Destitution and Paths to Justice

Abstract

Introduction How is destitution defined in law? The legal definition and the JRF definition The state's duty to prevent/relieve destitution A legal perspective on routes into destitution Social security Debt Housing Social security and destitution Legal support for problems of destitution Case studies on destitution and paths to justice Key recommendations 1. A statutory duty on destitution 2. Resourcing legal interventions 3. Access to social security Emerging recommendations on debt and housing Further research appreciating that they have a justiciable problem is offset by the inability to secure advice and support to deal with that problem and the underlying causes, compounded by the extraordinary difficulties the individual faces in managing their destitute circumstances. Three main recommendations emerge from the data to deal with this. First, resource advice services to identify problem clusters, rather than only being able to focus on the problems their service can assist with. Second, provide partial reinstatement of legal aid funding to support preventative and remedial action that will help avoid destitution, primarily in the areas of housing, debt and social security, particularly appeals against sanctions. Third, co-locate legal and health services and enable crisis and support workers to identify justiciable issues that clients need help to deal with.

Conceptualising dignity in the context of social security: Bottom‐up and top‐down perspectives

“…Although some of the participants in receipt of benefits undoubtedly felt degraded by experiences of poverty or their interactions with the social security system, it would be a leap to suggest there was clear evidence of what the UK courts have—to date—been prepared to recognise as inhuman or degrading treatment. Although Adler's () view that this kind of development is far from unthinkable is noted, if not explicitly endorsed, by the Special Rapporteur (Alston, ), case law to date suggests such a conclusion would only be possible following detailed examination of an individual litigant's circumstances (McKeever et al, ).…”

“…Consequently, it was suggested that a Scottish social security system would place greater emphasis on protection against poverty, a sentiment now reflected in the Act. Aspects of the system implicated as contributors to severe poverty (Fitzpatrick, Bramley, Sosenko, & Blenkinsopp, ; Goulden, ; McKeever, Simpson, & Fitzpatrick, ) were a particular focus for interviewees' ire. One politician stated that “the use of destitution as a deliberate act of government policy is something that I think appals most people,” and the imposition of destitution as a matter of policy through the sanctions regime was among the most frequent complaints.…”

The moral hazard of conditionality: Restoring the integrity of social security law

“…The destitution research in the UK mirrors this, where individuals experiencing destitution saw benefits as liable to rise, fall or disappear at the whim of a largely unaccountable decision maker (McKeever et al 2018;for Australia, see Human Rights Law Centre et al 2019:13-14;Harmer 2009:25-26).…”

“…It is not unusual for legal and social scientific definitions to differ, and destitution is a case in point. The UK legal definition of destitution is drawn from a range of legislative and jurisprudential sources and, as a result, is a much less coherent concept (McKeever et al ). The most comprehensive statutory definition comes from the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 (UK, s. 95), which states that destitution consists of the inability to access adequate accommodation and other essential needs, defined through case law.…”

“…What began as an examination of human rights definitions of destitution in the UK (McKeever et al ), explored as part of a wider discussion on international perspectives on welfare conditionality and homelessness (Walsh et al ), developed into a comparative lens to sharpen the analysis and refine the understanding of the ways in which legal systems operate. It will be seen that whilst their ideological approaches and the practical outcomes of their social security policies and programmes are remarkably similar, there are few similarities between the legal frameworks that govern the provision of social security benefits in Australia and the UK, despite their common legal heritage.…”