Finding our way home: Exploring the experiences of young people who have ‘aged out’ of care and experienced homelessness in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Studies have shown that youth exiting care are drastically overrepresented in the homelessness population. Few studies, however, have explored the experiences of homelessness of young people after they have exited care using participatory methods. Objective This study explores youth’s experiences during and after their placements in the child welfare system, their experiences with homelessness, and the factors that contributed to vulnerability or resilience. Participants and Setting Eight youth co-researchers were engaged in this study between the ages 18-25 residing in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, with both child welfare and homelessness experience. Method A Participatory Action Research (PAR) methodology using photovoice was used in this phenomenological study. Session transcripts and photographs were thematically analyzed to identify common themes. Findings Three thematic categories emerged: (1) protective factors; (2) dual protective and risk factors; (3) risk factors. Six participants were employed while experiencing homelessness. Community apathy was identified as a significant risk factor by most youth co-researchers. Half identified unsuitable foster care placements as contributors to homelessness. All disclosed that their social workers changed frequently and were unsupportive while they were in care and/or during their transition to adulthood. Protective factors included hope, self-care and community supports, including individuals in youth’s lives described as “champions” who took an interest in the youth’s life and advocated on their behalf. Conclusion Findings from this study provide a nuanced and youth-centred exploration of both the risk and protective factors that contribute to young people’s trajectories from the child welfare system into (and out of) homelessness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".