Men and loneliness in the Covid‐19 pandemic: Insights from an interview study with UK‐based men

Abstract

Since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, the UK, like many countries, has had restrictions on social contact, and injunctions of 'social distancing'. This study aimed to generate new insights into men's experiences of loneliness during the pandemic, and consider the ramifications of these for continued/future restrictions, the easing of restrictions, and the future beyond the pandemic. Twenty qualitative interviews were conducted with men between January and March 2021. A maximum variation purpose sample frame required at least three non-white men, three LGBTQ+men, three men with a university education, three without a university education, three 18-30 years old, and three aged 60+. Thematic analysis, focused on semantic themes, was employed as part of a 'grounded' epistemology whereby the stated perspectives of the interviewees drove the content of the study. Seven themes were constructed:(i) lost and new activities and routines; (ii) remote social interaction; (iii) narrowed social spheres; (iv) rethought and renewed recognition of what is important; (v) loneliness with a purpose; (vi) anxiety of social contact; and (vii) easier for themselves than others. Lost routines, fewer meaningful activities, and a reduction in face-to-face interaction, were framed as challenges to preventing loneliness. Solo-living gay men seemed particularly negatively affected. However, many men displayed new, more covid-safe routines and activities. Remote forms of interaction were often utilised, and though they were imperfect, were constructed as worth engaging with, and held capacity for improvement. A moral need to reduce transmission of SARS-COV-2, and a fear of catching it, became important features of participants lives that also affected loneliness. Men at higher risk of health complications from Covid-19 were particularly likely to highlight anxiety of social contact. Reducing restrictions alone may not return everyone to pre-pandemic levels of loneliness, particularly if the pandemic remains a significant public health issue.

Beware the “loneliness gap”? Examining emerging inequalities and long‐term risks of loneliness and isolation emerging from COVID‐19

“…While our study reinforces prior findings that while COVID both strengthened home‐based family relationships for some and thwarted new romantic partnerships for others (Ratcliffe et al, 2022 ), it goes further in identifying how many younger participants’ longer‐term “life trajectories” were disrupted by lockdown, including education and work‐related relocation plans. This might represent an interruption of late modern work and mobility patterns, with a possible arresting of their socially fragmenting effects (Urry, 2000 ).…”

“…COVID‐19 exacerbated existing forms of loneliness‐based marginalisation and created new ones, in ways that continued post‐lockdown. It created additional difficulties for those with physical disabilities, some of whom avoided contact because of higher COVID‐19 health risks and anxiety; this reinforces qualitative findings from other studies linking preexisting health issues to increased COVID‐induced anxiety around social contact (Ratcliffe et al, 2022 ). For others, it exposed the “normality” of an absence of contact, and the ease with which they “could be ignored.” It revealed new inequalities in loneliness between those with physical and psychological disabilities and their carers, and those with no such pre‐conditions or responsibilities.…”

“…COVID-19 lockdown also impacted social networks and capital directly, particularly through the common theme of pruned and consolidated networks. The idea of "pruning" reflects findings from other COVID studies around "narrowed" social spheres (Ratcliffe et al, 2022) or "funnelling" contacts through prioritising and strengthening care, support and communication with some contacts over others (Vrain et al, 2020). However, the "pruning" differs from this earlier phenomenon in that it appears more deliberate -involving decisions to not just focus on some contacts, but to actively end others perceived to be negative -and involves longer-term consequences for both the pruners and the pruned.…”

Experiences of COVID-19 lockdown among older people in Aotearoa: idyllic or dystopian?

“…Similarly, Kremers et al (2021) found that older Dutch people had a sense of being 'in it together' and adapted to the situation of reduced opportunities for social interaction during the pandemic. As in the present study, both Kremers et al (2021) and Ratcliffe et al (2022) found many people described the impact of restrictions as greater on others than on themselves. Ratcliffe et al (2022) suggest that this may be due to older people wishing to be viewed as knowledgeable of the needs and priorities of others.…”

“…As in the present study, both Kremers et al (2021) and Ratcliffe et al (2022) found many people described the impact of restrictions as greater on others than on themselves. Ratcliffe et al (2022) suggest that this may be due to older people wishing to be viewed as knowledgeable of the needs and priorities of others. The idyllic account of lockdown similarly was used to acknowledge and mourn inequities in lockdown experiences in A/NZ.…”