Clearly the parent is saying that people start out with some sort of support network, and are likely to have transitioned from their own accommodation to sleeping on a couch or in a spare room, and _then_ become homeless. That in that process those with the most extreme problems lose, one way or another, their useful support network.
To counter the parents claim we'd need solid figures of those who went from self-supported accommodation direct to being homeless on the street without any support from family or friends [or others].
Shelter did an indicative, not statistically significant report in which they say
>"Half of the people we spoke to ended up rough sleeping because they had
nowhere else to turn. This could be because they didn’t know anyone who was
able to accommodate them, or they had burned bridges with friends and families
due to drug and/or alcohol misuse." (Ch.3, "Summary report - On the Streets", from [2])
Half isn't quite the large majority the parent claims, but this isn't a statistical survey. I think it gives enough support that one should need to prove them wrong with well supported figures.
This page [1] has some relevant stats which I think largely support the parents position but the question of "did you arrive as a rough sleeper from being hidden homeless" doesn't seem to be well shown in stats I could readily find.
I think if you allow a somewhat close reading your quote supports my point.
>"Half of the people we spoke to ended up rough sleeping because they had nowhere else to turn."
This is a little bit ambiguous, but I think one fair interpretation is that the other half they spoke to had somewhere else to turn. (It is also possible they had no information on half.)
So if half do have a place they could go (possibly with the condition of not using drugs, which is the reason they don't accept the accommodation?) and some number of others had burned bridges "due to drug and/or alcohol misuse", that's already a majority. Again this is a pretty close reading, but what I said is not controversial at all if you dig into some of the data and don't just read press releases which selectively quote the studies, or misleadingly combine statistics about people who have lost a residence (due to foreclosure, health, or other financial hardship) but have shelter with friends or family and people who are sleeping outside without shelter.
Clearly the parent is saying that people start out with some sort of support network, and are likely to have transitioned from their own accommodation to sleeping on a couch or in a spare room, and _then_ become homeless. That in that process those with the most extreme problems lose, one way or another, their useful support network.
To counter the parents claim we'd need solid figures of those who went from self-supported accommodation direct to being homeless on the street without any support from family or friends [or others].
Shelter did an indicative, not statistically significant report in which they say
>"Half of the people we spoke to ended up rough sleeping because they had nowhere else to turn. This could be because they didn’t know anyone who was able to accommodate them, or they had burned bridges with friends and families due to drug and/or alcohol misuse." (Ch.3, "Summary report - On the Streets", from [2])
Half isn't quite the large majority the parent claims, but this isn't a statistical survey. I think it gives enough support that one should need to prove them wrong with well supported figures.
This page [1] has some relevant stats which I think largely support the parents position but the question of "did you arrive as a rough sleeper from being hidden homeless" doesn't seem to be well shown in stats I could readily find.
Crisis have pertinent UK stats too [3].
[1] https://www.trustforlondon.org.uk/data/rough-sleepers-london...
[2] http://england.shelter.org.uk/professional_resources/policy_...
[3] https://www.crisis.org.uk/ending-homelessness/homelessness-k...