'That house was a home': Qualitative evidence from New Zealand on the connections between rental housing eviction and poor health outcomes.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: Eviction, or a forced move from rental housing, is a common experience for New Zealand renters, yet we know very little about its effects. This research investigated how eviction affects people's lives and health. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 27 people who had experienced eviction. We coded the transcripts and grouped them into themes using template analysis. RESULTS: Participant experienced grief at the loss of the home. Moving out and searching for a new home was highly stressful on participants and on their relationships. After being evicted, people became homeless, often staying with family and friends and lived in poor quality or unaffordable housing. They reported health issues as a result of these circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: Eviction harms health through causing stress, grief and a move to a risky living situation. Increasing the supply of housing and funding wide-ranging support services can help minimise the harm caused by eviction. SO WHAT?: Reducing the incidence and impact of eviction should be a priority for health promotion.

Examining the role of tenure, household crowding and housing affordability on psychological distress, using longitudinal data.

BACKGROUND: The association between good mental health and housing circumstances is well established. Tenure, household crowding and housing affordability have all been linked to mental health and psychological distress. These cross-sectional relationships are collinear and confounded, and so provide little information on the possible effects of changing housing circumstance on mental health or psychological distress. To do this longitudinal data are needed. METHODS: In this paper we use the longitudinal data from the 11 500 NZ households in the Survey of Families, Income and Employment (SoFIE), conducted in New Zealand from 2002 to 2010. We examine the cross-sectional associations of housing factors on psychological distress and use fixed-effects modelling of longitudinal data to examine any effects of changes in selected housing factors on changes in psychological distress. RESULTS: We show large significant cross-sectional associations between all the housing circumstances and psychological distress. These associations were not present in the fixed-effects models. Only changes in individual deprivation had a significant effect on changes in psychological distress. While a significant effect was found for moves to and from houses with a two-bedroom deficit, the small number of moves of this type means these results are not robust. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that the effect of house ownership and housing affordability on psychological distress is likely to be confounded in the cross-sectional models. Therefore, marginal changes to these housing factors are unlikely to yield large reductions in psychological distress. Our results suggest that reductions in psychological distress are more likely to be seen through interventions that target individual socioeconomic deprivation and severe household crowding.