Boredom, Drugs, and Schools: Protecting Children in Gentrifying Communities

Abstract

Gentrification beings a host of economic and social changes. Changes in community culture do not directly impact residents’ livelihoods or homes, but these differences in lifestyles shape peoples’ experiences of their homes. I examine rhetoric in three gentrifying neighborhoods in Atlanta, GA to see how it expresses both the uncertainty that new and long‐time residents feel about their communities, and how it is indicative of boundary‐work residents engage in to distinguish their group from the “others.” Residents express concern about the safety and happiness of children in demographically changing communities. I find that residents focus on threats to children as a socially acceptable way to object to the different class, and sometimes race, background of their neighbors. This boundary maintenance activity serves to calcify divisions between groups of residents, and obscures the underlying schisms between the privileged and less‐privileged residents in gentrifying neighborhoods.

‘Any place to raise children is a good place’: children, housing and neighbourhoods in inner Newcastle, Australia

“…Perceptions of an unsafe neighbourhood environment can lead to restrictions on activities such as walking and cycling (Timperio et al 2004, Carver et al 2008. Of critical importance to parents are perceptions of other residents, both children and adults (Reay and Lucey 2000, Power 2007, De Visscher and De Bourverne 2008a, 2008b, Martin 2008, Pinkster and Fortiujin 2009. As Martin (2008) points out, perceptions of and disputes about, children in neighbourhoods are critical to claiming space and defining who is 'an appropriate and legitimate neighbour' (p. 332).…”

“…Of critical importance to parents are perceptions of other residents, both children and adults (Reay and Lucey 2000, Power 2007, De Visscher and De Bourverne 2008a, 2008b, Martin 2008, Pinkster and Fortiujin 2009. As Martin (2008) points out, perceptions of and disputes about, children in neighbourhoods are critical to claiming space and defining who is 'an appropriate and legitimate neighbour' (p. 332). This paper explores the way such neighbourhood dynamics impact on the perceptions of what makes a 'good' place to raise children.…”

“…The comments of the tenants are frequently couched in the language of the slum mentioned earlier, something not found in discussions of inner Newcastle neighbourhoods. As Martin (2008) has pointed out, it is a powerful rhetorical tool in neighbourhood debates to couch behaviours as 'not in the interests of children'. The behaviour of some adults in the suburb is seen as making Hamilton South an inappropriate place to raise children.…”

Linking Charter School Emergence to Urban Revitalization and Gentrification: A Socio-Spatial Analysis of Three Cities

“…Both sides of this debate on charter schooling arise in the context of urban revitalization and gentrification. That is, on the one hand, charter schools may be a part of a benevolent urban revitalization agenda aimed at improving blighted communities, or they may be a conscious tactic on the part of middle‐class White newcomers entering revitalized neighborhoods (and the business and political leaders spurring their entrance) to separate their children from the “threat” of bad schools and the poor and minority students who fill them (DeSena, 2006; Hankins, 2007; Martin, 2008).…”

Residential instability and obesity over time: The role of the social and built environment

“…A parent may not feel safe having children unaccompanied in these areas, which may lead to a sedentary lifestyle for the child. Even interesting, areas that experience rapid change through gentrification see a quick but temporary increase in the crime rate (namely property crimes) before a more precipitous decline occurs, usually through local police force having a more demanding presence in the neighborhood (Martin, 2008;Papachristos et al, 2011). However, this finding most likely occurs when the gentrifier is white.…”