MEN ALONE IN NO-MAN’S-LAND

• This document in PDF Format (1.65mb)

Tomás de Brún Centre for Participatory Strategies,
Clonbur,
Co. Galway

Ed Du Vivier
Maynooth,
Co. Kildare

A Study of the Needs of Socially-Excluded Males in Dublin Inner City
Own Goals & Penalties
MEN ALONE IN NO-MAN’S-LAND

ii Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Dublin Inner City Partnership for commissioning this research with the generous support of the Social Inclusion Unit of Dublin City Council. Pat Gates (Community Regeneration Officer, DICP) was instrumental in facilitating this study, and we wish to acknowledge his support and assistance. Thanks must also go to Trutz Haase who provided us with the Small Area Population Statistics from the 2002 Census. The key ingredient, indeed the vital one, in this research process was provided through the life experience and expertise of the men who constituted the research group itself. We would like to register our wholehearted gratitude to the following men: Billy Brian Dave B. Dave C. Gerry Joe Joe S. J.P. Paddy Paul Peter Richard Shay Will The men listed above welcomed us into their world with great honesty, integrity, and no small measure of fun. The experience was deeply enriching and will be remembered by us as an example of men’s ability to break through the ‘taboo zone’ and open up a safe space in which to share some of their vulnerabilities as well as their insights. Finally, this research would not have been possible without the energy, commitment, and organisational abilities of Joe Murdiff and others in MAIN who worked behind the scenes to move the process forward. Thank you all. Undoubtedly, in a report such as this we will have made mistakes in recording individual details, reporting what people said, interpreting their intentions and leaving things out. Responsibility for these shortcomings is entirely ours and we apologise in advance for any errors, omissions or oversights. Thomas de Brún Centre for Participatory Strategies, Clonbur, Co. Galway Ed Du Vivier Maynooth, Co. Kildare We wish to thank all of the above and also Bert Donlon, Event Manager Irish Film Institute (IFI) and Ian Keogh, General Manager, Jack Nealon’s of Capel Street, Dublin for the use of their premises during the Research Study. MAIN logo design by Billy Polion. MEN ALONE IN NO-MAN’S-LAND

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS

• 1. Executive Summary
• 1 1.1 Principal Aims and Objectives
• 1 1.2 The Research Context
• 1 1.3 The Research Group: Men Alone In No-man’s-land (MAIN)
• 1 1.4 Participatory Learning and Action (PLA): Research that Fosters Social Inclusion
• 2 1.5 Gaps in Provision
• 2 1.6 Key Recommendations
• 3 2. Introduction
• 2.1 In their own words
• 2.2 Dublin Inner City Partnership (DICP)
• 2.3 Men Alone In No-man’s-land (MAIN)
• 2.4 Aims and Objectives
• 8 3. Literature Review
• 3.1 Social Exclusion/Social Inclusion
• 3.2 Poverty
• 3.3 Educational Disadvantage
• 3.4 Unemployment
• 3.5 Social Isolation
• 3.6 Physical and Mental Health
• 3.7 Best Practice Models
• 4. Methodology
• 4.1 Participatory Process through an In-Depth Encounter
• 4.2 Participatory Learning and Action Research
• 4.3 The Research Group
• 4.4 Taking an ‘Insider’ Perspective
• 4.5 Narrative Structure of the Research Encounter
• 4.6 Outline of Research Sessions
• 4.7 Strengths and Limitations of the PLA Approach
• 5. Barriers to Social Inclusion
• 5.1 Participants Recount Barriers in their Lives
• 5.2 Grouping of Barriers
• 5.3 Ranking of Barriers
• 6. Breakthroughs towards Social Inclusion
• 6.1 Educational Opportunity
• 6.2 Psychological Support in the form of ‘Wise Counsel’
• 6.3 Support from Friends and Family
• 6.4 Getting Involved in MAIN
• 6.5 The PLA Research Process
• 7. Culturally-Appropriate Solutions
• 7.1 Presentation and Response to Meta-Analysis Matrix Chart: Summary of Barriers and Breakthroughs
• 7.2 Suggested Solutions to Social Exclusion
• 7.3 The Way Forward
• 8. Conclusions and Recommendations
• 8.1 Participatory Learning and Action Research as an Innovative Model
• 8.2 Continuing to Build on the Good Work of MAIN
• 8.3 Key Recommendations
• APPENDIX A: Data on Research Group
• APPENDIX B: Small Area Population Statistics
• APPENDIX C: Terms of Reference
• APPENDIX D: Detailed Outline of Research Sessions 64 Bibliography

1 Executive Summary

This research was commissioned by the Dublin Inner City Partnership (DICP), with financial support from the Social Inclusion Unit of Dublin City Council, on behalf of the Men Alone In No-man’s-land (MAIN) group.

1.1 Principal Aims and Objectives

The principal aims of this research were two-fold: 1. to identify practical, locally-based and culturally- appropriate solutions that will help inner-city men experiencing social exclusion to overcome barriers and attitudes that prevent them from seeking help to tackle their social exclusion; and 2. to identify a practical, appropriate and participatory approach to the social inclusion of vulnerable men that could be developed by MAIN and piloted in Inner City Dublin. (Terms of Reference, see Appendix C )

1.2 The Research Context

This research addresses issues raised in the DICP’s 2007Policy Position Paper under the heading “Shaping the New Strategy”. DICP envisages anewrole for itself in terms of introducing pilot approaches for innovative and tailor-made services to meet individual needs wheregaps in provision havebeen identified. Byutilising Partnership structures to support key agencies and organisations, stakeholders willbe facilitated in experimentingwith alternativedeliverymethods tomeet the increasingly diverse needs of Inner Cityresidents. 1

2 This approach will ensure that the DICP is on the leading edge in relation to new thinking on quality service delivery and responding to the individual rather than operating within the constraints of the delivery system. (DICP 2007: 7) In order to move in the direction outlined above, DICP requires a “new and fresh response”, recognising that “many of the local residents experiencing poverty are those now ‘hardest to reach’ ” (DICP 2007: 3, 4).

1.3 The Research Group: Men Alone In No-man’s-land (MAIN)

DICP commissioned two consultants – Tomas de Brún (Director of the Centre for Participatory Strategies, CPS, in Galway) and Ed Du Vivier (an independent consultant) – to design and deliver a research study to be carried out with members of Men Alone In Noman’s- land. MAIN is a response by a number of men to what they see as an absence of social, psychological, and solidarity networks for men in Dublin.

1.4 Participatory Learning and Action (PLA): Research that Fosters Social Inclusion

This research project was designed and delivered as an in-depth, participatory process of co-inquiry, and this was integral to its outcomes. From the outset the aim of the research facilitators was to offer the men more than a series of technically-competent research sessions where information was gathered. Rather, the intention was to create a safe space where vulnerable men might actually experience the research encounter as a form of social inclusion, as well as an acknowledgment of their considerable life expertise in terms of social exclusion. The experience of participating in the research was quite transformative for a number of men, and is congruent with the approach MAIN already utilises in its work with vulnerable men in Inner City Dublin. While the transformative dimension of this study is somewhat unique for social science research projects in general, it is quite common and often integral to a well-run Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) process. We believe that the means by which sociallyexcluded groups are invited to become part of research processes must serve to increase their experience of being socially included rather than furthering greater alienation and isolation. Where participation is genuinely invited, socially-excluded men can begin to experience a sense of personal and group empowerment.

1.5 Gaps in Provision

A variety of exercises were used to gather primary data during the research sessions, including: life journeys, accounts of individual barrier experiences, cardsorting, direct ranking and stories of personal breakthroughs. The research group identified twentythree barriers to social inclusion and clustered these into three distinct categories. While acknowledging that all of these barriers are important, these categories were then ranked by group members from those they considered ‘most important to progress towards solutions’ to those they considered ‘least important to progress towards solutions’. Emotional/Relational Crises and Issues ranked most highly with a score of 34, while the two other categories, Poor Inadequate Service Provision and Societal/Class Prejudice and Discrimination ranked equally with a score of 23. The men were clear that the top-ranked category of barriers is the one where they felt existing services are particularly inadequate, representing a crucial gap in provision. With only one or two exceptions, the men felt their emotional needs were dealt with poorly when accessing ‘official’ services, because agencies tend to process clients in a more systematic and impersonal way. In many cases, the men knew what services are already provided by different agencies, organisations, and community groups. However, because of their vulnerability and an accompanying lack of confidence and low self–esteem, the matching of services to services users can be extremely problematic. The informality and ‘ethic of care’ (Gilligan 1982) inherent in the MAIN initiative is one of the key reasons men find it so helpful and meaningful to them. The men also identified ways in which they had already succeeded in breaking through various forms of social exclusion towards greater health, educational achievement, employability, relational healing and improved well-being. Following this, the research consultants generated a meta-analysis of the experiences shared in the group in a matrix chart that was taken back to the men for consideration on our final evening together (see Chapter 7). The matrix arranged the data under five column headings: l Common Life Events: Throughout our lives, we all encounter a similar set of events and relationships over which we have only limited power or control. These life events are essentially neutral. However, depending on the circumstances surrounding them, they may have either a positive or negative impact.

Responses:

When life events happen others can respond to us in a variety of ways. It is how we react to these responses that may result in barriers or breakthroughs in our lives. l Negative Impacts on Us: Under this heading we listed some of the ways in which these responses and our reactions have impacted negatively on us and others. l Saying it in Our Own Words: Direct quotations from men in the research group are used to illustrate some of these negative impacts. l Interventions: Finally, under this heading we listed some of the interventions that helped men break through these barriers towards greater social inclusion. Each man was given a copy of the matrix chart, which was explained by the researchers, and then asked to reflect on it and offer their comments. This led to an animated discussion that resulted in the production of a series of five charts with suggestions for culturally-appropriate solutions to the social exclusion of vulnerable men in Inner City Dublin (see Appendix D).

1.6 Key Recommendations:

Continue to Build on the Good Work of MAIN The men who took part in this research are very clear about the significance of participating in MAIN as a means of enhancing their own experience of social inclusion. It is this experiential certitude that gives them the motive power and the vision to nurture, extend and develop the work of MAIN in helping other vulnerable men like themselves. Those who took part in the co-inquiry process have been energised to share what they have achieved. They are ready and willing to work with partner agencies, organisations and groups to help shape forms of service provision that address the key needs of vulnerable men in Inner City Dublin. As one of the participants – Richard – suggests, “we must approach men in a very non-threatening way” in order to develop “a public space for exploring a private agenda”. In order to advance the above, we recommend the following:

A. Support MAIN to continue to come together as a group With great commitment the members of MAIN have given selflessly of their time and expertise. It is our view that support for the group should now be put on a more structured footing if that work is to develop and grow. Such structured support would require securing sufficient funding to assist the men to “feed” themselves, and build upon the capacities and abilities they already possess. The nature of such feeding would need to be established by the men themselves, in collaboration with relevant partner organisations. Suggestions have already been made by the group as to how MAIN might consolidate their strengths (See Chapter 7). At the final session, the question was asked: “Can we facilitate ourselves when Ed and Tom leave?” The answer to this question depends, to some extent, on whether MAIN intends to use PLA-style participatory strategies as part of their ongoing work. If it is the intention to continue with this participatory approach, then developing a training programme tailored to the specific needs of the membership of MAIN is possible and, in our view, desirable.

B. Foster Outreach Work through Oneto- One Mentoring Attention ought to be paid to the desire of some members of MAIN to develop their ability to offer an outreach service to other vulnerable men in the form of one-to-one mentoring. Again, funding would need to be secured in this regard, particularly in terms of creating opportunities for further training. Such training might include elements of lifecoaching, mentoring, or other forms of creative listening and talking therapies. A case can also be made for employing one or some of the key members of MAIN in order to strengthen and develop the ability of MAIN to offer innovative services to Inner City men who experience social exclusion. The work of MAIN would progress and benefit greatly if a structured role or roles could be created in the form of a ‘coordinator’ or ‘outreach worker(s)’ from within the ranks of MAIN. These workers could be engaged on a contract basis, either full-time or part-time, or possibly through a Community Employment Scheme. Some further training should be considered here also and MAIN members need to be involved in identifying what form this should take.

C. Secure a ‘Home’ for MAIN A key concern of the group was whether they will continue to have a place to meet in the future. Because social exclusion is often characterised by homelessness, it seems to us that MAIN would benefit greatly by having a secure ‘home’ to continue their important work

D. DICP in Partnership with MAIN Develop an Innovative Pilot Model of Service-User-led Provision As noted above, DICP wishes to generate tailor- made pilot services and models of delivery to address the diverse needs of its clientele. We believe that the work of MAIN fulfils these criteria. A case can be made for innovative and participative research processes, like the one used during this research, to become an integral part of “innovative creative and experimental service delivery models” like that offered by MAIN. Service users are ‘consultation weary’. Many service providers have yet to genuinely engage with service users in the sense that this implies developing a longer-term relationship of trust, involvement and co-responsibility. What MAIN offers the men with whom they work is that longer-term relationship. In this they are already innovating and have the potential to construct a model of delivery that is ‘cutting edge’. MAIN has begun the process whereby service users can become active agents and partners in the development of more user-driven services. We believe that MAIN is an appropriate partner for DICP in further developing this innovation as a pilot model of such provision. Once established, this model of user-led provision would benefit greatly from engagement with relevant stakeholders in an ongoing process of participatory monitoring and evaluation.

Introduction

2.1 In their own words

It’s been a very positive evening for me. Amazed too by the similarities. It’s been a reassuring evening for me. Much of the time you’re walking into a valley of darkness – but you know – you’re not alone! (Peter) If you’ve never done this life map before…then that’s a barrier itself. Men don’t share together… but here…when you do share…you get great confidence. (J.P.) You’re brought up…men don’t cry…but that song ”stand up and cry, and be a man”…you know, don’t be aggressive and beat the shite out of someone because of the rage and anger in you…no… ”stand up and cry, and be a man”. It’s just getting better and better, each session. All those years I thought I was alone…on my own…and now realising I’m not. (Shay) From the outset this research has aimed to engage in a genuine way with men from Dublin’s Inner City who have experienced, or who are currently experiencing, social exclusion in any of its many forms. The above comments from the men themselves during the research process illustrate something of the quality and depth of that engagement and, in an important sense, set the tone for the rest of this report.

2.2 Dublin Inner City Partnership (DICP)

In a draft position paper, DICP acknowledges many successes since its inception in 1991 and sets out a number of discussion points for the development of a new strategic plan. This plan is emerging within a changed context at an international and national level, as well as within Dublin itself. This requires a “new and fresh response” from DICP which recognises that “many of the local residents experiencing poverty are those now ‘hardest to reach’ ” (DICP 2007: 3, 4.). The issue now is to move past the approach to poverty that views it solely in terms of lack of income or consumption. We need to recognise and acknowledge the multi-dimensional aspects of the experience that reveal the linkages between depth of poverty, in terms of material and social assets… (DICP 2007: 4). DICP envisages a new role for itself in terms of introducing pilot approaches for innovative and tailormade services to meet individual needs where gaps in provision have been identified. By utilising Partnership structures to support key agencies and organisations, stakeholders will be facilitated in experimenting with alternative delivery methods to meet the increasingly diverse needs of Inner City residents. This approach will ensure that the DICP is on the leading edge in relation to new thinking on quality service delivery and responding to the individual rather than operating within the constraints of the delivery system. (DICP 2007: 7) DICP commissioned this research in an attempt to hear from a group of Inner City men, a group arguably among those ‘hardest to reach’. While acknowledging the material dimensions of poverty and marginalisation, the research group has stressed the dimensions of exclusion most salient to them at this point in time as inherently social. The research project and encounter situates itself within the emerging DICP strategic plan that promotes innovation and the generation of tailor-made pilot services where a failure in existing provision has been identified. It supports experimentation and the development of new ideas and models of delivery that address the diverse needs of individuals. It also models how innovative service provision might be driven by the energies and expertise of service users themselves, in partnership and cooperation with key agencies and organisations.

2.3 Men Alone In No-man’s-land (MAIN)

DICP commissioned two consultants – Tomas de Brún (Centre for Participatory Strategies, CPS, Galway) and Ed Du Vivier (independent consultant) – to design and deliver a research study “to identify practical approaches to overcoming the social and economic exclusion of men in Dublin’s Inner City” (Terms of Reference see Appendix C). The research was to be carried out on behalf of and in conjunction with members of the MAIN group. MAIN is a response by a number of men to what they feel is an absence of social, psychological, and solidarity networks for men. The reference to ‘no-man’sland’ is an apt metaphor for the social isolation that many men confront on a daily basis. The dictionary definition of this term is “a land between boundaries, an unoccupied zone between opposing forces, an unclaimed piece of ground, an ambiguous area of activity or thought” (Collins 1979: 999). No-man’s-land can also be a refuge, a place to which men can beat a tactical retreat and camouflage themselves in anonymity when aspects of their lives spin out of control and threaten to overwhelm. The problem is that once a man steps beyond the boundaries and loses his place in a social network, it can be very difficult for him to get back onside. Many men in Dublin and elsewhere find themselves alienated from their families and the wider community, experiencing feelings of hopelessness and helplessness. Social isolation can arise from a number of causes: unemployment, welfare dependency, addiction, mental and physical health issues, homelessness, marriage and relationship breakdown. Men in such situations often lack the capabilities to address their social and economic exclusion, a problem that is compounded by cultural messages that discourage men from expressing their vulnerability or seeking help from service providers or relevant agencies. With this in mind, MAIN set up a Steering Group which includes men who have experienced, or who currently still experience, some of the issues mentioned above. In partnership with DICP, the Steering Group decided “to explore ways in which the community and society can create social, economic and cultural space in which vulnerable males can present themselves to seek help and begin the journey back to becoming active and productive members of their community.” (Terms of Reference, see Appendix C )

2.4 Aims and Objectives

The principal aims of the research were: l to identify practical, locally-based and culturallyappropriate solutions that will help Inner City men experiencing social exclusion to overcome barriers and attitudes that prevent them from seeking help to tackle their social exclusion; and l to identify a practical, appropriate and participatory approach to the social inclusion of vulnerable men that could be developed by MAIN and piloted in Inner City Dublin. A number of specific objectives were also outlined in the terms of reference, including: l Reviewing recent empirical (both qualitative and quantitative) research studies in Ireland (and Dublin in particular) to assess the numbers of men in this category and analyse the barriers that prevent the social inclusion of vulnerable males in an urban setting. (See Chapter 3) l Identifying the supports currently provided on an agency, interagency, voluntary or community basis to socially excluded men in Dublin’s Inner City. l Presenting case studies of national or international projects that have been successful in overcoming barriers to the social inclusion of vulnerable males and demonstrate models of ‘best practice’. (See Chapter 3) l Through fieldwork (survey and focus groups) with the target group, identifying a practical, appropriate and participatory approach to the social inclusion of vulnerable men that can be developed by MAIN and piloted in Inner City Dublin. In addition to the objectives outlined above, the consultants proposed some supplementary objectives. Our goal was to assist the MAIN Group to:

• Clarify its vision, goals and possible scope of its involvement in the provision of services to marginalised men in Dublin’s Inner City;
• Develop an appreciation of both the potential and limitations of the research process;
• Build its own capacity to continue the inquiry process, while making contact and engaging with the target group;
• Gain a sense of ownership of the research process and its outcomes. Because of the effectiveness of the participatory research process chosen, we believe that the MAIN group has been assisted to realise each of the objectives outlined above.

3 Literature Review

In 1999, the EU commissioned a research project to examine the Social Problem of Men in ten European countries. A critical review of the literature regarding the Irish situation concluded that “ academic research into men in Ireland has barely begun” (Hearn et al. 2004: 10). While this may be true in relation to theoretical studies, a growing body of policy-based research has been undertaken that provides insights into the needs of socially-excluded men. This chapter reviews some of the key studies undertaken in recent years.

3.1 Social Exclusion/Social Inclusion

Since the 1990s there has been a move away from viewing social exclusion primarily in terms of material deprivation. Instead we need to examine a range of structural and institutional processes that contribute to the production and reproduction of poverty, educational disadvantage, unemployment, social isolation, ill heath and reduced well-being. These factors also have political (with a small ‘p’) consequences, rendering marginalised groups and individuals voiceless and powerless in relation to many of the decisions affecting their daily lives. The operating definition used for social exclusion in this research encounter is one recently put forward by the Combat Poverty Agency. Social exclusion is: the process whereby certain groups are pushed to the margins of society and prevented from participating fully by virtue of their poverty, low education or inadequate life skills. This distances them from job, income and education opportunities as well as social and community networks. They have little access to power and decision-making bodies and little chance of influencing decisions or policies that affect them, and little chance of bettering their standard of living. (Combat Poverty Agency, 2006) It is interesting to note that official discourses about social exclusion envisage it as a group phenomenon, apparently reflecting programme- or area-based approaches to its eradication (Saris & Bartley 2002: 14- 15; Saris et al. 2002: 173-175). Until recently, there has been a tendency among policy-makers to identify groups of clients with particular characteristics and then to design specific interventions to address any deficits. Individuals who find themselves excluded from full participation in society, but who do not fit into one of these groups or live outside a designated area, are thus overlooked. Social inclusion is conceived of as a process of increasing engagement, involvement and participation in social, economic, cultural and political structures. The Combat Poverty Agency defines social inclusion as follows: Ensuring the marginalised and those living in poverty have greater participation in decision-making which affects their lives, allowing them to improve their living standards and their overall well-being. (Combat Poverty Agency, 2006) The drawback of such definitions is that they paint a rather simplistic and mechanistic picture of the process. Despite the range of services available for groups experiencing social exclusion, some individuals never take part as envisaged. These apparent failures of the social inclusion paradigm lead to the suspicion that individuals who do not avail of the services available bear some responsibility for their circumstances, perhaps betraying lingering notions of the ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving poor’ which date from the 18th and 19th centuries. Moreover, even when people become fully engaged in social and community networks, they may not experience the anticipated improvements in their standard of living or general well-being.

3.2 Poverty

Despite a broadening of the definition of social exclusion, poverty remains a key measure of social disadvantage. Whereas absolute poverty is a feature of life for many people in developing countries, being poor in high-income countries is normally defined relative to the prevailing norms of the society in question. In terms of Ireland’s National Anti-Poverty Strategy (NAPS), the problem is envisaged as follows: People are living in poverty if their income and resources (material, cultural and social) are so inadequate as to preclude them from having a standard of living which is regarded as acceptable by Irish society generally. As a result of inadequate income and resources, people may be excluded and marginalised from participating in activities which are considered the norm for other people in society (Ireland 1997). While there is no single and universally-accepted measure of poverty, the EC’s Social Protection Committee established a common set of indicators in June of 2006. Between 1994 and 2001, the rate of consistent poverty (DSFA-OSI 2007) in Ireland declined by two-thirds. Nevertheless, it remained relatively high in households headed by persons who are lone parents, unemployed, retired, ill and disabled (CPA 2004: 1). In general, women are at a higher risk of income poverty than men, and the risk for both sexes increases significantly with age. For example, fewer than one in five men below 65 years of age have an income less than 60% of the national median, but for men sixty-five and older this figure rises to almost three in eight.

3.3 Educational Disadvantage

Educational attainment refers to the highest level of schooling that an individual has completed, and it is normally defined in terms of the various certificates and other qualifications awarded by education and training institutions. Modern capitalist economies are stratified and segmented on the basis of a distinction between those without qualifications and those with various forms of credentials that enable access to specific trades and professions. The education system, as the principal provider of these credentials (certificates, diplomas and degrees), is deeply implicated in this process of sorting people into occupational niches (Connell 2000: 139). Educational attainment may also be seen as a key indicator of poverty and social exclusion because of a strong correlation with rates of employment and unemployment. Nearly a quarter of all boys (24%) exit the formal education system before passing the Leaving Certificate, compared with only 6% of girls (Cleary et al. 2004: 28). A much smaller number of students (less than 4%) leave school without passing the Junior Certificate, but five out of every eight of these were male (Gorby et al. 2005: 11-12). On a national level, those leaving school without any formal educational qualifications are five times more likely to be unemployed than those who attained a leaving certificate. While male school-leavers were almost a third more likely than females to be unemployed in 2002/03, this is partly because girls tend to continue their education beyond second-level (Ibid.: 4).

Chart 3.1 below presents data from the 2002 census on participation in the labour force by males from Dublin’s Inner City, categorised on the basis of levels of educational attainment. Although those without any formal education represented only a small percentage (0.4%) of the total male population in the area, half were unemployed or still seeking their first job. By way of contrast, only one in twenty men with a third-level qualification living in the Inner City were unemployed on the night of the census in 2002. The chart clearly shows that, as a man’s level of education increases, the likelihood of his being unemployed decreases. Adult education and training are promoted as key mechanisms for enabling the socially-excluded to lift themselves out of poverty by bettering their employment prospects, as well as increasing their engagement with social networks and participation in community decision-making (Ireland-DES 2000: 28- 29, 49). In the 1970s and early 1980s, the majority of participants in adult education and training programmes were male, but in recent decades an increasing number of women have enrolled for such courses. Chart 3.2 on the following page shows how the gender balance of adult literacy learners in Ireland has changed in the last few decades. Whereas seven out of ten people taking part in adult basic education tuition in 1980 were men, this proportion had dropped to less than four in ten by the year 2000. Under the Back To Education Initiative, which was launched in 2003 to encourage hard-to-reach groups (such as disadvantaged men) to take part in adult education, over 70% of participants are women (Ireland, DJELR, c. 2006). In the vocational training sector, there has been a comparable shift in the gender of participants; by 2003, fifty-seven per cent of those taking part in FÁS courses were female (FÁS [2004]). The changing balance of gender participation in adult education and training led to concern about a phenomenon that was referred to as the ‘Missing Men’ (McGivney 1999; Owens 2000: 3). This is perhaps a misnomer, as there has been no real decline in the number of males seeking to develop their knowledge and skills. In fact, between 1984 and 2000, the number of men taking part in provision funded under the Adult Literacy and Community Education Scheme increased almost nine-fold, while the number of women enrolled for these courses grew almost twelve times. The question, therefore, is not “Why aren’t men taking part in adult education and training?” but rather “What has made this activity so successful in attracting women?” Much of the research on participation in adult education adopts a common-sense ‘barriers to access’ approach originally popularised by Cross (1981). Factors holding adults back from enrolling in courses are classified under five headings: institutional, informational, situational, dispositional or, latterly, contextual (Ronayne 1999: 18-19). Among others, McCaffery (1985) highlighted institutional barriers contributing to lower female enrolments during the 1970s and 80s, including the scheduling of classes at inconvenient times and the absence of childcare facilities. Once these shortcomings began to be addressed, women could take part in greater numbers. Recent studies on participation by Irish men in adult education have focused on low levels of literacy, negative experiences of school, low self-esteem, fear of embarrassment and potential loss of social welfare benefits as barriers to access (Owens 2000: Corridan 2002). Participation has also been analysed in its social context. Levine (1987) highlighted how conceptual models of adult education adopted by providers can influence the gender balance among learners. Through ‘selective channels of publicity’ and particular arrangements for tuition, providers were able to ‘cream off’ particular categories of clients and ‘weed out’ those for whom the service was not intended. In the 1970s, many providers in the UK and Ireland promoted adult education as a means of improving the learner’s employment prospects and, given men’s traditional role as breadwinners, this approach favoured males. By the early 1980s, however, increasing attention was being paid to the needs and concerns of women. Slowey’s (1980, 1987) research in the new housing estates of North Dublin focused on the ‘vocabularies of motive’ that served to construct adult education as a legitimate ‘interest outside the home’ – something women could and should be doing for themselves. This is one possible explanation for the dramatic growth of day-time provision in Ireland from the mid-1980s onwards, which catered primarily for female learners (Inglis & Basset 1988; Inglis et al. 1993). Increased female enrolments coupled with the predominance of women as administrators, tutors and volunteer support workers have contributed to the perception of many community-based education centres as ‘women’s space’ (Corridan 2002: 18-20). In this context, the issue of ‘male culture’ has become a focus for investigation as a factor influencing participation by men. Whereas taking an adult education course is seen as a legitimate activity for women, it is less so for men, who find it easier to justify further learning if it is called ‘training’. In addition, many men experience what Owens calls the ‘taboo zone’: a multi-determined oppression of the head anheart whereby one feels as powerless and meaningless as “a piece of cosmic dust” and identity is derived and directed from without rather than constructed from within the self (2000: 23). This taboo zone is rooted in traditional norms for masculine behaviour and operates as an internalised barrier to participation not only in adult education, but in the wider social sphere (Ibid.: 23-38).

Chart 3.1 - Inner City Males (15 - 64 years) by Levels of Education and Employment Status Percentage of Men in Educational Category Levels of Education At Work Unemployed 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Seeking First Job No Formal Education Primary Education Lower Secondary Technical or Vocational Upper Secondary Upper Sec + Tech/Voc Upper Sec + Tech/Voc

Chart 3.2 - Adult Literacy Learners by Gender 1980 2000 Females 29% Males 71% Sources: 1980 Figures, Carey 1982, ‘Aspects of Adult Literacy Teaching in Ireland 2000 Figures, DES 2001, unpublished data based on returns from VECs Females 63% Males 37%

3.4 Unemployment

Although unemployment rates have been dramatically reduced in the Celtic Tiger economy, those who find themselves unemployed are at a greater risk of poverty and social exclusion. As McGivney notes, for a man becoming unemployed involves not only the loss of a job, but also the loss of purchasing power, identity, social status, self-esteem and social interaction with workmates (1999: 35). Willot and Griffin suggest that, as the result of a loss of financial independence and a role outside the home, unemployed men can experience feelings of disempowerment and emasculation (1996: 89). Thus, being out of work undermines a man’s self-image and connectedness with society in many different ways. Table 3.3 above summarises raw data on the numbers of males and females in the Irish labour force and rates of unemployment for the last eight years. While males have been consistently more likely than women to find themselves unemployed, this may reflect higher levels of male participation in the labour force, as well as social expectations. As the traditional breadwinners, men are expected to go out to work, and unemployment threatens this central aspect of male identity (McGivney 1999: 35). Collecting the dole is still a recognised and accepted role for a man, though clearly second best when compared to being in work. Women, on the other hand, may find it easier to classify themselves as caregivers in the home even when the opportunity of going out to work would be welcome. Those with children or elderly relatives requiring care may qualify for social welfare entitlements other than unemployment benefit/ assistance, and would thus not appear on the Live Register. As many people can weather a short period without work, a distinction is normally drawn between shortterm (less than one year) and long-term (one year or more) unemployment. In this regard, men are half again more likely than women to experience longterm unemployment. For example, in October 2006 the Live Register showed that 35.7% of unemployed males had been signing on for more than twelve months, compared with 23.0% of unemployed females (Ireland-CSO 2006: Table 1, p. 2). The risk of long-term unemployment also increases with age. Compared with males under 35 years, unemployed men aged 45 to 64 years were over fifty percent more likely to have been out of work for a year or more. Once older men have been unemployed for some time, it becomes more difficult for them to re-enter the labour force. Thus, the October 2006 Live Register showed that almost a quarter (22.9%) of unemployed males in the 45-64 year age group had been out of work for over three years. (Ibid.: Table 5b, p. 5)

3.5 Social Isolation

The 2002 census showed that slightly more females than males were living on their own in Ireland. However, for nine out of twenty women (45.0%), this was the result of the death of a partner, while only one in eight men (12.4%) were classified as widowers (Ireland- CSO 2003: Table 12, p. 42). Living alone creates the potential for social isolation and poverty, though this is not always the case, as many people on their own maintain links with family members, friends, neighbours or others in their communities. Nevertheless, those living alone are at an increased risk of poverty. In 2005, for example, twenty-nine percent of adults living alone had an income less than sixty percent of the national median (Ireland-DFSA-OSI 2007: Table 5). Changing patterns of family life over the last three decades have had a significant impact on women, but have also contributed to increased social isolation of men. Although marriage is still the dominant paradigm for couples who wish to set up home together, marriage rates have fallen, and “ marital and sexual relationships are more fluid and lack permanence” (Cleary et al. 2004: 27). The increased incidence of marital separation and divorce has also led to a sharp rise in the number of lone-parent families since the 1980s. The vast majority of these are headed by women: forty-three times more women than men received the single-parent family allowance in 2005 (Ireland-DJELR c. 2006). The current state of development with family law in Ireland is widely perceived as favouring mothers in relation to child-custody, with the result that some fathers do not have regular contact with their children. However, Ferguson notes that the absence of hard evidence makes it impossible to determine how many fathers actually apply to the courts for custody or access (Ferguson 2001: 38-40, 42). Homelessness is a particularly acute form of social isolation, implying as it does not only the absence of stable living accommodation but also a breakdown of a person’s connectedness with a wider community. A survey undertaken in 2005 found that 954 adult males were homeless in the Dublin area, of which 129 were sleeping rough. Forty percent of homeless men were between 26 and 39 years of age, and nine out of every twenty (45%) had been homeless for over three years (Homeless Agency 2006). In recent years, there has been a considerable reduction in the problem (Homeless Agency c. 2003).

TABLE 3.3 - Irish Unemployment Rates (not standardised) by Gender, 1999-2006 Source: Central Statistics Office Ireland. 2007 Labour Market-Principal/Statistics (online) 1999 917.8 89.8 1,007.6 8.9% 595.8 35.1 630.9 5.6% 2000 960.3 75.0 1,035.3 7.2% 629.7 34.3 664.0 5.2% 2001 991.5 67.6 1,059.1 6.4% 662.1 31.6 693.7 4.6% 2002 999.8 80.4 1,080.2 7.4% 696.7 34.3 731.0 4.7% 2003 1,008.2 80.5 1,088.7 7.4% 709.8 33.1 742.9 4.5% 2004 1,038.5 81.1 1,119.6 7.2% 731.9 31.6 763.5 4.1% 2005 1,080.6 77.1 1,157.7 6.7% 776.8 32.5 809.3 4.0% 2006 1,130.4 80.3 1,210.7 6.6% 810.4 35.1 845.5 4.2% MALES - At Work (thousands) - Unemployed - Total in Labour Force - Unemployment Rate FEMALES - At Work (thousands) - Unemployed - Total in Labour Force - Unemployment Rate

3.6 Physical and Mental Health

There is a tendency among men to ignore health problems and to delay going to a doctor for a checkup. In recent years, there has been increasing emphasis on promoting preventative measures such as health checks, self-examinations and screening for male conditions such as testicular cancer. However, consideration of general health issues for men is outside the scope of this study. Instead, this literature review focuses on a few key indicators of physical and mental health that may have a disproportionate impact on marginalised men. Alcohol and drug abuse are two such indicators. Men drink more frequently and more heavily than women and are also more likely to drink to excess (Kelleher et al. 2003: 28-31). However, because of the cost of alcohol, men living on a limited income may not be able to drink as much or as often as those with regular wages. The data on drug abuse is more patchy, because of the illegal and hidden nature of this activity. Nevertheless, in 2004 males were twelve times more likely than females to be prosecuted for drugs offences (Connolly 2006: Figure 4.7, p. 54). Between 1998 and 2002, seven out of ten persons receiving treatment for drug abuse were male (Long, Lynn & Kelly 2005: Table 17, p. 18). Over the last decade, drug-related deaths in Ireland were between three and eighteen times higher among males than females (Long, Lynn & Keating 2005: Figure 4, p. 39). Anecdotal evidence suggests that the vast majority of hard-drug users come from backgrounds of social and economic deprivation, and that their drug habit serves to reinforce their marginalisation. There is also compelling evidence linking social exclusion with mental health. Although the picture with regard to the incidence of mental health problems for men and women is complex,1 males form the majority of psychiatric in-patients. Despite a fall in the number of residents in Irish psychiatric facilities since the 1960s, there has been little change in the gender balance of patients; the rate of hospitalisation of males is currently 25% higher for males than for females (Daly & Walsh 2006: 19-20). Single males are almost six times more likely to be in-patients than married men, while the rate of hospitalisation is three to four times higher for agricultural and unskilled manual workers than for other socio-economic groups (Ibid.: 20-21). Suicide is another issue that disproportionately impacts on men. In 2002, Irish males were 4.7 times more likely to take their own lives than females (Ireland- HO-JCHC 2006: 21). Since the late 1980s, the suicide rate in Ireland has risen considerably, though the increase has been most marked among young males between 15 and 34 years of age. When compared with the thirty member countries of the OECD, Ireland now has the second highest incidence of suicide among this age group (Begley et al. c. 2003: 38). The available research indicates that there is no direct correlation between suicide and socio-economic deprivation, but there is a linkage with social fragmentation measured by such indicators as the proportion of single-person households, levels of transient residence and prevalence of alcohol abuse (Ireland-HOJCHC 2006: 23). However, research by Begley and her colleagues among young men in Ireland suggests that an increased risk of suicide arises from growing anomie – “a personal feeling of not being part of, or responsible to society” (Begley et al. c. 2003: 5; Durkheim, 1952). As a result of changing economic conditions and social values in Ireland over the last two decades, young men are now experiencing dissatisfaction with their lives in terms of career opportunities, health services and social networks.

1 O’Hare and O’Conner (1987) report that there is considerable evidence from the UK and USA to suggest that the rates of mental illness are higher for women than for men. However, males exceed females in Irish psychiatric hospitals in respect of both first admissions and longterm residents. Case register morbidity, which includes all persons in receipt of some form of psychiatric care either community- or hospital- based, suggest that males are more likely to be diagnosed with mental illness in rural areas and in the West of Ireland, while females predominate in urban areas and in the East.

3.7 Best Practice Models

While many service initiatives, anti-poverty measures and education/training programmes have been designed to benefit males as part of larger groups of disadvantaged persons, socially-excluded men were identified as a specific target group through attempts to redress gender inequality in Irish society. The Second Commission on the Status of Women acknowledged that: There is a real problem for men at the bottom of the social and economic pyramid, because the positive incentives that have encouraged their wives to seek change have, in many cases, passed them by. Yet their traditional role no longer exists. The automatic assumption that they controlled family finances and decision-making is gone. While children may benefit from seeing their mothers behaving more independently and confidently, men can feel threatened (1993, 86-87). In 1994, the Department of Social Welfare implemented the Commission’s recommendation to extend funding support for men’s groups in ‘socially disadvantaged’ areas. However, eight times as many women’s as men’s groups applied for and received funding in 1996, though the average level of grant received was similar (Ferguson 2001: Table 3.1, p. 42). Because of the difficulty of involving disadvantaged men in personal development and community work, there was a “lack of worthwhile ideas and activities coming forward for funding” (Ireland-DSW 1998: 25). The men’s groups funded under this scheme did not follow a standard approach in working with disadvantaged men. However, the most common orientation was towards ‘personal development’, while supporting men in finding a new role for themselves in the face of long-term unemployment (Ferguson 2001: 41-42). Ferguson characterised these groups as: a ‘life-strategy’, a resource which vulnerable men use to gain support and to engage in life-planning to help guide them in making crucial decisions about their lives. They are a quintessentially latemodern practice in that they involve the construction by men of new kinds of relationships and communities in which self-conscious care for one another as men, self-identity and its re-constitution - rather than work, sport, or some other external reason - is the reason for the encounter (Ibid.). Rather than directly addressing issues of gender equality in wider society, these groups focused on building self-esteem, creating a culture of care and promoting well-being for the men who took part. However, while an external review of the DSW grant scheme found that locally-based women’s groups were “very successful” in meeting their objectives, the impact of men’s groups on the wider community was found to be “limited” (Ireland-DSW 1998: 25). Attempts have also been made to increase the involvement of men in adult education. In 1998, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform launched the Women’s Education Initiative, with support from the European Social Fund. The scheme was extended to include groups working with disadvantaged men, renamed the Employment Equality Initiative (EEI) and included in Ireland’s National Development Plans for 2000-2006, as well as for 2007-2013 (Ireland-DJELR c. 2006). Since 2003 the Back To Education Initiative (BTEI), administered by the Department of Education and Science, has supported projects targeted at hard-to-reach groups, including disadvantaged men (Ireland-DES 2006). Private funding has also been set aside for initiatives designed to support socially-excluded men, though the level of uptake was described as “disappointing” (Katharine Howard Foundation 1999: 1, as quoted in Owens 2000: 13). Despite the best efforts of community groups and educational bodies funded under these schemes, disadvantaged men remain one of the hardest to reach target groups, demanding labour-intensive approaches. In light of the lessons learnt from the EEI and BTEI experience, Brady argues that many of the methodologies and approaches developed by community- based women’s education groups in the 1980s and -90s can be adapted as models of practice for working with men (2007). However, in his review of the Department of Social Welfare grants scheme, Cousins concludes that: Perhaps one of the weaknesses of much work in men’s development has been an assumption that models which have worked with women’s groups can simply be transferred to men’s groups. The record to date would suggest that this is not the case. (Cousins 1997a: 39, as quoted in Owens 2000: 48) The issue of models and methods for working with men is a complex one. On the one hand, it may simply be a JPer of language. For example, the men taking part in various groups at a community-based education centre in Tallaght objected to use of the words ‘personal development’ to describe such activities, referring to these instead as ‘support’ or ‘finding your own headspace’. Even the term ‘men’s group’ was problematic, as some felt that it implied that they were in need of help; the preferred terms were ‘men’s club’, ‘core team’ or simply ‘the lads’ (Du Vivier, Cox & McManus 2006: slide 6). In light of this, we note that a key element of best practice (and a core principle of PLA) must be openness to, and encouragement of, the naming by men of their experiences and activities in a manner that is meaningful to them. Such ‘naming’ promotes ownership and avoids the pitfalls of a wholesale transfer of any model from one group to another. This caution needs to be exercised not only in relation to the gender variable, but also to a much wider range of variables including ethnicity, ability, class, economic status and sexual orientation. To avoid jettisoning what is valuable about women’s ways of working, a clear distinction also needs to be drawn between models that (a) do not or cannot enable men’s modes of expression and (b) those which are inherently adaptable and open to meaningful use and development by men. On the other hand, at least some men resent the ‘personal development’ courses that their wives and partners take part in, as these can lead to challenges to the domestic status quo and fears of being further peripheralised in the home. If this is a key reason for men’s lack of engagement in such courses, it has nothing to do with any model because these men are not experiencing a model – they are absent. Therefore, ongoing development of best practice models of men’s work in Ireland may need to establish to what extent the problem of engagement lies with models that are not suitable for men’s work, and to what extent the problem may be a deeper and more complex one related to socio-cultural constructions of male and female gender identities in a rapidly changing social landscape. The model and methodology employed in this research is based on the principles and pragmatics of PLA. While not explicitly a feminist research methodology, PLA is rooted in the Freirean approach and shares a great deal with both community development principles and feminist research epistemology in its commitment to emancipation, a focus on the human subject as expert in his/her own life and conditions (Chambers 1994a) and a political analysis of power differentials in society. A number of evaluative reviews and studies of participants in adult education programmes for disadvantaged men in Ireland have been undertaken in recent years (Owens 2000; Corridan 2002; Ireland-DES c. 2004; Kavanagh 2005). These have identified several elements that are common to successful initiatives, including: 1. Outreach “Prolonged and target outreach” is essential in order to draw men into sustained contact with any service provided. It may take any number of forms: door-to-door visits, community consultation, peer-to-peer support groups, one-to-one mentoring, acting as a ‘gateway’ referring drop-in clients to other services or bringing activities out to potential participants in their own social settings. Nevertheless, it must be remembered that “[o]utreach is a protracted process which may encounter resistance from the target group; may be slow to produce quantifiable results and is highly dependent on the skills of the outreach worker (Ireland-DES c. 2004: 5).” In this regard, participants may prove to be the best outreach agents for making contact with other local men and encouraging them to take part in the project. 2. Introductory Activities As a complementary activity to outreach work, many successful projects have utilised introductory activities to familiarise potential participants with the location and layout of physical facilities, to meet with staff members, to demystify what is on offer, to break the ice and to build confidence. Examples of such activities include: breakfast clubs, open days/evenings, once-off talks on topics of interest, starter/taster courses, sharing of life stories and creative forms of needs assessment. 3. Threat-Free Environment It has long been recognised that the best learning takes place in an environment where participants can take risks without fear of derision for making a mistake. However, given the competitive nature of many male-male relationships with a propensity for ‘piss-taking’, it is essential to agree and reinforce ground rules for behaviour in men’s groups. As Owens notes, “ the self-disclosure dimension of men’s development work renders participants feeling vulnerable to the threat of ridicule or slagging for engaging in ‘unmanly’ behaviour (2000: 43).” In most cases, strict confidentiality is a precondition of participation, and formal mechanisms for taking turns may need to be put in place in order to ensure that everyone gets a say.

Relationships of Mutual Respect and Trust

Confidentiality and other ground rules for working with groups of men help to create a climate of trust. However, a common feature of successful projects was that staff members had personal experience of working through issues surrounding the ‘taboo zone’ of male culture. As one participant in Owens’ study said: “people who’ve gone through that experience themselves have real insights on what’s involved in the process” (2000: 45). When male staff members invested themselves in their work with groups by sharing aspects of their life stories in an appropriate manner, they were able not only to establish rapport with participants, but also to create a sense of identification, mutual respect and collaboration towards common goals.

5. Real Life Context

Time and again, the available research emphasises the need to facilitate the acquisition of skills in purposeful and meaningful contexts that reflect the situations that participants encounter in their day-to-day lives. In adult education projects, this involves a creative and flexible approach to learning objectives, course content, delivery methods and assessment strategies. In all projects targeted at disadvantaged men, it is essential to find a balance between individual and group needs, between the process and content of groupwork, and between the affective and cognitive dimensions of development. 6. Personal Agency Another key element in successful projects for men is their capacity to inspire a sense of personal responsibility and individual agency. Learning, whether formal or non-formal, boosts self-belief and confidence in our ability to influence the world around us. This sense of agency is critical to the process of re-engagement for men who have been disempowered through social exclusion. 7. Networking Structured partnerships between statutory bodies, community-based groups and key individuals were found to add value to the work undertaken by projects, as well as enhancing their capacity to meet the needs of participants (Ireland-DES c. 2004: 6). Networking with other men’s groups is also essential for the exchange of ideas, broadening horizons and supporting new initiatives. As no single project is able to provide all the services participants require, it is essential for staff to maintain links with other service providers in order to facilitate referrals and make available other opportunities for education, development or employment. Information about models of working with sociallyexcluded men in other countries has been difficult to come by, but what is available broadly echoes the points made above. These common elements may thus be considered best practice guidelines for planning and delivering interventions for this target group.

4 Methodology

4.1 Participatory Process through an In-Depth Encounter

Over the last decade or so, a number of bodies have sought to address the exclusion of men in Irish society. While these interventions have proved successful in meeting the needs of relatively small numbers of men, many of these projects and groups have encountered difficulty in identifying potential beneficiaries, making contact and drawing them in to avail of the services provided. Thus, while we have a good idea of what works with marginalised men once they have been brought together, much more research needs to be done to clarify how we might overcome the difficulties of contact and engagement with this target group. Researching the needs and intentions of economically-, socially- and/or culturally-marginalised men is problematic for the following reasons:

• It is difficult to define the total number in the target group. Census data can provide statistics on social and economic status, employment, marital status, living circumstances, educational attainment and other indicators of social exclusion. While many of the men who fall into these categories may experience marginalisation, it would be erroneous to assume that all of them do.
• Like other hard-to-reach groups, it is difficult to identify men who might be categorised as marginalised. Because of their living circumstances, marginalised men are frequently under-represented in commonly-used sampling frames, such as the Register of Electors. For this reason, it is impossible to select a statistically-representative sample for a quantitative study.

The primary goal of this research is to discover how men experience social exclusion, as well as uncovering their preferences and intentions with regard to services that might be put in place to meet their needs. Understandably, marginalised men tend to be extremely guarded in revealing such information about themselves. Under such circumstances, what respondents say is likely to represent acceptable discourse rather than real needs, and statements of intention must be seen in this light. To offset this, an atmosphere of trust and rapport needs to be built into the research encounter. In order to achieve the objectives of this research, it was essential to engage with the target group in a genuinely inclusive way. Based on previous experience of social research, we designed the project as an in-depth encounter between ourselves and a group of men who had voluntarily agreed to engage in co-inquiry around issues of social exclusion. A variety of participatory methods were used to facilitate discussion and to produce experiential data.

4.2 Participatory Learning and Action Research

In response to the requirements of the terms of reference, and for the reasons outlined above, a quantitative survey was seen as unlikely to meet the primary goal of this research or to provide a reliable indicator of the preferences and intentions of socially excluded men in Inner City Dublin. Instead, we proposed an intensive process of qualitative co-inquiry, employing a range of Participatory Learning & Action (PLA) strategies with a relatively small number of respondents. PLA can best be described as “a growing family of approaches and methods [that] enable local people to share, enhance and analyse their knowledge of life and conditions, to plan and to act.” (Chambers 1994c). It is an approach that explicitly addresses issues of power differentials between the researcher and those being researched where the researcher typically belongs to what Chambers calls ‘uppers’, while the researched belong to the category ‘lowers’ (Chambers 1997: 217). PLA is also tailored to researching ‘sensitive’ topics, such as social exclusion, particularly among a group of men, who may often be less than forthcoming in revealing the delicate terrain of their own inner landscapes. While a PLA research process is frequently initiated by an organisation or professional researchers, the commitment is always to move towards developing a shared responsibility for the direction that the research will take. This is achieved through fostering a team process of reflective self-awareness in terms of the political and ethical dimensions of the research. It also demands building into the research process opportunities for co-analysis, co-evaluation, and finetuning.

4.3 The Research Group

The great advantage of a qualitative PLA approach is that the research group constitutes a gathering of ‘local experts’ who can speak with authority and veracity about their lives and conditions. What they offer is an in-depth perspective we cannot gain by any other means, a perspective that speaks with the authority of experience and illustrates (in the manner of case-studies) the experiences of other men like themselves. The research group for this project constituted a nonprobability purposive network sample. That is, we deliberately selected men who are members of MAIN and other men who had been approached by MAIN members because they are currently experiencing forms of social exclusion. Having direct experience of social exclusion was the key criterion in the selection of men for the research process. The value of non-probability sampling lies in the depth and quality of information generated in the research encounter. The principle of selection is the researcher’s judgment as to applicability (Robson 1993). Patton (1990) describes purposeful sampling as an effective means of obtaining ‘information rich’ material from special groups. The resulting research findings provide an important in-depth and multi-dimensional understanding of the key issues that such men experience in their daily lives. They also generate suggestions for possible interventions that would be most acceptable and appropriate for this group. The researchers were given a list with the names of twenty men comprising all members of MAIN steering committee, along with other men from the target group identified and invited by MAIN members. Those on the list had been briefed on what the research was about and had ostensibly agreed to take part in the process. However, when contact was made by telephone, it became clear that at least some of them had reservations about becoming involved. Nevertheless, a total of fourteen men attended one or more co-inquiry sessions, while a core group of twelve men were present for three or more evenings during the course of the research.

4.4 Taking an ‘Insider’ Perspective

Key to realising the above is the commitment within PLA to taking an emic2 perspective. Taking an emic approach means that the researcher focuses on the participants’ own perspectives, articulated in their own language, in order to identify key categories of enquiry and analysis meaningful to them. The participants’ own lives and conditions, and their understandings become a locus of expertise. In contrast, etic approaches favour the researcher’s perspective on the issue in question, and seek to develop key categories of enquiry and analysis exclusively in the researcher’s language and categories of meaning (O’Reilly de Brún & de Brún 2007: 78). The current research takes an emic approach but also brings this into conversation with the views, opinions and perspectives of the researchers. It is dialogical and collaborative in terms of the process, content and co-analysis between participants and research facilitators. PLA also enables socially marginalised groups to find their own ‘voices’ and to ensure that these are heard. A key element in the critique of professionalized discourses of administrators and academic researchers is that they constitute a “language of power” that “… facilitates the construction of [research subjects] as simultaneously different and inferior” (Abu-Lughod 1991: 150-151). Historically, those experiencing social exclusion have been viewed as ‘others’ who occupy a subordinate position in a hierarchy of knowledge/ power and whose ‘voices’ are generally absent from the professional, managerial and administrative structures that form the ruling apparatus of society (Ibid.: 142-144). In order to counter this mode of producing other-ness, researchers must strive to bring the language of the text closer to the language used in everyday life by their research subjects. By adopting a predominantly emic perspective, the participatory approach used for this study successfully harnessed the input and energies of the men themselves, from the early stages of co-inquiry through the research and co-analysis process: Yes, I’m energised too, I’m invigorated. Hope is rising in me. (Brian) I want to echo what other people are saying – I found tonight very uplifting…it’s fantastic when men share together and are able to share how vulnerable we are. I love being a man. (Gerry) You know, even the wind and the rain didn’t stop us getting here tonight. It’s working – it’s working! Men like us coming together and talking about just ourselves, being real, ordinary – the support is great. It’s working. (Joe) Participatory research approaches also provide opportunities for experiences of inclusion, greatly increasing the likelihood of men’s ownership of the process and thus promoting sustainability of any practical actions emerging from the study. Our research process to date shows strong evidence of this: I was looking forward to tonight – to coming back for the session. So much is happening for me here. I came in tonight and I’m leaving a better man. (Dave) Other people kept telling me, “You will never let anybody fall”. So I now trust myself to find ways to help other men. We won’t do it on our own. … It’s not a burden – it’s what I should be doing. This is meat and drink. Now there’s not enough time in the day. It’s great. (Joe) Seeing how men over a short period of time, have explained some of their inner feelings and in some ways their inner demons through the confidence they gained just by being part of a group. I am also confident that we as a group can progress and reach out to other men. (J.P.) It’s encouraging – the caring aspect. We care for each other, and I do think we’re growing. (Joe) The level of ownership of the process is also evidenced by the fact that there was a significantly high degree of consistent attendance and engagement by the participating men. The primary data arising from these co-inquiry sessions comprises the life stories, shared experiences, ideas, suggestions and analytic categories of the men themselves. We generated this information through diagrams, charts, maps and written documents produced by the participants, extensive focus group discussion and sharing, and comprehensive note-taking by the facilitators. The latter data-recording technique was chosen in preference to tape/digital-recording because of concerns about the possible inhibiting effects of recording equipment as well as potential problems with sound quality. Primary co-analysis was carried out by the participants and facilitators during the sessions. Between sessions, the facilitators carried out a meta-analysis of issues that had arisen and fed this back to the group for comment, validation or amendment at the following session.

2 The terms etic and emic were borrowed from linguistics, but found wider application in the discipline of anthropology (Goodenough 1956). Emic research is also known as ethnoscience, the New Ethnography, ethnomethodology and componential analysis.

4.5 Narrative Structure of the Research Encounter

From the outset it was important to understand something of the wider cultural context of the men taking part in this study. It is only within such a context that barriers to social exclusion and culturally-appropriate solutions to those barriers can emerge. This material was accessed by inviting the men (including the research facilitators) to root the research exploration in the narratives of our unique life stories. A visualisation exercise called The Journey of My Life (Hope & Timmel 2003: 22) was chosen for this purpose. Each of us produced a life journey chart with the aid of pictorial images, words, newspaper headlines, and written sentences which was then shared through the telling of our stories in the group. The fact that we, as research facilitators, included ourselves in this part of the process was enriching for us, but it also served to generate trust between us and members of the group. If we hope for an honest relationship to be established with participants, it is crucially important that researchers are prepared to be vulnerable too. In receiving from these men something of their life experience, we need to be prepared to offer something of our own selves also. Men find it easy to talk about things – depersonalising the content, stripping it of emotional undertones and distancing themselves in the process. By focusing on personal experiences through the life journey exercise we managed to foster a type of discussion that men do not normally engage in. The individual narratives shared in the group had the quality of being uniquely ‘real’ and authentic stories that conveyed feelings as well as thoughts. This metaphor of the ‘journeys of our lives’ continued to be referred to on subsequent evenings in order to assist men in identifying concrete moments when they were barred from full participation in the social life of those around them. The life journey charts were also used to map the moments when they succeeded in achieving ‘breakthroughs’ into greater social inclusion. Through this process the men identified barriers to social inclusion, and were able to categorise them into groups meaningful for themselves. These groups were then ranked from ‘most important to progress towards culturally-appropriate solutions’ to ‘least important to progress towards culturally-appropriate solutions’. The men also identified ways in which they already had succeeded in breaking through various forms of social exclusion towards greater health, educational achievement, employability, relational healing, and improved general well-being. Finally, through a process of co-analysis, we drew on the research process itself to consider ways that these men could assist others like themselves to become more engaged with society. Several suggestions were generated for pilot interventions within Inner City Dublin to enable MAIN to reach out to socially excluded men in partnership with a relevant agency or agencies. Each of the five sessions (of about three hours duration) concluded with a participatory co-evaluation. The final session included a formal evaluation, along with a questionnaire concerned with certain demographic variables, such as: age, educational attainment, employment status, living situation, family and marital status. The questionnaire also included a consent form where participants could indicate how they wished to be referred to (either full name, first name only or pseudonym) in the research report (see Appendix A for breakdown of questionnaire data). The information obtained through these questionnaires may also be compared with Small Area Population Statistics (SAPS) for Dublin Inner City, Dublin City and Ireland as a whole (Appendix B) in order to situate the research group in a broader context.

4.6 Outline of Research Sessions

The co-inquiry process was originally scheduled for a series of four sessions, each lasting about three hours. The dates had to be adjusted because one of the research facilitators fell ill, and a fifth session was added to provide additional time to complete the research. A general summary of these co-inquiry sessions is provided on page 23:

4.7 Strengths and Limitations of the PLA Approach

The results of any investigation are judged on the extent to which they satisfy three criteria: are they valid, are they reliable and are they representative of a wider social group. The ability to make more general predictions about the attitudes and behaviour of others in a particular society depends upon an evaluation of the research results in light of these criteria. Validity refers to the truth or correctness of the findings. As the above discussion suggests, research that does not adopt an emic approach in the collection and analysis of data is in danger of producing results that participants do not recognise as a true reflection of their views. Given that we had adopted an emic approach, we wished to minimise our capacity as researchers to influence the findings. This was achieved by introducing a loose structure to elicit the experiences, attitudes and beliefs of men in the research group; by enabling them to name the barriers they encountered and the analytic categories for grouping and prioritising this data; and by facilitating them in suggesting ways to address the issues that arose. For these reasons, we believe that the findings of this study have a very high degree of face and content validity. The second criterion – reliability – relates to the question of whether the same findings will be obtained if other researchers were to repeat the study. Reliability is a key concern of experiments in the physical sciences, but it is more difficult to achieve in social science research because of the unique nature of human encounters. For example, a political pollster can record the voting intentions of a representative sample of citizens, but there is no guarantee that the same results will be replicated a week later, even if all the same voters are contacted, because people’s views can change. Jones characterises qualitative research methods as “ a complicated, shifting, social process occurring between individual human beings, which can never be exactly replicated” (1985: 48). In light of this, our study included several mechanisms to ensure the reliability of the findings. In the first instance, it was not a once-off encounter with the research group, but took place over five sessions spanning a period of four months. In addition, the life journey charts were brought out and referred to repeatedly throughout the process, thus providing opportunities for participants to confirm, clarify or correct things they had said in earlier sessions. Finally, the fact that the facilitation of the research was shared between two consultants provided a further means of checking what participants had said and how this could be interpreted, thus ensuring greater reliability of the findings in this report. The final criterion relates to whether the men who took part in the research sessions are representative of the wider category of socially-excluded males in Dublin’s Inner City. As with all qualitative research based on non-probability samples, we do not assert that the data derived from this small group is representative of all marginalised men. By deliberately adopting the purposive network sampling approach to identify and select who would be involved in the research group, statistical rules for computing sample size and composition were no longer relevant (O’Reilly de Brún & de Brún 2007, Robson 1993). Thus, while the findings of this study may be said to have a high degree of validity and internal reliability, no claims can be made for their representativeness or statistical significance.

Date Theme Content

• 1. Monday, Who make up Ice-breaking & group formation. 27 November the target Development of rapport. 2006 group? Historical Profiling: Sharing of Life Journeys to provide concrete indicators of social exclusion. Participatory evaluation.
• 2. Monday, What are the Concluding Life Journeys exercise. 5 February Barriers & Focus Group Brainstorming: Identifying, 2007 Blockages naming and sharing barriers experienced by men that blocked them from accessing services & supports. Ongoing participatory evaluation.
• 3. Monday, Barriers & Completing the sharing of Barriers. 19 February Blockages Card Sort Technique: Categorising and 2007 Classifying Barriers. Ongoing participatory evaluation.
• 4. Monday, How can we Identifying, writing up and sharing of 5 March overcome Breakthroughs. Clarifying the factors that 2007 these enable men to get past the barriers that Barriers/Blockages prevent them from accessing support. Feedback from research facilitators on proposed grouping of Barriers. Direct Ranking exercise of sets of barriers. Ongoing participatory evaluation.
• 5. Monday, How can we Research facilitators feed back their analysis 26 March reach out and of information on Barriers and Breakthroughs. 2007 support other Matrix Grid: Considering possible interventions. men? Ranking of alternatives. Final participatory evaluation.

5 Barriers to Social Inclusion

After each of us had shared the story of our life journey, participants were asked to consider the barriers or blockages they have experienced throughout their lives. Barriers were defined as: … events, things, people, organisations, anything that prevents you from being positive or moving forward in your life. They’re like roadblocks or dams. Tonight, we want to concentrate on barriers that prevented (people/you/us) getting help or assistance when it might have made a difference. (Outline of Session 2) The research facilitators illustrated this with examples of internal and external barriers they had experienced in their own lives. Participants were then given a packet of self-adhesive labels and asked to mark the places on their life journey charts where barriers had occurred. They were also encouraged to write a few words about each barrier on the label in order to jog their memories when sharing the story with the rest of the group.

5.1 Participants Recount Barriers in their Lives

Over the course of Sessions 2 and 3, the men identified and named a total of twenty-three barriers to social inclusion. These are outlined below, with a brief summary of the discussion that took place. While some of these are clearly specific to a particular individual, they do provide broader insights into how something like a long-term illness/disability can affect men in a similar position.

A. Getting Kyphos-Scoliosis In 1999, J.P. was diagnosed with a condition known as kyphos-scoliosis – double curvature of the spine. He felt that statutory bodies, such as the Department of Social Welfare and the Health Service Executive, have not provided him with the information or help he was looking for.

B. Bias/ Disability/ Labelling This was another issue identified by J.P., who saw all the red tape associated with the health and social welfare systems as an external barrier in his life. “I found myself in limbo. The medics wanted to put me on Disability [Benefit], they said I was unfit for work. But I said, ‘Hold on a minute. Surely there’s something I can do’.” Once J.P. had been labelled, the ‘system’ took over control of his life and he was given the run-around. “The system says you couldn’t sign on for Unemployment Benefit if you’re on Disability. First, you have to get through the rehabilitation system, then we’ll tell you whether you are fit to work.” The decision over J.P.’s working life – a core element of masculine identity – was effectively out of his hands.

C. Government Making Cutbacks A number of participants felt that the problems outlined above were exacerbated by recent cutbacks in government funding to voluntary groups working in the community to provide support for those with disabilities as well as others who are disadvantaged.

D. Discrimination – Societal/Class J.P. also recounted the difficulties he has had in finding work since being classified as ‘disabled’, despite earning a third-level qualification for himself. “They say it’s illegal to discriminate against someone for disability, but I still haven’t got any work.” This led to a wider discussion about discrimination in society, which is often based on class distinctions. Some of the men recounted how this had affected their personal relationships with potential partners. Another participant, Will, spoke about the discrimination he experienced in trying to get a place in a ‘good’ school. Because of problems at home, he was living with his grandparents at the time. “When I gave my grandparents’ address in Ballybough, I couldn’t get into [name of an academic secondary school in city centre]. They thought I was just a skanger from the Inner City. So I went back and gave my mother’s address in Raheny and I got a place.”

E. Racial Discrimination Paul spoke about his experience of being discriminated against because he was Irish: I’m seventy-four and I’m talking about the time I was in England… there you’re a Paddy… They make assumptions that you’re a drunk, a rowdy because you’re Irish. Sometimes people would say bad things to you just because you might disagree with something someone said, and they would call you a bastard… but what they really meant was… you’re an Irish bastard … but they wouldn’t say the Irish bit. It’s the same though in Ireland if you’re from Sheriff Street. Paul considered this to be a form of racial discrimination.

F. Going to College Because of Richard’s negative experience of schooling discussed below, for much of his life he lacked confidence in his own academic skills and abilities. Nevertheless, after taking an adult education course and rebuilding some of his self-esteem, Richard decided to go on to study at third level. This was a huge step because of the fear of failure and other emotions surrounding his school experience, which acted as internal barriers to access. Nevertheless, he overcame his fears, took the chance and obtained a bachelor’s degree, followed by an honours B.A.

G. I met a Bollox of a Teacher – “He deconstructed me” Richard remembered loving school as a boy and skipping there with joy each morning. However, this did not last, as he recalled meeting … a bollox of a teacher. He robbed me of the joys of life. The teacher called me a ‘pleic amadán’ – a double fool. He totally ‘deconstructed’ me. His dealings with this teacher marked him, “that was the first time I really felt hurt”. Though he didn’t have the language as a child, he now knows that he became a “child depressive”, and this proved to be a barrier to further development for much of his life.

H. Death of my Father and Friends Richard then went on to talk about how the death of his father had affected him. When my father died, it was very powerful. I was alone. It was the first time I felt alone. I lost all my support systems, everything that was safe, secure and strong. He linked this experience with the death of some friends. The experience of training together in the army as part of an armoured unit had created strong bonds between them. [You’re] four men in an armoured box, with three other tanks looking out for you, to the back, front and side. I call it the ‘spirit of the tank’. You get very close to other men in those situations. When these friends died, Richard felt very scared and vulnerable without the support of others looking out for and protecting him. He described these feelings as a very personal and internal barrier to moving forward in his life.

I. All these Pubs are an Attraction Richard described himself as “a recovering alcoholic who has been dry for the last year”. But the fact that there is “a pub on every corner” and that this is where most men in Ireland go to socialise is a problem for him. Although he has learned how to deal with it, it does present a barrier when he wants to meet, chat and celebrate with others. A number of the other men agreed that this was a problem.

J. Taking on Someone Else’s Fear Another participant, Dave, identified how childhood experiences had shaped certain patterns in his life. As a baby, I had fits. That wasn’t so much a barrier, but my mother’s reaction was. Her fear, I grabbed onto it. She wouldn’t let me out to play with the other kids. If I was out playing, there always had to be somebody there, a brother [watching out for me]. Three, four, five – those are the formative years, but I didn’t get a chance to make friends. This pattern influenced Dave’s relationships with others throughout his life. When I was twelve, my ma ended up in hospital on or off for five years with depression. My dad worked every hour he could to keep us going. I ended up feeling very lonely. I felt really low. I guess I was depressed, but I couldn’t talk about it. I couldn’t even talk to my friends. I mean, I could talk to people, but I couldn’t talk about Dave. Eventually, I just got lost. I stopped going to school. Though I was very good in school, it became irrelevant As a result of ”getting lost”, Dave developed an internal barrier that holds him back from meeting and relating to other people. ”I’m afraid to commit, to let people in. All the other problems are made worse by this.”

K. 1997 – Meltdown At an early age, Dave went out to work, but lost his job and ended up on the dole. This was an experience that drained his spirit even further: “I got really low. Nobody wanted to know me.” He then met his partner and, although the relationship was “rocky”, they got a house and moved in together. Eventually, this relationship broke up, and he lost his mother and grandmother around the same time. I lost my house/home and hit the bottle. 1997 was the worst. Both my mother and my gran died. I couldn’t handle it. I couldn’t grieve. It took me a long time to get over the death of me ma or to go out with another girl. Dave described this period in his life as “meltdown”. As a result of his unresolved grief, the break-down of the relationship with his partner and the loss of house and job, Dave “took the easy way out” and started drinking. I was stuck in a rut and drinking too much. I just hit the bottom. You drink for comfort, you drink to forget about things, but it doesn’t work. It has taken Dave the best part of ten years to pull himself out of this situation and move on with his life.

L. Lack of Love/Affirmation Gerry highlighted how the relationship he had with his parents had affected his life. My mother was very manipulative, she manipulated people through her illness. My father was extremely authoritarian. Because of that, I face fear every day. Even coming here, I felt afraid. This fear of people in authority made me become the ‘quiet guy’. One of my bosses told me “You’re better than everyone here, but you don’t know it.” In common with many of the stories recounted above, such childhood experiences are influential in shaping a man’s self-image and patterns of behaviour in later life.

M. Responsibility and Duties around Parents Social norms and expectations can also inhibit us from reaching our full potential, as Gerry’s comments suggest: There were a number of things I’d have liked to do with my life, like get a job abroad. But I was the eldest son, I married young and my brother and sister went away, so I was left to look after the parents. I had to stay, to be there for them. Parents can put a burden on your back. Well, at the time, I saw it as a burden, as a duty. It was only later in life that I learned to see it as a choice, my choice to stay. It took a mental shift in myself. Many years struggling with self-awareness and personal development were required for Gerry to gain these insights into the relationship with his parents.

N. Father not Expressing Love for You Because of these experiences with his parents, Gerry felt very insecure and unable to express love. The only time I remember either of my parents saying “I love you” was on my twentyfifth wedding anniversary. I couldn’t handle it. My parents always used to tell me “That’s very good, but ”. I hated that ‘but’. Nevertheless, Gerry was at pains to say that: “My father did as best he could for his time.”

O. Massive Insecurity Another participant, Brian, spoke about feelings of ‘massive insecurity – so big I can’t describe it’, ‘no self-belief’ and ‘lack of confidence’. He coped with this by: putting on a mask, on top of another mask, on top of another. My life became a series of masks. Brian felt that his attempts to hide away his true feelings have made it more difficult to relate to others in a real and authentic way.

P. Grief comes to you and you don’t know how to handle it A number of men then spoke about the problems they had, and still have, coping with bereavement: When my dad died, my life folded like a pack of cards. I completely collapsed [] I was totally disconected from my heart. (Brian) Eventually it [undealt-with grief] catches up with you. (J.P.) There was general agreement among a number of the men present about this point. The discussion seemed to suggest that we, as men, did not have role models for expressing emotions, especially grief, because our fathers and other men of that generation did not do so: My dad was a cloth-cap type of guy. One day he saw me crying and couldn’t cope with it. (Richard) In this way, barriers can be passed down from one generation to the next, from father to son. Yet, nobody wanted to point the finger of blame at this older generation of men, as that was how things were done in their day. The men in the research group had mixed feelings about the advisability of expressing emotions openly. Brian said: “We don’t cry when we should cry. We need to learn to cry.” However, Dave appeared to be more ambivalent: “Not so much you don’t cry. You just get on with your life.”

Q. Lack of Services/Facilities/ Information for Homeless/ Those in Need Paddy spoke about how his life fell apart and he became homeless. As a result of a minor injury that went untreated, Paddy had part of his foot amputated. By the time he was well enough to be discharged from hospital, he was jobless, homeless and broke. He encountered genuine difficulties obtaining assistance from the relevant state bodies. No one wanted to take me on. Once I got into the system, you have to run around to get everything sorted. You have to keep chasing it all the time, no one really tells you. Joe’s experience of homelessness illustrates the problems of relating to government-funded service providers and the impact on his self-image. I became homeless. When I went down to the officer to get some help, the woman asked me was I an alcoholic or a drug addict. I mean, what was that about? I was just so down, and I went down further – I eventually got completely flat. As well as undermining a man’s sense of identity and self worth, being without a place of residence presents particular difficulties in accessing services, as Joe explained: ”Without an address, you’re a non-person. Lots of men are suffering out there – just suffering in silence on their own.”

R. No One [single] Centre for Information (Department of Social Welfare/ Health Service Executive) A number of the men spoke about the apparent lack of coordination between the DSW, HSE and other agencies, the failure to share information, and the red tape involved in accessing services. This leads to ridiculous situations like the one recounted by Paddy, who was forced to undergo a further medical examination when claiming Disability Allowance. “They had to send out a doctor to see that my foot hadn’t grown back.” A number of the men argued that what is needed is a one-stop shop, where information can be obtained about all the available services and where all of the paperwork can be easily processed.

S. No Social Architecture for Men There followed a general discussion about the problems men encounter from middle age onwards. Housing was considered to be a major issue; many bedsits and single flats in social housing schemes are not suitable for older people or those with disabilities. Paddy noted that “ once you come up to fifty-five, they don’t want to know”. This appears to be a reference to DSW’s tendency to pension off people who have been unemployed for some time and are no longer contributing to the work force. Richard argued that the problem is bigger than the absence of suitable facilities. We also need to consider the social and community dimension: There is no social architecture for men to relate to. No male development workers (in community organisations), no outreach workers for men. The problem is so huge that working in the area is like (working with) quicksilver. He felt that a “universal response” is needed to address the multiple problems faced by socially-excluded men.

T. Recurring Depression Brian noted that depression seemed to be a recurring theme running throughout the discussion during the first three research sessions. Others agreed. One word stands out – depression. (Peter) If you have depression, it’s like shutting the door. (J.P.) It’s part of the mix of what we are, part of our DNA. There’s five thousand years of conditioning… it’s part of the mix of the cake. (Richard)

U. Isolation Shay spoke about the situation he found himself in after coming home from East Germany where he had lived for a number of years. The people he had grown up with hadn’t moved on in their lives, and couldn’t seem to relate to him because he had taken an alternative path. He felt that he was being forced into isolation through their begrudgery.

V. Broken Relationships Again, a number of participants noted that this was a common experience in many of their life journeys.

W. Huge Culture of Blaming Gerry observed that there is a culture of blame in Irish society and this can hold people back: If something goes wrong, we get a name, we have to find a scapegoat. We live in fear of taking a chance, of making a mistake. It’s paralysing for the person. As the barriers were identified and discussed, the research facilitators prepared a separate A5 card for each of them for use in the following exercise.

5.2 Grouping of Barriers

Because of the large number of barriers identified by the men in the research group and the apparent overlap between a number of them, the research facilitators thought it would be helpful to group them into a smaller (and more manageable) number of categories. Towards the end of third session, each of the barrier cards was read out and placed face-up on a table around which the participants were sitting. The men were then asked to sort the cards into piles based on similarities and differences between them. There was considerable discussion and debate about which card should go into which pile, and the exercise had to be concluded before all the outstanding differences could be resolved.

Before the next session, the facilitators met to consider the outcome of this card sort exercise. The participants had created four separate piles, with two barrier cards left over as agreement had not been reached on which pile they should be allocated to. While maintaining the basic structure of these categories, the facilitators felt that two of the piles could be combined because of the high degree of similarity between the barriers they contained. We also proposed that one or two barriers be allocated to different categories. In addition, we suggested labels for the category headings. At the start of Session Four, all of these proposals were referred back to the men in the research group, who debated our suggestions and approved the final arrangement. The following are the meaningful categories of barriers that were generated through this exercise:

Societal/Class Prejudice and Discrimination

• Bias/Disability/Labelling
• Racial Discrimination
• I Met a Bollox of a Teacher – “He deconstructed me”
• Discrimination – Societal/Class
• Huge Culture of Blaming Emotional/Relational Crises and Issues
• Broken Relationships
• Father not Expressing Love for You
• Lack of Love and Affirmation
• Responsibility and Duty around Parents
• Death of my Father and Friends
• Going to College
• Isolation
• Recurring Depression
• Grief Comes to You and We don’t Know How to Handle It
• 1997 – Meltdown
• Taking on Someone Else’s Fear
• Massive Insecurity
• All These Pubs are an Attraction Poor/Inadequate Service Provision
• No One [single] Centre for Information. DSW/ HSE
• Lack of Services/Facilities/Information for Homeless/ Those in Need
• Getting Kyphos Scoliosis
• Government Making Cutbacks
• No Social Architecture for Men

5.3 Ranking of Barriers

Given the large number of barriers identified by the group, the research facilitators felt it necessary to prioritise those which needed to be addressed in the remaining sessions. We chose a simple ranking exercise and introduced this at the beginning of Session Four after agreement had been reached regarding categories of barriers. The men in the group were given the following instruction: Please rank these clusters of barriers according to those you consider most important to progress towards solutions to those you consider least important to progress towards solutions. (Outline of Session Four) Each participant was given ten colour-coded matchsticks and asked to allocate these in accordance with the priority they attached to each of the three categories of barriers. This exercise produced the following ranking: The category of Emotional/Relational Crises and Issues was ranked most highly with a score of 34, indicating clearly that these were the barriers participants wished to address and progress towards the development of culturally-appropriate solutions. There was a high degree of agreement that this category of barriers is the one where existing provision is particularly inadequate. With the notable exception of Richard, the few men who succeeded in accessing ‘official’ services at times of emotional/relational crisis described their experience negatively. In general, they felt their emotional needs were overlooked by agencies which tend to process clients in a more systematic and impersonal way. Even if they knew what services were available and where to find them, the nature of their vulnerability with its accompanying lack of confidence and low self-esteem makes the matching of services to service users extremely problematic. The informality and ‘ethic of care’ inherent in the MAIN initiative is probably one of the key reasons men find it so helpful and meaningful. The category referred to as Poor/Inadequate Service Provision was ranked joint second with the Societal/ Class Prejudice and Discrimination group, both scoring 23. In relation to societal/class prejudice, the men in the research group acknowledged that not enough has been done in the past to address this in Ireland, but they also acknowledged that perhaps things had begun to improve in this area. In relation to inadequate service provision, when these marginalised men tried to access services, many were unhappy with the quality of the services provided. The fact that the participants identified ‘poor/inadequate service provision’ as both a barrier in itself and as a category of barriers suggests that this is a very significant issue that contributes to the creation and maintenance of social exclusion.

6 Breakthroughs Towards Social Inclusion

In addition to identifying barriers that inhibit men from moving forward in their lives, we also wished to focus on those occasions when the participants managed to break through these blockages. This was important not only to provide the men in the research group with hope for the future and a sense of their own power, but also to enable them to analyse what they can do to assist others. Although one participant felt that the term ‘breakthrough’ was a bit of American psycho-babble, there was general agreement with the concept underlying this exercise. Although we had flagged our intention to look at breakthrough moments at the beginning of Session Two, the exercise did not take place until later in the series of research sessions. The concept was introduced as follows: BREAKTHROUGHS are great moments, events, experiences that allow us to MOVE FORWARD, sometimes to get through a barrier that has blocked us for some time. BREAKTHROUGHS can be moments when something very small happens, but on reflection, we see that it was the beginning of something much, much bigger. Breakthroughs mean our life situations and conditions improve for the better. (Outline for Session Two) Again, the research facilitators illustrated the concept with examples of breakthroughs they had made in their own lives. Each man then received a self-adhesive star, which they used to mark the most important breakthrough moment on their life journey charts. They were also asked to write a few notes about that moment, including: what the breakthrough was, how it happened, who was involved, how it made them feel and what difference it made in their lives. These notes were then placed in envelopes and saved for later use. During Session Four, the notes were taken out and participants were invited to share their breakthrough stories in the wider group. The researchers’ analysis of the breakthrough material in conjunction with the life journey data highlighted a number of timely supports that helped men experience greater social inclusion:

• Educational Opportunity
• Psychological Support in the form of “Wise Counsel.”
• Friends and Family.
• Being Involved in MAIN.
• The PLA Research Process.

6.1 Educational Opportunity

Even though early childhood memories of schooling were often negative, a number of men identified the importance of returning to further training or schooling up to and including third-level study. One participant found his way into third-level education after being diagnosed with a major spinal condition: The most important breakthrough in my life came about when I enrolled in Maynooth to initially do the Diploma in Community and Youth Work, then on to the BA Honours in Applied Social Studies. This expanded my knowledge and broadened my horizons. This however would not have been possible without the monies that I inherited from my late mother. Her death in many ways helped open a new chapter in my life. [The money] removed the burden often associated with thirdlevel study, making it easier to study to obtain my goal. (J.P.) As a result of this breakthrough experience, J.P. describes himself as someone “who is thinking different” and who now sees himself as “an eternal optimist”. The school experiences of another participant, Richard, were recounted in the previous chapter. In spite of such an unhelpful start in schooling, Richard returned to NUI Maynooth as an adult student and completed his degree studies there. As he says himself: “I went to College…the fool went to College. Look at the depression line…its rising!” Shay recalls a day when his maths teacher called him “a fucking dreamer because I was watching pigeons in the yard. I was interested in nature.” He later went to a private school where he encountered an American teacher and “she was like a whole new world, and she encouraged me in art.” In spite of this positive experience, Shay took the boat out of Ireland in the 1980s and ended up in East Germany where his true education took off. The experience of learning about German language and culture, the arts and opera has remained with Shay as a key period in his life where he broke out of the confines of 1980s Ireland into the greater freedom and experience of social inclusion that East Germany offered. On my arrival in Germany (GDR) in the 80s, I immediately became aware of artistic, educational, and sporting opportunities etc. Lectures; Theatre; Political work; Concerts, Opera; Sport. [There was] total access to these things at almost no cost! I do believe that 80% of my education today is a result of this “freedom”. Shay concluded his input with a passionate appeal for greater opportunities for people to develop their talents. “If somebody has the wherewithal to do something, they should be allowed and encouraged to do it, at six not sixty [years of age].” While Will was still a young man, his child died and later his relationship broke up. Like Shay, Will also felt he had to leave Ireland in order to try to escape some of his own demons. He hitched to Israel and succeeded in “sorting some things out.” After returning to Ireland, Will decided to study for a degree in education from Trinity College, Dublin. He has since become involved in MAIN. Early experiences of schooling proved to be very influential for many of the participants. As illustrated above, some had damaging (as well as inspiring) encounters with teachers. Others were absent for lengthy periods as the result of serious illness or difficulties at home. Only a small number of men in the research group did not complete junior secondary schooling, while quite a few had pursued third-level education (see questionnaire data in Appendix A). Even when group members did not specifically mention education as a key breakthrough in their lives, many recounted how the opportunity to further their education had been important in achieving greater social inclusion. However, there are limits to this. Educational attainment serves to reduce but not entirely eliminate the experience of social exclusion. For example, of the five men in the research group who had attained third-level qualifications, only two are currently in paid employment. The remaining three men described their continued unemployment as ‘personally disturbing’ and a source of ongoing marginalisation.

6.2 Psychological Support in the form of ‘Wise Counsel’

Richard’s story is one of making a key breakthrough after being referred by his GP to a psychotherapist for counselling. As mentioned previously, Richard suffered from depression as a child and this stayed with him into adulthood. The depression was compounded as a result of his father’s death and the deaths of some of his friends. On his life journey chart he said: “I chose the headline ‘Man of Mystery’, but I’m a mystery to myself. I’ve issues of bereavement; I’ve lost a good few friends.” The psychotherapist helped him through the depression with talking or “wise counsel” instead of medication. “This man knows all my secrets and I’m happy that he does.” After this period of counselling, Richard says: I’m thinking different, beginning to feel more confident and at ease with myself. It’s like a second time round, another go at life. If this intervention had not happened, I don’t know where I’d be now. I’m fundamentally changed from that person I was fifteen years ago.” Although Richard is the only man to identify formal counselling as the key breakthrough in his life journey, we include it here as a ‘finding’ because all of the men identified various forms of what we refer to as ‘informal counsel’. This can take the form of mentoring, compassionate listening, the experience of being part of what MAIN offers, and the support arising from participation in the research process itself. This informal counsel was central to their experiences of breaking through the barriers in their lives.

6.3 Support from Friends and Family

Brian’s story illustrates the importance of individual contact with a significant other in helping men to emerge from the no-man’s-land they find themselves in. The key breakthrough in his life came in 1971: I had been working in Kenya but had to return to Dublin where I isolated myself and was very depressed. I had no idea what to do. My parents with whom I stayed were tolerant but bewildered by me. I was in freefall, unable to work, totally isolated, stayed in my own room. I’d lost faith in myself, in where I could go. An old friend, also named Brian, kept coming to see me. He seemed to believe in me and accepted me where I was. He took me out many times for walks and to events. He even took me on a holiday with two other guys who had been friends. His intervention was a turning point during the worst period of my life. Brian stressed the importance of making meaningful connections with other men, which he later explained as a type of “life mentoring”. In relation to his own mentor, Brian said: “He had faith in me. He was a bit older than me, a bit wiser than me.” Brian now goes out looking for men who are ready to make transformative changes in their lives and offers them the opportunity to work with him as their mentor. Billy’s story also illustrates the importance of friends and family, and the value of informal relationships as a key support for vulnerable men. One year out of hospital. Still feeling suicidal, lost, burnt out… family and friends showed concern and began by giving me various reading materials associated to my illness. Reading the material gave me an insight to others having similar events in their life. From there my brother and friends encouraged me to just go out walking, or for a pint or two, so I did and after a few months found all my fears fading gradually. Gerry maintained that: “All the breakthroughs I’ve had have been learning to accept myself a little more.” He noted that the breakthroughs all came out of periods of confusion, darkness, struggle and despair. They all involved people coming into his life and acting like “stepping stones”. He then spoke about the most difficult period in his life. His marriage was “very rocky, nothing I could do was going right.” One of his children was sick all the time (with a disability) and he referred to her in “abusive terms”, something that shocked him at the time. He was depressed and taking medication, “one tablet three times a day, but found myself taking ten tablets at night so that I could sleep. I also used to curse all of the time.” Gerry’s transformative moment began when two people he knew worked behind the scenes to get him transferred to another department in his workplace, where he came into contact with a third person who befriended him. After an argument with this man in a pub, Gerry was walking along Merrion Square and had a ‘transformative experience’ It was as if someone was saying, “I’ve been knocking at your door. Are you going to go ahead or stay back?” [] I just knew that it was okay to be me. Before that I had no confidence in myself, I never spoke at meetings Now I know I’m good enough. Gerry stopped cursing, his marriage started to come back“I just noticed I wasn’t taking the tablets anymore. It’s made me understand people an awful lot more. I just do what I can do and that’s okay”. Gerry’s story highlights the involvement of other people in making a breakthrough. It also hints at the far more indefinable support of ‘spirituality’, suggesting that healing, transformation and growth for vulnerable men like him might also entail learning to accept their brokenness. Other group members affirmed what Gerry said here in terms of just learning to accept who you are, “warts and all”, while at the same time rejecting any idea that this means giving up or not trying any more. Paddy diagnosed his condition in the following way: For twenty years, I was a part-time friend, a part-time husband, a part-time father. I never gave anything to that relationship. After the break-up of [my] marriage, I found it very hard to get in relationships of any sort. I just took to avoiding situations or running away from them. When he found out that his daughter was pregnant, he grabbed this as a second chance to be a father to her. “I decided to become a father to my daughter, and it actually worked I was so happy.” The hardest thing was going into the hospital to visit his daughter. He was afraid that she might reject him, and he was also nervous about meeting his ex-wife there. I had the chance to face up to my responsibilities or run away. I decided to face up to the real world. It brought me back into the fold of my family – I got a second chance with my daughters. It worked, and all’s well that ends well. All of the stories in this layer of the breakthrough analysis emphasise the value and importance of informal networks of friends and family in helping vulnerable men move from social exclusion towards greater social inclusion.

6.4 Getting Involved in MAIN

One of the key findings of the breakthrough stories is the significance and importance of the support that MAIN has offered these men, and continues to offer them. Dave recounted the experience like this: The first major breakthrough was when I met Joe, Richie and JP, and was able to talk freely about myself. There was no judgment, just acceptance. It was incredible after thirty years to be able to relate my life experiences and to feel that I was accepted for the person I was and not the person I felt I should present to others. No more fear, no more lies. At this point in his life, Dave was living on his own in a flat in Fairview, and feeling “very low”. He found it difficult meeting and talking to women, because of low self-esteem. The metaphor of Groundhog Day really struck a chord for him. This is a reference to the popular American film where the main character finds himself reliving the same day over and over again. I was stuck in a rut, going to work, going to the pub, falling back home, going to work again. Meeting Joe and getting involved in MAIN is very positive for me. I’m doing a computer course and a Level 5 FETAC course. I’m still on the road and getting better slowly, but MAIN is really important for me. Billy is equally clear about what MAIN has offered him: I also bumped into Joe M—- round this time and got involved with the MAIN group, and the meetings gave me an added strength. They’re not different from myself. [MAIN] allowed me to accept myself for what I am – to learn to love myself. Before this, I couldn’t see my way I thought about suicide a couple of times. Joe spoke about how the idea for MAIN came about. One of the great things about setting up this group MAIN is that I got to know people really well [] MAIN’s approach is unique, it’s a process of connection. I remember men watching football in the pub, but I noticed J.P. and Richard analysing the reactions of the crowd in the pub, and thought this was really interesting, unique. In a way, pubs aren’t that bad for some men, because at least they’re not hiding away. I much rather people go down to the pub, at least you can talk to them there. Once they stay in their flats drinking alone, they’re lost. Joe spoke about starting up MAIN as a transformative experience in itself. “The biggest breakthrough has been setting up the men’s group. It’s only in the last year that I’ve come out of that darkness”. He also described the experience of “cleaning away things in my life, washing my clothes by hand to see the dirt coming out of them.” Richard picked up on the value of men being able to meet not just in pubs: “It’s great we can get together and share like this. We don’t have to share only in the pub. I’m amazed by the similarity of our stories.” Brian confirmed the strength of the group and the importance of the support offered through MAIN: “For years I’ve had this lack of confidence that men could be real with each other…but this group is great…really great.” Throughout the narration of life journeys, the consideration of barriers, and the focus on breakthroughs, a strong and clear message came through – the support offered by MAIN is of particular value to these men. MAIN is not a replacement for other informal supports such as family and friends, or for forms of professional counselling or service provision. But it is an active and vital way for vulnerable men to continue to access forms of honest and open sharing that increases their self-confidence and self-esteem. Interestingly, the experience of being a part of MAIN effectively addresses many of the barriers that the group prioritised under the heading of Emotional/Relational Crises and Issues.

6.5 The PLA Research Process

In the Terms of Reference for this research project, DICP asked the research consultants to identify “a practical, appropriate and participatory approach to the social inclusion of vulnerable men that could be developed by MAIN and piloted in Inner City Dublin.” Comments from individual men throughout the research sessions suggest that they gained from the PLA process itself and experienced it as consistent and congruent with the aims and practice of MAIN. Such a participatory research process using a PLA approach thus appears to be a practical and appropriate intervention capable of being developed by MAIN and piloted in Inner City Dublin. Dave firmly locates his key breakthrough as “right now”, something happening during the research process itself: I’ve been carrying someone else’s fear. I realised this only a month ago when you asked me about barriers in my life. If I hadn’t been asked that question, I would never have seen it as a barrier [] I put my star [major breakthrough] at the end of my life-journey, which is now, really. Coming to these meetings has been the major breakthrough for me. I was always afraid, making excuses It’s like something’s been broken, it can never grow back. The major breakthrough for me was coming to the meetings, to feel so comfortable with myself that I could look at my life and be able to accept myself. When we were talking about barriers I began to realise I was carrying a lot of fear that was not my own. With this realisation and acceptance I feel that I can deal with my own pain and fear, and try to move on with my life. Dave’s comments were echoed by most of the other men in the group: I learnt how effective a structured exploration together on one’s life can encourage men to talk about deep issues that affect them. The energy, support of other men. It confirmed me in my own manhood. I want to echo what other people are saying I found tonight very uplifting, and I’m delighted that I’ll be able to get here the next night. I wasn’t sure I would. It’s fantastic when men share together and are able to share about how vulnerable we are I love being a man. (Gerry) Knowing I am not alone, and being able to interact with other males without feeling intimidated. For once in my life I have the ability and confidence to speak in front of other people. (Will) I was waiting on the bus very cold and wondering to myself, why am I coming here? But the bus came anyway, and I got on, and got here. It’s been really good I’m really glad I did come again. Improving it’s improving all the time. Each session is better than the last. Yeah, it’s great. (Paddy) I agree with what’s been said. There’s more hope now. When we started out we were restrained, but tonight we were a lot less restrained. Each session it gets better. We’re all willing to dance. (Shay) My sense of it is that something is going on here something important. It’s like ‘maleness’ [laughter in group] no, I mean real ‘maleness’, and I have a growing sense of just what’s going on between us it’s very powerful. (Brian) A bit of what everyone has said already I’m just growing since I came here, and I’m feeling part of the group. I feel I am having my most crucial breakthrough at the moment. (Billy) Culturally- Appropriate Solutions Before and after each session, the research facilitators met on their own to review the issues that had arisen and to finalise plans for the following session. In between sessions four and five, we met for an extended period to generate a ‘meta analysis’ that drew together the salient material from the life journeys, barriers, breakthroughs, clustering and ranking. This was intended to consolidate the issues raised throughout the co-inquiry process and to move the discussion forward towards practical solutions. We compiled a matrix chart that was taken back to the men for consideration on our final evening together.

7.1 Presentation and Response to Meta-Analysis

The matrix chart arranged the data under five column headings: l Common Life Events: Throughout our lives, we all encounter a similar set of events and relationships over which we have only limited power or control. These life events are essentially neutral. However, depending on the circumstances surrounding them, they may have either a positive or negative impact. l Responses: When life events happen, others can respond to us in a variety of ways. It is how we react to these responses that may result in barriers or breakthroughs in our lives. l Negative Impacts on Us: Under this heading we listed some of the ways in which these responses and our reactions have impacted negatively on us and others. l Saying it in Our Own Words: Direct quotations from the men were used to illustrate some of these negative impacts.

7 Summary of Barriers and Breakthroughs Saying it in Our Own Words

It was like I was in a shadow – my childhood. I had no bond with my mother – I was a child in shadow. (Brian) The only time I remember either of my parents saying “I love you” was on my twenty-fifth wedding anniversary. I couldn’t handle it. My parents always used to tell me, “That’s very good, but ”. I hated that ‘but’. (Gerry) For twenty years, I was a part-time friend, a part-time husband, a part-time father. (Paddy) I was a piece of cosmic dust, out there in the darkness. (Richard) My dad was a cloth-cap type of guy. One day he saw me crying and couldn’t cope with it. (Richard) I was trying to prove of value to my dad. But when my dad died, my life folded like a pack of cards. (Brian) I loved school, school didn’t love me. The teacher called me a pleic amadán. (Richard) [The job] took a lot out of me. My confidence was dented, deflated. It changed my personality I started to beat myself up. (Peter) I ended up on the dole. I really lost myself, I got really low. Nobody wanted to know me. (Dave) I coped with that by putting on a mask, on top of another mask, on top of another. My life became a series of masks. (Brian) Life ain’t no cakewalk. The medics wanted to put me on disability, but I said, “Hold on a minute, surely there is something I can do.” (J.P.) I became homeless. When I went down to the officer to get some help, the woman asked me was I an alcoholic or a drug addict. (Joe) I was stuck in a rut and drinking too much. I just hit the bottom. You drink for comfort, you drink to forget about things, but it doesn’t work. (Dave) Being able to talk freely about myself with other men Being accepted/no judgements We’re not to blame. No child is born with shame. We need to be encouraged to talk about how we feel. Second chance to be a father: facing up to my responsibilities Meaningful connections with other men. He had faith in me. People coming into my life – ‘stepping stones’. Going to college Going back to education and experiencing success. Setting up MAIN Taking on a leadership role Freedom/opportunity to develop interests Good kind council (counselling) Listening Watching Encouragement Support Empathy Imagination Deep sharing of life experiences Looking after one another Feeding ourselves Getting in touch with our spirituality Negative Impacts Lack of confidence & self-belief Inability to express love or other feelings. Massive insecurity. Fear of authority Taking on someone else’s fear. Responsibility/duty around parents. Feeling inadequate Fear of rejection Inability to commit Isolation Grief comes to you and we don’t know how to handle it. Inability to express grief Inability to deal with death Despair/Depression Lack of self-confidence & sense of self-worth Repressed anger Undermined self-confidence Paralysing Isolation Putting on Masks Disempowerment Feeling like a non-person Being put in a box Alcohol/Substance abuse Recurring Depression Sense of Failure, Shame Responses Father not expressing love for you Lack of love/ affirmation Lack of encouragement Authoritarian Manipulative Fearful Broken Relationships. [Note: Few references were made under Barriers, but important in many Life Journeys and Breakthroughs] Lack of male role models for expressing emotions Suppressing feelings I met a bollox of a teacher – he deconstructed me. Being bullied No encouragement [Note: Few references under Barriers, but important in many Life Journeys] This is an issue, but not the dominant issue. Bias – Disability – Labelling. Discrimination, societal & class. Racial discrimination. Stereotyping/Ageism Begrudgery Blaming Poor/inadequate service provision. Lack of services/ facilities/information for homeless & those in need. No one-stop-shop. Government making cutbacks. No social architecture for men. All these pubs are an attraction. Life Events Relationships with Mother Father Other Relationships Partner(s) Children Friends Other Men Bereavement Death of my father & friends 1997 – Meltdown. Schooling/ Education Work/ Employment Our Relationship with Society Ill Health/ Disability/ Growing Older Getting kyphos scoliosis. Relationship with Ourselves (Spirit) BARRIERS BREAKTHROUGHS

l Interventions:

Finally, under this heading we listed some of the interventions that helped men break through towards greater social inclusion. The matrix chart is reproduced in full on page 40. Each man was given a copy of the chart, which was read out and explained in detail by the researchers. We then asked participants to reflect on it and offer their comments. The response to the meta-analysis chart was very positive. A number of the men commented again about the importance of “relationships”, “emotional baggage”, and “shame”. Yes, it’s very striking…all that about relationships, particularly because so much of masculine identity is around work and employment. It [work] is an issue, but not the dominant issue. (Richard) A lot of this stuff is emotional baggage, and if it’s not dealt with when you get a job it just drags you down. If you don’t address the emotional baggage, you’ll never be successful in work. (J.P.) Shame is part of something… though I do think we have it covered when we experience that ‘lack of encouragement’. The shame is felt when your self confidence is right down in the bottom of your boots. (Shay) 7.2 Suggested Solutions to Social Exclusion The above reflection and conversation led quite logically into a consideration of practical ideas/solutions that could be developed for dealing with the social exclusion of vulnerable men like those in the research group. A number of the comments from this conversation are recorded below: Community-based men’s groups are probably the forum for exploring some of the issues in that chart. They offer a non-threatening forum for exploring these issues. Otherwise we don’t explore these issues in a gentle way. (Richard) Seek them (men) out, and engage them. (Joe) Also, the ‘isolation’ strikes me…but why do we detach ourselves? If we could develop a public space for exploring a very private agenda you must approach men in a very nonthreatening way. (Richard) It’s about listening and paying attention to each other. (Joe) When you have a problem, it’s easier to walk away from it…the path of least resistance is easier to take…but you need support to take the other path. (Dave) Hopefully it will come out…lots of men don’t know how to connect, or the difference between sympathy and empathy. (Joe) I’ve a big question about building selfesteem… that it’s not just about building up an ego, and when that gets knocked then we go down. It’s about accepting ourselves as we really are…we are flawed! There is another way of coming to see ourselves. (Gerry) We are all flawed, and we have to get back to just being human. (Shay) The research facilitators continued to focus the conversation around specific concrete solutions: Identifying and naming things like shame, is good, and how we move through that is with encouragement, support and empathy from other men. We need to be encouraged to talk about how we feel. We need this at the beginning, in the middle and at the end. Men need this. (Joe) I remember the time I brought a group of ‘drug users’ to the theatre. They were delighted and amazed. We just side-stepped the social expectations that drug addicts don’t go to the theatre. We just went out and did it, and there was a great buzz from them afterwards. (J.P.) We have to pay attention to each other; otherwise we won’t notice what we need to notice. (Joe) We need to share, to form an ETU – an Emotional Trade Union – to come together and join up, and learn about emotions and feelings…a safe space that helps men. Small communitybased men’s groups could make this happen. I don’t know how this would happen practically though! (Richard) It all comes back to supporting each other – to be able to look each other in the eye – women are great at this. (Joe) Richard’s comments from an earlier session, and an intervention by him during this final session, sum up very well the concerns of the men:

I have doubts…Yeah, its brilliant here in the room…now…but I want it to continue to grow and happen. This is one of the strongest groups I’ve ever worked with, and I want something golden to come out of this. We need support for this. I don’t want it to end in a piece of paper. I have a sense of fear and trepidation that MAIN can continue from tonight. I’m worried… we are actually held together by emotional strings and bandages. We need an anchor…a partner, an organisation to anchor us…this needs to be ongoing. What we need to do is set ourselves up first, and then move on to help other men. 7.3 The Way Forward From the continuing conversation around possible interventions in response to the needs of socially-excluded men, a number of critical issues emerged. On the one hand, members of MAIN are willing to reach out to work with other men. On the other, concern was expressed about the need to look after themselves, what one participant referred to as “feeding ourselves”. The latter point was aptly illustrated by Gerry’s comment: It’s very important if we are to work with other men that we have to resource ourselves as a group – maybe go to Glendalough or somewhere, regularly build ourselves up, get in touch with our Celtic roots and spirituality! The facilitators remarked that the type of sharing that had been going on in the research sessions over the last few months had a special quality that seemed to have touched everyone who took part. The quality of this sharing and the willingness to be vulnerable with one another could be seen, in itself, as a type of spirituality. The challenge was to find a balance between mutual support and growth among existing members of MAIN, and the group’s goal of helping other men. As Gerry suggested: We need to alternate between these two things. We need separate meetings for deeper sharing, and business meetings to plan the active work that we do. In terms of consolidating MAIN as a group, participants focused on structural issues such as: clarifying its aims and objectives, ratifying a draft mission statement, finalising standing orders, appointing officers and assigning tasks/responsibilities to them. A key concern was finding a permanent ‘home’ for MAIN – a centrally-located and neutral place where the group can meet regularly. Such a ‘home’ is also essential as a contact point for outreach work with other vulnerable men in the Dublin Inner City area. In terms of concrete suggestions for how to go about contacting and supporting other men, the responses were limited. As an introductory activity to meet with men in the area, Richard proposed holding a series of Big Breakfast events, a method that has been used with some success by the Ballymun Men’s Centre and other men’s groups. Interest was also expressed in setting up a personal mentoring service, whereby members of MAIN would be trained to work on an informal one-to-one basis with individual men in the area. Clearly, much more thought and detailed planning needs to be done before such activities can be initiated. Nevertheless, Joe was clear that the DICP was committed “to continue to support us in this kind of work.”

8 Conclusions and Recommendations

8.1 Participatory Learning and Action (PLA)

Research as an Innovative Model The manner in which this research project was designed and delivered, as a participatory process of in-depth co-inquiry, was integral to the outcomes. From the outset, the aim of the research facilitators was to involve the men in more than a series of technically-competent sessions of information-gathering. Rather, our intention was to create a safe space where vulnerable men might actually experience the research encounter as a form of social inclusion. That the five research evenings succeeded in achieving this aim is evidenced by a selection of the participatory evaluation comments from the men themselves. When asked to name one thing they would take away from the research process, participants wrote: That I am not alone. I now know that there people who respect me and don’t judge me. I know that if I need emotional support that I will receive it. (Dave) [I’m] very grateful for the professional and interactive approach of the facilitators, their generosity, and the honesty of their involvement. (Joe) This is one of the strongest groups I’ve ever worked with and I want something golden to come out of this. We need support for this – I don’t want it to end in a piece of paper. (Richard) To the extent that Richard’s wish (echoed by all the men) is to be granted and that this piece of paper is not the only concrete outcome of our five research evenings together, it is worth noting the value of the research process itself. What strongly worked for these men was the experience of being genuinely listened to in a threat-free environment. This enabled them to be open about their vulnerabilities, the barriers to social inclusion they have encountered, and the breakthroughs they have made. In essence, the research process enabled these men to recognise all the areas of life where they possess in-depth knowledge and the capacity to effect change. It also gave them an opportunity to find their voices. Within that listening framework, even men who were initially tentative about sharing something of their stories gradually gained in confidence and grew as a result. Seeing how men over a short period of time have explained some of their inner feelings, and in some ways their inner demons through the confidence they [gained] just by being part of a group. (J.P.) These last two evenings – it’s improving my confidence. In school I’d get the shite kicked out of me…but here in this group I feel comfortable and I’m getting more and more confident. (Will) I agree with what’s been said. There’s more hope now. When we started out we were restrained, but tonight we were a lot less restrained. Each session gets better. We’re all willing to dance. (Shay) I’ve spent the last two weeks since the last session being fearful about being fearful. But in the last session, I realised something I had missed in the first session and that was great And tonight, I’ve taken another, a big step just being able to talk to you about my fears. (Dave) The fact that something transformative happened for most, if not all, of the men through the research process suggests that similar approaches could be used in future, not only with MAIN, but also with other men’s groups and vulnerable populations in Dublin’s Inner City. While this transformative dimension of the research encounter is somewhat unusual for social science research projects in general, it is quite common and often integral to a well-run Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) process. We are convinced that the means by which socially-excluded groups are invited to become part of research processes must serve to increase their experience of being socially included, rather than furthering greater alienation and isolation. Where participation is genuinely invited, socially-excluded men (and others) can begin to experience a sense of personal and group empowerment.

8.2 Continuing to Build on the Good Work of MAIN

The men who took part in this research are very clear about the significance of participating in MAIN as a means of enhancing their own experience of social inclusion. It is this experiential certitude that gives them the motive power and the vision to nurture, extend and develop the work of MAIN in helping other vulnerable men like themselves. Those who took part in the co-inquiry process are energised to share what they have achieved. They are ready and willing to work with partner agencies, organisations and groups to help shape forms of service provision that address the key needs of vulnerable men in Inner City Dublin. As one of the participants – Richard – suggests, “we must approach men in a very non-threatening way” in order to develop “a public space for exploring a private agenda”.

8.3 Key Recommendations

The review of national and international literature in Chapter 3 highlighted seven key elements of best practice when working with socially-excluded men. Interventions are likely to succeed when they: l involve an outreach dimension, l organise introductory activities, l create a threat-free and non-competitive environment, l develop relationships based on mutual respect and trust, l relate the real-life context of participants, l inspire personal agency, and l network with other statutory and voluntary bodies. In order to incorporate these guidelines in advancing the proposals arising from this research, we recommend the following:

• A. Support MAIN to continue to come together as a group. With great commitment, the members of MAIN have given selflessly of their time and expertise. It is our view that support for the group should now be put on a more structured footing if that work is to develop and grow. Such structured support would require securing sufficient funding to assist the men to “feed” themselves, and build upon the capacities and abilities they already possess. The nature of such feeding would need to be established by the men themselves, in collaboration with relevant partner organisations. Suggestions have already been made by the group as to how MAIN might consolidate their strengths (See Section 7.2) At the final session, the question was asked: “Can we facilitate ourselves when Ed and Tom leave?” The question depends, to some extent, on whether MAIN intends to use PLA-style participatory strategies as part of their ongoing work. If MAIN intends to continue with this participatory approach, then developing a training programme tailored to the specific needs of the membership of MAIN is possible and in our view, desirable.
• B. Foster Outreach Work through One-to-One Mentoring Attention ought to be paid to the desire of some members to develop their ability to offer an outreach service to other vulnerable men in the form of one-toone mentoring. Again, funding would need to be secured in this regard, particularly in terms of creating opportunities for further training and on-going support/ supervision. Such training might include elements of life-coaching, mentoring or other forms of creative listening and talking therapies. A case can also be made for employing one or some of the key members of MAIN in order to strengthen and develop the ability of MAIN to offer innovative services to Inner City men experiencing social exclusion. The work of MAIN would progress and benefit greatly if a structured role or roles could be created in the form of a ‘coordinator’ or ‘outreach worker(s)’ from within the ranks of MAIN. These workers could be engaged on a contract basis, either full-time or part-time, or possibly through a Community Employment Scheme. Some further training should be considered here also and MAIN members need to be involved in identifying what form this should take.
• C. Secure a ‘Home’ for MAIN A key concern of the group was whether they will continue to have a place to meet in the future. Because social exclusion is often characterised by homelessness, it seems to us that MAIN would benefit greatly by having a secure ‘home’ to continue their important work. D. DICP in Partnership with MAIN Develop an Innovative Pilot Model of Service-User-led Provision As noted above, DICP wishes to generate tailor-made pilot services and models of delivery to address the diverse needs of its clientele. We believe that the work of MAIN fulfils these criteria. A case can be made for innovative and participative research processes, like the one used during this research, to become an integral part of “innovative creative and experimental service delivery models” like that offered by MAIN. Service users are ‘consultation weary’. Many service providers have yet to genuinely engage with service users in the sense that this implies developing a longer-term relationship of trust, involvement and coresponsibility. What MAIN offers the men with whom they work is that longer-term relationship. In this they are already innovating and have the potential to construct a model of delivery that is ‘cutting edge’. MAIN has begun the process whereby service users can become active agents and partners in the development of more user-driven services. We believe that MAIN is an appropriate partner for DICP in further developing this innovation as a pilot model of such provision. Once established, this model of user-led provision would benefit greatly from engagement with relevant stakeholders in an ongoing process of participatory monitoring and evaluation.

APPENDIX A: Data on Research Group

At the end of the final research session, a questionnaire cum evaluation form was distributed to the participants present. Unfortunately, since this session had to be scheduled at the last minute to allow additional time for the research, a number of the men were unable to attend. Subsequently, attempts were made to obtain the information by telephone, but it was not possible to make contact with all the outstanding participants. In the end, data was obtained on eleven of the fourteen men who took part in one or more research sessions. Data from the 2002 Census for Dublin Inner City and for Ireland as a whole is provided for comparison. TABLE A.1 - Age of Men in Research Group compared with Males (15 years and over) TABLE A.2 - Educational Attainment of Men in Research Group compared with Males (15 +) Number of As Percent of Census 2002 Census 2002 Age Bands Responses Respondents Dublin Inner City Ireland as Whole 0 - 34 years 0 0.0% 56.3% 41.7% 35 - 39 years 2 18.2% 8.5% 9.5% 40 - 44 years 1 9.1% 6.8% 8.9% 45 - 49 years 2 18.2% 5.6% 8.2% 50 - 54 years 2 18.2% 5.2% 7.7% 55 - 59 years 2 18.2% 4.4% 6.6% 60 - 64 years 0 0.0% 3.8% 5.1% 60 years and over 2 18.2% 9.4% 12.4% TOTALS 11 100% 100% 100% Highest Level of Number of As Percent of Census 2002 Census 2002 Education completed Responses Respondents Dublin Inner City Ireland as Whole - No Formal Education 1 9.1% 0.9% 0.6% - Primary School only 1 9.1% 21.3% 22.6% - Junior Secondary School 0 0.0% 15.9% 23.7% - Senior Secondary School 1 9.1% 17.2% 21.6% - Trade/Vocational Certificate 2 18.2% 5.0% 6.8% - Non-Degree Qualification 1 9.1% 12.8% 11.8% - Bachelor’s Degree 2 18.2% 16.3% 8.1% - Post-Graduate Study 3 27.3% 10.7% 4.8% TOTALS 11 100% 100.1% 100% TABLE A.4 - Household Composition of Men in Research Group compared with all persons Number of As Percent of Census 2002 Census 2002 Category Responses Respondents Dublin Inner City Ireland as Whole - Living Alone 5 45.5% 16.0% 7.3% Sharing accommodation with: - Wife 1 9.1% 15.9% 23.7% - Partner 1 9.1% 17.2% 21.6% - Child of Children 0 0.0% 5.0% 6.8% - Mother or Father 3 27.3% 12.8% 11.8% - Other Family Member(s) Relation(s) 1 9.1% 16.3% 8.1% - Other Person(s) 0 0.0% 10.7% 4.8% TOTALS 11 100% * * TABLE A.3 - Educational Status of Men in Research Group compared with Males (15 +) Number of As Percent of Census 2002 Census 2002 Category Responses Respondents Dublin Inner City Ireland as Whole - At Work (for pay) 4 36.4% 70.1% 73.0% - Primary School only 2 18.2% 13.2% 7.6% - Junior Secondary School 3 27.3% 5.4% 5.1% - Senior Secondary School 2 18.2% 11.2% 14.3% TOTALS 11 100% 100% 100% Note: * These columns do not add up to 100% because the census categories differ from those used in Participant Questionnaire.

APPENDIX B: Small Area Population Statistics

In an attempt to quantify the scale of social exclusion for men in the area, the research consultants gained access to the Small Area Population Statistics (SAPS) from the 2002 census for the thirty-nine District Electoral Divisions (DEDs) that comprise Dublin Inner City. These provide information on several key demographic characteristics of the adult male population, along with certain indicators of social exclusion. Since such statistics are aggregated at DED level, it is not possible to examine the impact of a combination of factors, except with a limited number of variables. In order to compare the Inner City area with the rest of Dublin City and with Ireland as a whole, data on the latter were also obtained. B.1 Age At the time the census was taken in 2002, there were over a third more boys and men living in the DIC area than those of the opposite sex. A profile of males by age is shown in Chart B.1 below, with separate bars for Dublin Inner City (blue) and the country as a whole (green). The national picture shows a gentle fall and rise in the relative percentages of males with age, peaking among 20-24 year-olds and subsequently tapering towards the baseline in older age groups. However, this population bulge is much more pronounced in the Inner City. Whereas the proportion of boys and older men is lower in Dublin’s Inner City than in the country as a whole, the percentage of males from 20-34 years of age is up to twice that in the wider population. We can infer from this that young men from other parts of the country are drawn to live in the centre of the nation’s capital city by a variety of factors, including employment opportunities, further education or training, entertainment options, the availability of drugs and drugs treatment services, and hostels for the homeless. Chart B.1 - Males by Age Percentage of All Males Age Groups Dublin Inner City Ireland as a Whole 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85+

B.2 Marital Status

Information was also obtained about the marital status of respondents, and the data for males fifteen years of age and older is summarised in Chart B.2 below: Whereas cohabiting couples were recorded separately in the data on household composition, this was not the case in relation to marital status. Presumably, those who had previously been married and who were living with another partner at the time of the 2002 census were counted as either ‘separated’ or ‘married’ depending on their inclination when responding to this question. Caution should therefore be exercised in interpreting these statistics. Nevertheless, almost three out of every four men in Dublin’s Inner City were not in a marital relationship (i.e. either single, separated or widower) compared to only two out of four in the country as a whole.

B.3 Household Composition

The census form also included a question about the relationships between people living in private households, a category that excludes communal establishments such as hotels, hostels, hospitals, boarding schools and military barracks. The data obtained on living circumstances for both males and females of all ages is summarised in Table B.3 at right. The table highlights some distinctive features of the population in the Inner City area. Whereas over half of all people in Ireland lived in a traditional nuclear family (husband, wife and children), fewer than one in five persons in Dublin’s Inner City lived in such households. On the other hand, the proportion of people living in single- person households in the DIC area was twice the national average. In addition, those in the Inner City were five times more likely to share accommodation with unrelated persons than those living elsewhere in the country, a reflection of the relatively large number of rented flats in the area of Dublin between the canals. Moreover, since this data refers only to private households, it does not account for those staying in hostels for the homeless in the city centre, where males significantly outnumber females. For this reason, the percentage of men living in relative social isolation was probably higher than shown in Table B.3. On census night in 2002, there were 7412 men (twenty-five years of age or older) recorded as living on their own in Dublin’s Inner City. However, when we focus on middle-age males – those between twenty-five and fifty-four years of age – there were significant differences between the DIC area and Ireland as a whole, as can be seen in Chart B.4 at left. The proportion of Inner City males in this age group living on their own was more than twice the national average

B.4 Educational Attainment

As noted in Chapter 3, educational attainment is an important indicator of the potential for social exclusion. SAPS data was therefore obtained about the highest level of education completed among males 15 years of age and older. Although the census form included up to thirteen different options for answering this question, these have been aggregated into four categories as shown in Chart B.5 at right. Levels of education for males resident in the DIC area are comparable to those for Irish men generally, though Inner City men tend to be better educated. Almost five out of every eight men in Dublin’s Inner City had completed senior secondary school or higher, while just over four out of eight held comparable qualifications on a national level. Again, this probably reflects an in-migration of more highly qualified individuals from other parts of the country.

Chart B.2 - Males (15+ years of age) by Marital Status Dublin Inner City Ireland as a whole Separated 6% Widower 2% Separated 4% Single 66% Married 26% Widower 2% Single 46% Married 48% TABLE B.3 - Persons by Household Composition Dublin Dublin Ireland City Inner City Single Person 7.3% 11.2% 16.0% Husband + Wife 9.0% 8.2% 6.4% Cohabiting Couple 2.2% 3.6% 6.8% Husband + Wife + Children 51.8% 34.9% 17.9% Cohabiting Couple + Children 2.7% 2.4% 2.4% Father + Children 1.4% 1.4% 1.2% Mother + Children 8.2% 10.2% 11.8% Couple + Others 1.5% 2.2% 3.0% Couple + Children + Others 6.5% 6.8% 4.4% Father + Children + Others 0.4% 0.6% 0.5% Mother + Children + Others 1.7% 3.0% 3.3% Two or more Family Units 0.9% 0.9% 0.6% Non-Family Households + Relations 2.5% 4.4% 6.4% Two or more Persons Not Related 4.0% 10.2% 19.2% TOTAL PERSONS 100.0% 100% 100%

Chart B.2 - Males (15+ years of age) by Level of Education Dublin Inner City Ireland as a whole No Formal Education 1% Primary Education Only 21% No Formal Education 1% Primary Education Only 23% Lower Secondary Upper Only 16% Secondary or Above 62% Lower Secondary Upper Only 24% Secondary or Above 52% Chart B.4 - Living Circumstances of Middle-Age Males (25 - 54 years of age) Dublin Inner City Ireland as a whole Living Alone 18% Living Alone 8% Living with Others 82% Living with Others 92%

B.5 Employment Status

The employment status of males fifteen years of age and older at the time of the census in 2002 is summarised in the table below. Compared with the picture for the country as a whole, men living in Dublin’s Inner City were slightly less likely to be employed, either because they were still in full-time education, looking for their first job or out of work. As noted in Section B.1 above, older men form a smaller proportion of the population in the city centre than in other parts of the country, and this is reflected in the relatively low percentage of retired males shown in Table B.6. When data on the employment status of males fifteen years of age and older is combined with that for educational attainment a clear pattern emerges. Not surprisingly, those with higher levels of education were more likely to be in work. For example, half of all Inner City men who had not completed primary school were unemployed or still seeking their first job at the time the census was taken in 2002. As can be seen in Chart B.7, males who had completed junior secondary education or less were almost four times more likely to be out of work than those with higher levels of educational attainment.

B.6 Occupation

All persons aged 15 years of age and over in the labour force are classified by the type of work they perform, irrespective of the location or nature of the employer’s business. Those who were unemployed at the time of the census were assigned an occupation on the basis of the job they held most recently. Data for 2002 is summarised in Chart B.8 on the following page. It comes as no surprise that there were fewer farmers and agricultural workers in the Inner City than in other parts of the country. However, the higher percentages recorded for clerical workers; sales and commercial workers; and professional, technical and health workers in the DIC area are noteworthy. One possible explanation relates to the concentration of corporate offices, sales outlets and hospitals in the city centre. Despite the number of government departments located in the area bounded by Dublin’s canals, it is surprising that the percentage of male residents listing this as their occupation is lower than in other parts of the country.

Chart B.7 - Dublin Inner City Males (15-64 years) by Education & Employment Status Lower Secondary Education or Less Upper Secondary Education or Higher Seeking 1st Job 2% Unemployed 27% At work 71% Seeking 1st Job 2% Unemployed 7% At work 92% TABLE B.6 - Males (15+) by Employment Status Dublin Dublin Status Ireland City Inner City At Work 63.3% 61.2% 59.2% 1st Job Seeker 0.8% 1.0% 1.4% Unemployed 5.8% 7.2% 9.8% Student 10.9% 10.6% 11.9% Home Duties 1.4% 1.3% 1.1% Retired 12.4% 13.0% 9.5% Unable to Work 4.4% 4.1% 4.6% Other 1.0% 1.6% 2.6% TOTAL PERSONS 100.0% 100% 100%

B.7 Socio-Economic Group The final piece of census data that can provide an indicator of social exclusion for males in the Dublin Inner City area is socioeconomic group (SEG). A man’s SEG is largely determined by his principal occupation combined with Social Class categories, which reflect qualifications and status within the workplace. Dependents, whether adults or children, are classified in accordance with the SEG for the breadwinner in the household. Data on the SEG classification for all males in the DIC area is presented in Chart B.9 below, along with comparable data for Ireland as a whole. To a large extent, this data mirrors that on Occupations presented above. Perhaps the most salient feature of Chart B.9 is the high percentage of males for whom the SEG was not known, presumably because this question was left unanswered when the census forms were filled in.

Chart B.8 - Males (15+ years) by Occupation Percentage of All Males Occupational Categories Dublin Inner City Ireland as a Whole 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Farmers Other Agricultural Manufacturing Building & Construction Clerical Administrative & Government Communication & Transport Sales & Commerce Professional, Technical & Health Service Industries Other (including ‘not stated’) Chart B.9 - Males (15+ years) by Socio-Economic Group Percentage of All Males Socio-Economic Group Dublin Inner City Ireland as a Whole 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Employer & Manager Higher Professional Lower Professional Non-Manual Manual Skilled Semi-Skilled Unskilled Own Account Worker Farmer Agricultural Worker SEG not known

Terms of Reference Background Men Alone In No-mans Land (M.A.I.N) is a response by a number of men to what they feel is the absence of social, psychological and solidarity networks for men who for various reasons including, Unemployment, Welfare dependency, Addition, Mental and Physical Health issues and Homelessness, marriage and relationship breakdown, are experiencing helplessness, isolation, alienation and hopelessness. They have found themselves separated from family community and the wider society and excluded from the active and productive participation in ‘mainstream’ society. These men can feel extremely vulnerable and lack the capabilities to identify the means to overcome their social and economic exclusion. Well documented research has shown that cultural factors in relation to the socialisation of boys/men create barriers to vulnerable men presenting themselves to seek help and social support in times of trouble. This highlights the old stereotype of the ‘tough lonely man who works hard and suffers in silence’. This can lead to multidimensional exclusions. The Steering Group of M.A.I.N which includes men who have experienced some of the issues mentioned above have decided to explore ways in which the community and society can create social, economic and cultural space in which vulnerable males can present themselves to seek help and begin the journey back to becoming active and productive members of their community. Objectives of the Study The current proposal is to carryout a qualitative and quantitative study building on the current body of practical and academic work in this area to identify practical locally based and culturally appropriate solutions that will help inner city men experiencing social exclusion to overcome barriers and attitudes that prevent them from seeking help to tackle their social exclusion. To this end, the study should provide:

• 1. A review of available recent empirical (quantitative and qualitative) research studies in Ireland (and Dublin in particular) to assess the numbers of men in this category and analyse the barriers that prevent the social inclusion of vulnerable males in an urban setting.
• 2. Identify the current agency, interagency, voluntary and community supports to socially excluded men in Dublin’s inner city.
• 3. Identify a number of case studies either national or international of ‘good practice’ projects that have been successful in overcoming barriers to the social inclusion of vulnerable males.
• 4. Through fieldwork (survey and or focus groups) with the target group, identify a practical, appropriate and participatory approach to the social inclusion of vulnerable men that could be developed by M.A.I.N and piloted in Dublin’s inner city. Study Methodology It is expected that the study will:
  • 1. From an review of existing work contain a qualitative and statistical analysis on the current barriers to male social inclusion;
  • 2. Contain ‘best practice’ case studies on practical applications to overcoming male exclusion that could be adopted to support the social inclusion of men in Dublin’s inner city
  • 3. Show a critical analysis of the in-depth consultative process and field work with the target group as to the practical solutions they would support to help overcome their social exclusion.
  • 4. Recommend a possible and appropriate solution based initiative that could be piloted in Dublin’s inner city.

APPENDIX C: Terms of Reference Men Alone In No-mans Land (M.A.I.N) Research study to Identify Practical Approaches to Overcoming the Social and Economic Exclusion of Men in Dublin’s Inner City

Budget A total budget of E12,000 has been secured for the study from the Dublin Inner City Partnership and Dublin City Council. Time Scale The study should be completed at the latest by Mid-February 2007. Tender Proposals Proposals from suitable consultants are invited that will address the following issues: Methodology The methodology adopted must be scientific and robust with regards design, methodology and analysis. Study Report The findings of the study shall be presented in a well written report. Time Scale The proposal should set out the start date and the time scale for completing the work. Fee The proposal should clearly set out an all in fixed fee for all work involved in the Audit. Experience The proposal should clearly set out experience in carrying out similar research and the CVs of the people involved in carrying out the study. Closing Date for receipt of proposals from interested parties is Friday 6th October 2006. Please forward tender proposal to: Patrick Gates Community Regeneration Officer Dublin Inner City Partnership Equity House 16-17 Ormond Quay Dublin 7

APPENDIX D:

D.1 Research Process: Session One Structure w Meeting together for the first time

• Building rapport
• Group formation
• Ice breaker exercise
• Introduction to the research, and the participatory research process.
• Historical Profiling: Sharing of Life Journeys and in-depth focus group discussion.
• Participatory co-evaluation.

Rationale

From the outset we wished to offer participants an opportunity to experience themselves as ‘experts’, and to begin to build up relationships of trust among the group and between the group and research facilitators. We also expected that the life journey material would yield high quality and information-rich data about the trajectories these men’s lives had taken, and material of a contextual and ‘cultural’ nature.

Findings

The data arising from this session was used in Chapters 5, 6 and 7.

D.2 Research Process: Session Two Structure

• Concluding life journeys
• Brainstorming, and Focus Group discussion
• Identifying, naming and sharing barriers to social inclusion experienced by men
• Ongoing participatory co-evaluation Rationale

To focus participants specifically on those times related to their life journeys where they experienced barriers to social inclusion or blockages to accessing services and supports. To continue to build rapport and support among themselves as a group of men sharing on sensitive personal issues. Findings The findings arising from this session form the basis for Chapter 5.

D.3 Research Process: Session Three

Structure w Completing sharing of barriers w Focus Group discussion w Card-Sort technique. w Grouping barriers into categories meaningful to the men themselves. w Co-analysis of barrier material w Ongoing participatory co-evaluation Rationale To offer participants an opportunity to discuss together in an in-depth way the type and nature of the barriers to social inclusion they encountered throughout their lives. To have men categorise the barriers generated in a way meaningful to themselves. To begin a process of reflective co-analysis on this material. Findings The findings arising from this session form the basis for Chapter 5.

D.4 Research Process: Session Four

Structure Identifying, writing up and sharing moments and instances of breakthrough into greater social inclusion. Feedback from research facilitators on proposed groupings of barriers from Session Three. Direct Ranking exercise of groups of barriers. Ongoing participatory co-evaluation. Rationale Partly as a corrective to the exclusive focus on barriers during the previous sessions, we thought it necessary and useful to invite the men to also consider those moments and instances in their life journeys where they may have experienced breakthroughs towards greater social inclusion: an opportunity to clarify the factors that enable men to get past barriers that prevent them from accessing support. Initial Findings Results of the categorising and ranking of barriers are reported in Chapter 5. The findings with regard to breakthroughs are the basis for Chapter 6. Detailed Outline of Research Sessions

D.5 Research Process: Session Five Final Session

Structure

• Researchers feed back the result of their metaanalysis on barriers and breakthroughs in a Matrix format for discussion.
• Researchers facilitate a Focus Group discussion on culturally appropriate interventions.
• Final participatory co-evaluation Rationale To offer the participating men an opportunity to consider and discuss together the outcome of our metaanalysis, and to modify or amend where necessary. Using the meta-analysis matrix to identify practical, locally-based and culturally appropriate solutions that will help Inner City men experiencing social exclusion to overcome barriers and attitudes that prevent them from seeking help to tackle their social exclusion. Initial Findings The principal findings of this session are reported in Chapter 7. In addition, detailed results of the Brainstorming Session are reported below: Final Chart-work on Solutions The research facilitators conducted a Brainstorming Exercise with the men on culturally appropriate solutions and generated five charts: Chart One To generate the first chart, we asked the following question: “What would help you and other men like you, break through these barriers and move forward in your lives?” Coming together as a group of men:
• [where it is] safe to be by yourself
• [where we can] speak about how we feel
• [where we are] engaged in doing something [for ourselves and other men like us]
• [where we can] get in touch with the spiritual
• [where we have the] time and space to be ourselves
• [and where we can continue] telling our stories. This is most important.
• Taking others to the theatre [see J.P.’s comment in Chapter 7] where sometimes it is good to offer vulnerable men a positive and unusual event outside their ‘normal’ experience.
• Pay attention to each other. Chart Two Here we asked the men to consider ‘specific interventions’.
• [Form an ] E.T.U.M. (Emotional Trade Union Movement). This was a very honest suggestion from Richard, and found full support from other men. As mentioned before it would involve men coming together to join up, and learn about emotions and feelings. Providing a safe space that would help men. Small community-based men’s groups could make this happen. Though how ‘we’ could do this practically is still unclear.
• [Form] small, community-based men’s groups
• [By] engaging/paying attention/watching [other vulnerable men]. [Just] look and you will see
• [By establishing] one-to-one contacts
• [and] avoid competition

Chart Three This chart focused on practical things that the participants themselves could do. w [holding] Big Breakfasts MAIN w Core Group (Joe, JP, Richard, Dave, Will, Aengus) w [clarify] aims and objectives w [ratify] mission statement w [finalise] standing orders w appoint tasks/responsibilities to people w complete the research w pay attention to ourselves as a group – feed ourselves. Not just be task or outreach focused. Chart Four This was a spill-over from Chart Three: w [Develop, encourage and support ] Mentoring [among MAIN members, and between MAIN members and other vulnerable men. This would require creating training opportunities] Chart Five This chart focused on questions among the group about going forward from where they found themselves at that moment. Concerns surfaced around the following points: Can we facilitate ourselves when Ed & Tom leave? [We need to] have committee meetings. Also have meetings where we continue to share our stories, and maybe use this to complete our mission statement. Get a place where we can meet regularly.

Bibliography

ABU-LUGHOD, Lila. 1991. ‘Writing Against Culture’, Chapter 8 in Richard G. Fox (ed.), Recapturing Anthropology: Working in the present. Santa Fe, New Mexico: School of American Research Press: 137-162.

BEGLEY, Mary; Derek CHAMBERS; Paul CORCORAN & Jonathan GALLAGHER. c. 2003. The Male Perspective: Young men’s outlook on life. Dublin: Bord Sláinte, Suicide Prevention Office. Electronic document accessed on 23/05/2007 at: <http://www.nosp.ie/male_perspective.pdf>

BRADY, Berni. March/April 2007. ‘Ireland: Gender Equality, Learning and Work’. EN Infonet, No. 2, 2007. Electronic document accessed on 21/05/2007 at: <http://www.infonetae. net/infoletter_2-07en.doc>

CHAMBERS, Robert. 1997. Whose Reality Counts? Putting the First Last. London. Intermediate Technologies Publications.

CHAMBERS, Robert. 1994c. Participatory Rural Appraisal: Challenges, Potential and Paradigm. World Development: 22 (10): 1437-54.

CLARE, Anthony. 2000. On Men: Masculinity in Crisis. London: Chatto & Windus.

CLEARY, Anne; Maria CORBETT; Miriam GALVIN & Joy WALL. 2004. Young Men on the Margins. Dublin: Katharine Howard Foundation.

COMBAT POVERTY AGENCY. No date [c. 2006]. Glossary of Poverty and Social Inclusion Terms. Electronic document accessed on 08/05/2007 at: <http://www.cpa.ie/povertyinireland/ glossary.htm#mainpage>

________. Summer 2004. Poverty in Ireland – The Facts: 2001. Dublin: CPA, Bulletin No. 16. Electronic document accessed on 17/05/2007 at <http://www.cpa.ie/publications /povertybriefings/Briefing16_PovertyInIreland- 2001Data_2004.pdf>

CONNELL, R. W. 2000. The Men and The Boys. Cambridge: Polity Press.

_________. 1995. Masculinities. Cambridge & Oxford: Polity Press.

CONNOLLY, Johnny. 2006. Overview: Drugs and crime in Ireland, No. 3. Dublin: Health Research Board, Drug Misuse Division. Electronic document accessed on 23/05/2007 at: <http://www.hrb.ie/storage/publications/hrbpublications/drugmisuse/ Drugs_and_crime_in_Ireland-Overview_3.pdf>

CORRIDAN, Mary. 2002. Moving from the Margins: A study of male participation in adult literacy education. Dublin: Dublin Adult Learning Centre.

CROSS, Kathryn Patricia. 1981. Adults as Learners: Increasing participation and facilitating learning. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.

DALY, Antoinette & Dermot WALSH, with Yvonne Dunne, Deirdre Hallissey & Fiona Bannon. 2006. Irish Psychiatric Units and Hospitals Census 2006. Dublin: Health Research Board, Mental Health Research Division. Electronic document accessed on 23/05/2007 at: <http://www.hrb.ie/storage/publications/hrbpublications/ mentalhealth/ Census2006.pdf>

DE BRÚN, Tomas. 2000. Masculinity and Irishness: Emerging Identities, Diverging Trajectories. Unpublished M.Phil. dissertation. Trinity College, University of Dublin.

DUBLIN INNER CITY PARTNERSHIP. 2007. Policy Position Paper: On the Future Role of the DICP. Electronic document, accessed throughout May-June 2007 at: <http://www. dicp.ie/ pdfs/policy%20position%20paper%20consultation%20draft%2 0jan07.doc>

DUBLIN SIMON COMMUNITY. No date. Facts on Homelessness. Electronic document accessed on 22/05/2007 at: <http://www.dubsimon.ie/homelessfacts/factsonhomeless.htm >

DURKHEIM, Emile. 1952. Suicide: A study in sociology. London. Routledge, Keegan Paul.

Du VIVIER, Edward F. (editor). 2006. ‘Exploring the Myths about Men’s Community Education’. Explore, quarterly magazine of Aontas – the National Association for Adult Education (Ireland), 3: 25-26.

________. 1994. Participation in Adult Basic Education: An exploratory study of the influence of gender and life cycle phases. Unpublished M.Ed. dissertation, Trinity College, University of Dublin.

________. 1992. Learning to Be Literate: A study of students’ perceptions of the goals and outcomes of adult literacy tuition. Dublin: Dublin Literacy Scheme.

________; Mick COX & Terry McMANUS. 2006. Support, Learning & Action for MEN in Tallaght West: An Cosán, a case study. PowerPoint presentation delivered to a workshop organised by Draiocht, the community development support agency, in Dublin on 30th March 2006.

EUSTACE, Anne & Ann CLARKE. No date [c.2006]. No title [Evaluation of Local Development Social Inclusion Programme, Services for the Unemployed Measure]. Dublin: Pobal. Electronic document accessed on 20/05/2007 at: <http://216.239.59.104/ search?q=cache:f4snoAkfQosJ:www.pobal.ie/media/ImpactreportonServicesfortheUnemployed06. pdf+%22socially+excluded+ men%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=31&gl=ie>

FÁS (Industrial Training Authority of Ireland). [2004]. Annual Report & Financial Statement 2003. Electronic document accessed on 19/05/2007 at <http://www.fas.ie/en/ PubDocs/AnnualReports/ ANNUAL_REPORT03/appendices3.htm>

FERGUSON, Harry. July 2001. Ireland National Report on Law and Policy Addressing Men’s Practices: Workpackage 3. EU FP5 Thematic Network: The Social Problem and Societal Problematisation of Men and Masculinities. Electronic document accessed on 22/05/2007 at: <http://www.cromenet.org/crome/crome.nsf/resources/ 85E36DD4E02B788EC2256B6C003B3DD1/$file/wp3+Ireland.do c>

FERGUSON, Harry; Jeff HEARN; Øystein Gullvåg HOLTER; Lars JALMERT; Michael KIMMEL; James LANG & Robert MORRELL. [no date, c. 2005]. Ending Gender-Based Violence: A call for global action to involve men, a summary of research. Electronic document accessed on 20/05/2007 at <http://www.sida.se/shared/jsp/download.jsp?f=SVI34602.pdf &a=3108>

FOUCAULT, Michel. 1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977, edited by Colin Gordon, translated by C. Gordon, Leo Marshall, John Mepham & Kate Soper. Brighton, Sussex, UK: The Harvester Press.

GILLIGAN, Carol. 1982. In a Different Voice. Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press.

GORBY, Shirley; Selina McCOY & Dorothy WATSON. November 2005. 2004 Annual School Leavers’s Survey of 2002/2003 Leavers. Dublin: Gov’t of Ireland, Department of Education & Science. Electronic document accessed on 17/05/2007 at <http://www.entemp.ie/trade/marketaccess/singlemarket/06se rv152.pdf>

HEARN, Jeff et al. October 2004. The Social Problem of Men, Volume 2 – Final Report of Project HPSE-CT1999-00008, EU Research on Social Sciences and Humanities, Directorate-General for Research (EUR21104). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Electronic document accessed on 20/05/2007 at <http://improvingser. jrc.it/default/page.gx?_app.page=entity.html& _app.action=entity&_entity.object=TSER—— 000000000000121D&_entity.name=II>

HOMELESS AGENCY (Ireland). May 2006. Counted in 2005: A period assessment from a weeklong survey of people experiencing homelessness in Dublin including: accident and emergency departments, people sleeping rough, emergency accommodation, Local Authority homeless lists, food and day services and street outreach services. Electronic document accessed on 08/06/2007 at: <http://www.homelessagency.ie/downloads/publications/122.p df>

________. No date [c. 2003]. Facts about Homelessness. Electronic document accessed on 22/05/2007 at: <http://www.homelessagency.ie/about_homelessness/scale.ht ml>

HOPE, Anne & Sally TIMMEL. 2003 [1984, 1995]. Training for Transformation: A handbook for community workers. London: ITDG (Intermediate Technology Development Group) Publishing.

INGLIS, Tom; Kay BAILEY & Christine MURRAY. 1993. Liberating Learning: A report on day-time education groups. Dublin: Aontas.

________ & Maureen BASSETT. 1988. Live and Learn: Daytime adult education in Coolock, Dublin. Dublin: Aontas. IRELAND, Government of. 1997. Sharing in Progress – National Anti-Poverty Strategy. Dublin: Stationery Office.

________, CENTRAL STATISTICS OFFICE. 2007. Labour Market: Principal Statistics. Electronic document accessed on 20/05/2007 at <http://www.cso.ie/statistics/sasunemprates.htm>

________, CENTRAL STATISTICS OFFICE. 17 November 2006. Live Register Age by Duration, October 2006. Dublin: CSO. Electronic document accessed on 22/05/2007 at: <http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/labour_ market/current/lrabda.pdf>

________, CENTRAL STATISTICS OFFICE. August 2003. Census 2002, Volume 3: Household Composition and Family Units. Dublin: Stationery Office. Electronic document accessed on 22/05/2007 at: <http://www.cso.ie/census/documents/vol3_t10_18.pdf>

________, Department of Education & Science. 31 October 2006. Back to Education Initiative (BTEI), Part-Time Programmes: Guidelines for the Community Strand. Electronic document accessed on 22/05/2007 at: <http://www.education. ie/ servlet/blobservlet/btei_guidelines_strand_community.doc>

________, Department of Education & Science. c. 2004. Education Equality Initiative, Phase I: Policy and Practice Lessons. Electronic document accessed on 22/05/2007 at: <http://www.education.ie/servlet/blobservlet/eei_phase1_book let4.doc>

________, Department of Education & Science. July 2000. Learning for Life: White Paper on Adult Education. Dublin: Stationery Office.

________, Department of Justice, Equality & Law Reform (DJELR). No date [c. 2006]. National Women’s Strategy, 2007-2016. Dublin: DJELR. Electronic document accessed on 22/05/2007 at: <http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:FqGk- OG0YSMJ:www.justice.ie/80256E010039C5AF/vWeb/flDOJA72F H3Y-en/%24File/NWS2007-2016en.doc+%22adult+education% 22,+%2B%22 disadvantaged+men%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=60&gl=ie>

________, Department of Social & Family Affairs, Office for Social Inclusion (DSFA-OSI). [2007]. What is Poverty? Electronic document accessed on 20/05/2007 at <http://www.socialinclusion.ie/poverty.html#whatare>

________, Department of Social Welfare. June 1998. Review of Expenditure Programmes: Schemes of Grants for Locally- Based Women’s Groups and for Locally-Based Men’s Groups (Now part of amalgamated scheme of Grants for Locally- Based Community and Family Support Groups). Electronic document accessed on 22/05/2007 at: <http://www.welfare.ie/publications/exp_rev/misc_grants.pdf>

________, Houses of the Oireachtas, Joint Committee on Health & Children. July 2006. The High Level of Suicide in Irish Society, Seventh Report of the Committee. Electronic document accessed on 23/05/2007 at: <http://www.nosp.ie/oireachtas_report.pdf>

JONES, Sue. 1985. ‘Depth Interviewing’ in Walker, Robert L. (ed.) Applied Qualitative Research. Aldershot: Gower.

KAVANAGH, Maureen. Autumn 2006. ‘Conclusion – We Need to Listen to the Evidence’. Explore, Issue 4. Dublin: Aontas. ________. Spring 2005. Targeting Hard to Reach Groups. Unpublished report of Regional Meetings of the Community Education Facilitator’s Training and Support Programme. Dublin: Aontas.

KELLEHER, Cecily et al. April 2003. The National Health and Lifestyle Surveys: Results of SLÁN [Survey of Lifestyle, Attitudes and Nutrition] and HBSC [Health Behaviour in School- Aged Children]. Dublin: Department of Health and Children, Health Promotion Unit. Electronic document accessed on 23/05/2007 at: <http://www.healthpromotion.ie/uploaded_docs/Slan03(PDF). pdf>

KIMMEL, Michael S. 1994. ‘Masculinity and Homophobia: Fear, shame and silence in the construction of gender identity’. Chapter 7 in Brod, Harry & Michael Kaufman (eds.), Theorizing Masculinities. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE.

LEVINE, Kenneth. 1987 [1986]. The Social Context of Literacy. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

LONG, J.; E. LYNN & F. Kelly. 2005. Occasional Paper No. 17: Trends in Treated Problem Drug Use in Ireland, 1998 to 2002. Dublin: Health Research Board, Drug Misuse Research Division. Electronic document accessed on 23/05/2007 at: <http://www.hrb.ie/storage/publications/hrbpublications/drugmisuse/ op17.pdf>

________; E. LYNN & J. KEATING. 2005. Drug-related deaths in Ireland, 1990–2002. Overview 1. Dublin: Health Research Board, Drug Misuse Research Division. Electronic document accessed on 23/05/2007 at: <http://www.hrb.ie/storage/publications/ hrbpublications/drugmisuse/drug_related_deaths_ireland. pdf>

MAYKUT, Pamela & Richard MOREHOUSE. 1994. Beginning Qualitative Research: A philosophic and practical guide. London: Falmer.

McCAFFERY, Juliet. 1985. ‘Women in Literacy and Adult Basic Education: Barriers to Access’, in Hughes, Mary & Mary Kennedy (eds.), New Futures: Changing women’s education. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul: 62-69.

McGIVNEY, Veronica. 1999. Excluded Men: Men who are missing from education and training. Leicester: National Institute for Adult and Continuing Education (England and Wales).

McCORMACK, Philip & A. Jamie SARIS. No date. ‘Gender and Social Exclusion in Cherry Orchard’. Unpublished manuscript.

McKEOWN, Kieran; Harry FERGUSON; & Dermot ROONEY. [1998]. Changing Fathers? Fatherhood and family life in modern Ireland. Cork: The Collins Press.

MILES, M.B. & A.M. HUBERMAN. 1984. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Newbury Park. C.A. Sage.

North Leitrim Men’s Group. March 2001. Research Report. Manorhamilton, Leitrim, Ireland. Electronic document accessed on 24 November 2006 at: <http://homepage.eircom.net/~nlmensgroup/ NLMG%20research%20projectfull% 20report%20Version%202.html>

OWENS, Toni. 2000. Men on the Move: A study of barriers to male participation in education and training initiatives. Dublin: Aontas, October.

O’HARE, Aileen & Aideen O’CONNOR. 1987. ‘Gender Differences in Treated Mental Illness in the Republic of Ireland’, in CURTIN, Chris; Pauline JACKSON & Barbara O’CONNOR (editors), Gender in Irish Society. Galway: Galway University Press: 309-329.

O’REILLY-DE BRÚN, Mary & Tomas DE BRÚN. 2007. PLA Training Manual. Galway. Centre for Participatory Strategies. Unpublished document.

ROBSON, Colin. 1993. Real World Research.: A Resource Book for Social Scientists and Practitioner Researchers. Oxford. Blackwell.

RONAYNE, Tom. 1999. Factors Affecting Participation and Non-Participation by Older Unemployed Adults in Education and Training. Dublin: WRC Social and Economic Consultants/Department of Education and Science (WRC/DES), unpublished research report.

SARIS, A. Jamie & Brendan BARTLEY. 2002. ‘The Arts of Memory: Icon and structural violence in a Dublin “underclass” housing estate’. Anthropology Today 18 (4), August: 14-19.

________; Brendan BARTLEY; Ciara KIERANS; Colm WALSH & Philip McCORMACK. 2002. ‘Culture and the State: Institutionalizing “the underclass” in the new Ireland’. City 6 (2): 173-190.

SLOWEY, Maria. 1987. ‘Education for Domestication or Liberation: Women’s involvement in adult education’, in Cullen, Mary (ed.), Girls Don’t Do Honours: Irish women in education in the 19th and 20th centuries. Dublin: Women’s Education Bureau: 116-135.

________. 1980. ‘The Structure of Meaning of Women’s Involvement in Adult Education’. Unpublished M.Litt. thesis, Department of Sociology, Trinity College, Dublin.

STANLEY, Liz & S. Wise. 1990. Breaking Out Again: Feminist Ontology and Epistemology. London. Routledge.

WILLOT, Sara & Christine GRIFFIN. 1996. ‘Men, Masculinity and the Challenge of Long-Term Unemployment’, Chapter 5 in Mac an GHAILL, Mairtín, Understanding Masculinities: Social relations and cultural arenas. Buckingham, England: Open University Press: 77-92

created & designed by

© Copyright DICP 2006