A photoelicitation exploration on formally homeless people experience with Universal Credit: System error and 'the government don't care'

Abstract

This article explores the impact of Universal Credit (UC) on a group of formerly homeless people who were forcibly made to experience a system of full of errors and government that, in their view, did not care. The experience of a marginalised and vulnerable group with complex needs allows one to consider the impacts of welfare reforms on vulnerable people. The research was conducted with formerly homeless contacted via organisations that support people who experienced homelessness in Brighton, Southeast of the UK. Five people (32 years and older) participated. Qualitative data were obtained in photo‐elicitation interviews and were thematically analysed. Findings were that they faced a system of error as well as experiencing a sense the government did not care about their situation. The participants expressed their views on how the UC process made them ‘struggle’ and caused them to have to ‘use food banks’, and argued that the staff did not know the policy. The system is singled out as the cause of UC claimants' destitution. For the participants, policymakers' negligence, contempt, and detachment were not hard to understand. The article provides implications for practice and research.

Automating universal credit: A case of temporal governance

“…In policy and welfare studies, researchers have primarily focused their analysis of Universal Credit on the laws, policies and bureaucratic systems comprising the benefit, such as job centres -not on UC as a digital infrastructure (for exceptions see Griffiths, 2021 andDe Oliveira, 2022). We conceptualize UC as an infrastructure by drawing on Plantin, et al's (2016) description of infrastructural properties, which entail interconnected systems often comprising essential and widely accessible services regulated in the public interest (Plantin,et al's [9].…”

Participatory action research as a research approach: advantages, limitations and criticisms

“…I have facilitated sets of qualitative studies to explore and contest homelessness in 2018, 2019, 2022 (De Oliveira, 2018, 2019, 2022). Specifically, I wanted to challenge how homelessness, individuals (like myself) and families were viewed and understood by their local communities.…”

“…Reason and Bradbury (2001, p. 1) define PAR as “a participatory, democratic process concerned with developing practical knowledge in the pursuit of worthwhile human purposes.” This is a systematic approach that seeks knowledge for social action (Fals-Borda and Rahman, 1991). PAR has been used to reach policymakers more easily and represent a more effective means of informing them on current social issues (De Oliveira, 2022; Groot and Hodgetts, 2012; Wang et al ., 1996, 2000). PAR facilitates participants in unravelling their accounts and reveals their experiences, shared practices, memories, identities, experiences and history (Sturken and Cartwright, 2009).…”

A thematic analysis of homelessness practitioners’ perception of the impacts of welfare reforms in the UK: “Hard to maintain my own mental equilibrium”

“…The pursuit of austerity measures dominated political and public discourse for most of the 2010s. These austerity measures have been widely criticised as a short-sighted and brutal approach to administrate public finances (Whyte and Cooper, 2017; Tanekenov et al , 2018; De Oliveira, 2022). However, more understanding on the lived experiences of service providers at the margins of policymaking is needed to provide more clarity on their views to policies that they must enact.…”