Constructing the Service-worthy Homeless Through Narrative Editing

Abstract

Using data from participant observations, shelter documents, and intake interviews, this article examines the social construction of service-worthy clients at an emergency shelter for the homeless. The concepts of narrative editing and client work are applied to underscore how staff-client interactions lead to organizationally useful accounts of homelessness. Analysis of the data reveals four narrative editing styles: collaborative, directive, confrontational, and dismissive. These findings empirically demonstrate variations in how service worthiness is achieved, or denied. It is argued that the homeless profile is not unilaterally and uniformly dictated by institutional agents. Rather, under the organizational auspices of the shelter, clients and staff are jointly involved in constructing the local relevance of homelessness.

An ethnography: Understanding emergency nursing practice belief systems

“…The findings support that service worthiness is complex and evident during incidents in which triage resources were constrained. Several studies have explored the notion of service worthiness in EDs Marvasti, 2002). This bolsters Sbaih's(2001Sbaih's( , 2002 earlier findings in which emergency nurses characterised patient service worthiness in response to overcrowded situations.…”

Young Adults’ Stories of Gambling in a Research Situation: A Narrative Inquiry

“…The third is the interviewer's reliance on a collaborative editing style. This style is appropriate when study participation is voluntary and it is necessary to ensure that informants do not become hostile or defensive (for discussion, see Marvasti 2002;Scott and Lyman 1968). Nonetheless, it precludes generalization, given that self-constructions may be different in other social situations where the audience is more sceptical or challenging.…”

Housing People with Mental Illnesses: The Discursive Construction of Worthiness

“…Shelter workers on the other hand transformed this into a discourse of institutional rules and resources in making decisions about whom to serve. Marvasti (2002) also studied the interaction of shelter applicants and shelter workers, examining how interactions between applicants and workers led to organizationally useful accounts of homelessness. In all of these studies, the authors show that workers not only determine who is worthy of services, but in doing so also articulate local understandings of the relevant category itself, that is, what counts as domestic abuse or homelessness in that setting.…”