Housing and loneliness among individuals with serious mental illnesses

Abstract

Background: People with serious mental illnesses (SMI) have higher levels of loneliness than the general population. Furthermore, people with SMI tend to be less satisfied with their housing and tend to move more frequently. Aim: This study aims to examine relationships between housing variables (whom they live with, duration of residence, and satisfaction) and loneliness among individuals with SMI. Methods: Data were collected from 188 adults with SMI in greater Philadelphia area. Classification and Regression Trees (CART) were used to examine whether whom they live with, duration of residence, and housing satisfaction were associated with loneliness. Results: Housing satisfaction was found to be the most prominent predictor of loneliness. Those who were unsatisfied with their overall housing conditions always had the highest level of loneliness, regardless of other factors. Even if they were satisfied with their housing conditions, their loneliness was higher if they had just moved to the new residence. Participants had lower loneliness the longer they lived in a residence and had the lowest loneliness levels after about three years. Conclusion: Housing is associated with loneliness among people with SMI. Psychiatric service providers should increase support to factors contributing to housing satisfaction and duration of residence, including active engagement in the community.

Disparities in severe loneliness between adults with and without a serious mental illness.

“…It is important that these efforts are long term as research suggests that it can take an average of 300 hr with someone to develop close relationships with others (Hall, 2019). Additionally, interventions to improve their environment, such as housing programs, should be promoted as satisfactory housing can facilitate positive interactions with others and can mitigate loneliness (Nagata et al, 2023;Weiner et al, 2010). Furthermore, funders and policy makers are encouraged to emphasize loneliness as focus of services.…”

“…Additionally, interventions to improve their environment, such as housing programs, should be promoted as satisfactory housing can facilitate positive interactions with others and can mitigate loneliness (Nagata et al, 2023; Weiner et al, 2010). Furthermore, funders and policy makers are encouraged to emphasize loneliness as focus of services.…”

Persistent invisibility and stereotyping as forms of mental illness stigma: A Spanish and English cross-language content analysis of mental illness portrayals on YouTube television.

“…Wang, 2019;Whitley & Berry, 2013). These mental illness attitudes and behaviors can be negative in the form of stigma and have a moderate negative effect on the utilization of mental health services (Clement et al, 2015;Corrigan et al, 2012;McCullock & Scrivano, 2023;Nagata et al, 2021Nagata et al, , 2022Nagata et al, , 2023. Though modifiable, mental illness stigma also has deleterious effects on outcomes related to community living and participation after treatment is sought (e.g., social inclusion, job security, housing security; Clement et al, 2015;Corrigan et al, 2012;McCullock & Scrivano, 2023;Nagata et al, 2021Nagata et al, , 2022Nagata et al, , 2023.…”

“…These mental illness attitudes and behaviors can be negative in the form of stigma and have a moderate negative effect on the utilization of mental health services (Clement et al, 2015;Corrigan et al, 2012;McCullock & Scrivano, 2023;Nagata et al, 2021Nagata et al, , 2022Nagata et al, , 2023. Though modifiable, mental illness stigma also has deleterious effects on outcomes related to community living and participation after treatment is sought (e.g., social inclusion, job security, housing security; Clement et al, 2015;Corrigan et al, 2012;McCullock & Scrivano, 2023;Nagata et al, 2021Nagata et al, , 2022Nagata et al, , 2023. According to stigma communication theory, illness-specific stigma can be constructed and communicated by the media using stigma cues in the language, such as marks, labels, responsibility, and peril, which are likely to induce affective and cognitive responses to create stigma attitudes (Smith, 2007).…”