Average f o r One Parent Families i n 1970 6,036 In B.C. Average Income of Two Parent Families i n 1970 $10,574 National Average for Two Parent Families i n 1970 9,958 94. CHART 7: NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF CASES AND INDIVIDUALS BY CATEGORIES Categories Cases Individuals Single Persons: Male Female Families: 2 Parents 1 Parent - Female 1 Parent - Male Couples Bdg./Nursing Home Residents Others: Status Indian, Child with Relative, etc. TOTALS 6,639 3.352 733 3,987 147 512 1,613 393 38.2 19.3 4.2 22.9 .8 2.9 9.3 2.3 6,639 3,352 1,024 1,613 621 23.9 12.0 14,601 52.4 3.7 5.8 2.2 17,376 100.0 27,850 100.0 FIGURE A Categories by Cases FIGURE B Categories by Individuals FIGURE C Categories by^ Dollars Issued Source of Data: * V.R.B. Case Stats. - Dec. 22/75 (cheques to cover month of Jan./76) + Averages for category calculated from case stats, and government statement Based on government statements Information from the Vancouver Resources Board indicates that an average of 14% of a l l VRB S.A. cases are two parent f a m i l i e s , and 86% are sing l e parent f a m i l i e s . Of the sing l e parent f a m i l i e s , 96% have a s i n g l e female parent There i s only a s l i g h t deviation from the mean percentage for the seven months - not more than 1%. Based on the Monthly Cheque Issue f or June 1975 - December 1976. Information from Vancouver Resources Board Researcher, Ruth Chisholm. CHART 8: INCOME INFORMATION FROM THE VANCOUVER RESOURCES BOARD, NUTRITION SERVICES Information provided by Irene Z i l i n s k i Family Size (# of Members) Support Shelter Total Income 2 140 130 270 3 175 145 320 4 210 160 370 5 250 170 420 6 285 180 465 7 315 190 505 N.B.: S o c i a l Assistance r e c i p i e n t s receive a basic amount of support and then an a d d i t i o n a l amount to pay for accommodation. The Vancouver Resources Board covers the cost of accommodation - above a c e r t a i n s p e c i f i e d amount the Board w i l l pay 75% of the cost of shel t e r . The re c i p i e n t absorbs the other 25%. CHART 9: THE INCOME BREAKDOWN OF AN "AVERAGE" ONE PARENT FAMILY ON GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE BUDGETS* i n f o r m a t i o n from Irene Z i l i n s k i , Vancouver Resources Board The budget information was obtained from sample budgets of singl e parents. Percentage of Income Expended Rent - l i g h t and heat 56% Food 30% Transportation 4% Laundry and Personal Needs 4% Household costs 2% Telephone 2% G i f t s , Recreation, Books and Newspapers 2% TOTAL 100% CHART 10: ACTUAL DOLLAR ALLOCATION FOR:FAMILIES ON GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE BASED ON AN AVERAGE ONE PARENT FAMILY BUDGET Family Size 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Income Shelter and Support 270.00 320.00 370.00 420.00 465.00 505.00 Rent Heat, Light, . (56%) 151.20 179.20 207.20 235.20 260.40 282.80 Food (30%) 81.00 96.00 111.00 126.00 139.50 151.50 Transportation (4%) 10.80 12.80 14.80 16.80 18.60 20.20 Laundry and Personal Needs (4%) 10.80 12.80 14.80 16.80 18.60 20.20 Household Costs (2%) 5.40 6.40 7.40 8.40 9.30 10.10 Telephone (2%) 5.40 6.40 7.40 8.40 9.30 10.10 G i f t s , Recreation, Books, Newspapers (2%) 5.40 6.40 7.40 8.40 9.30 10.10 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0093792/manifest

Comment

Related Items