The silent burden of stigmatisation: a qualitative study among Dutch people with a low socioeconomic position

Abstract

BackgroundIn-depth qualitative research into perceived socioeconomic position-related stigmatisation among people living at the lower end of our socioeconomic hierarchy is necessary for getting more insight in the possible downside of living in an increasingly meritocratic and individualistic society.MethodsSeventeen interviews were conducted among a group of Dutch people with a low socioeconomic position to examine their experiences with stigmatisation, how they coped with it and what they perceived as consequences.ResultsSocial reactions perceived by participants related to being inferior, being physically recognisable as a poor person, and being responsible for their own financial problems. Participants with less experience of living in poverty, a heterogeneous social network and greater sense of financial responsibility seemed to be more aware of stigmas than people with long-term experience of poverty, a homogeneous social network and less sense of financial responsibility. Perceived stigmatisation mainly had emotional consequences. To maintain a certain level of self-respect, participants tried to escape from reality, showed their strengths or confronted other people who expressed negative attitudes towards them.ConclusionDespite the good intentions of policies to enhance self-reliance, responsibility and active citizenship, these policies and related societal beliefs might affect people at the lower end of our socioeconomic hierarchies by making them feel inferior, ashamed and blamed, especially when they cannot meet societal expectations or when they feel treated disrespectfully, unjustly or unequally by social workers or volunteers of charity organisations.

Health inequality implications from a qualitative study of experiences of poverty stigma in Scotland

“…Poverty stigma – and negative public attitudes in particular - was further seen to affect individuals’ self-esteem and produce feelings of negative affect and shame. These findings are broadly consistent with previous qualitative research conducted in other parts of the UK (Chase and Walker, 2012) and internationally (Reutter et al, 2009; Simons et al, 2018).…”

Enablers and Barriers to Respectful Maternity Care in Low and Middle-Income Countries: A Literature Review of Qualitative Research

“…The stigma and discrimination were associated with poor education of women, poverty, differences in country of origin and due to disease such as HIV. The finding is consistent with a study on silent burden of stigmatization among Germanic ethnic group (Dutch women) in the Netherlands which found that women with low socio-economic status from a foreign country were discriminated [94]. In addition, our finding conforms with finding of secondary analysis on mistreatment of women during childbirth in healthcare facilities in developed countries where discrimination based on sociodemographic characteristics and medical conditions were found to impede RMC [95].…”

Moving Beyond Giving Free Food: Specific Targeting and Tailoring in Response to Child Food Insecurity

“…In addition to confusing messages about how much food was enough, the Virginia 365 intervention could have led to higher prevalence of food insecurity by exacerbating family feelings of stress and distress. Poverty carries stigma in US society, 27,28 and having school staff doubt a family's ability to provide sufficient food might have caused embarrassment, stress, and shame about the food situation. These feelings might have inherently harmed the well-being of children and families 3 and might have shaped responses to the food security assessment items, because some items ask specifically about feelings of worry and people appraise threats and challenges differently when they are experiencing stress.…”