Getting out, getting over, or getting by: Social constructs "on the streets".

Abstract

This dissertation focused on the hypothesis that persons "on the streets" construct their social world in one of three prototypes: (1) Getting Out, who hold mainstream values and norms; (2) Getting Over, who substitute non-mainstream values and norms; (3) Getting By, who reject mainstream values and norms but do not substitute new ones. The greatest influence was thought to be the "hang-out" group. These prototypes were distinguished by attitudes towards: alternative employment, job search strategies, group location, benefit use, service independence, and social group norms. The research took place at the "Street Center", a centralized service coalition in Richmond, Virginia and consisted of four phases: an analysis of the ethnographic literature on social groups in poverty environments, a clinical pretest (thirteen individuals), a close-ended survey of service users (one-hundred and forty-six individuals), and five focus groups drawn from among the survey participants. Using these methods allowed for an exploration of meaning beyond a strictly quantitative approach while allowing for a generalizability greater than in a qualitative study. The results suggest that eighty per cent of the population fit into five clusters--the three "social" prototypes of the original hypothesis and two "loner" ones that emerged from the analysis. The study also found that Getting By represented the most frequently occurring prototype; Getting Out individuals had smaller, more cohesive groups; and that Getting Over persons had more involvement in alternative employment activities and were more likely to be currently using substances. In addition, there was some suggestion that these prototypes emerged prior to first entry onto "the streets". The typology was compared to a structural explanation and an argument was made that the two approaches are complementary--that knowledge of both is superior to knowledge of either separately. Finally, implications for service delivery and practice and methodological implications are presented.