You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
Intervening on smoking exceeds social landlords’ remit and risks stigma
Landlords should not be the custodians of tenants’ health, argues Emma Lindley
There’s a lot to agree with in the recent article by Lee Sugden highlighting the findings of the Action on Smoking and Health report, which considers the effects of smoking in the home.
Social housing tenants are more likely to smoke and less likely to succeed at quitting compared to the population as a whole.
Social landlords are well placed to collaborate with stop-smoking services to locate clinics in community spaces.
“The analysis of smoking prevalence by tenure I believe overlooks a more important correlation with communities experiencing deprivation.”
However, the report’s conclusions that social landlords should take a more active role in reducing the levels of smoking in the home does not sit easily with me.
The analysis of smoking prevalence by tenure I believe overlooks a more important correlation with communities experiencing deprivation.
Indeed, the article highlights that smoking rates across Greater Manchester are almost 20% higher than in the rest of the country, but the report explains that 30% of smokers live in social housing and 43% in owner-occupier homes. Even with more social housing in the region compared to the national average, I am struggling to see the correlation.
READ MORE
By focusing on housing tenure, the report suggests that your tenancy type is a causal factor in being a smoker and as such there is a risk here of adding to the stigmatisation of social housing tenants. While there is an overrepresentation of smokers in social housing compared to the stock count, the greatest number of smokers live in owner-occupier properties, yet no recommendations are made for this tenure type.
It also implies that as it takes place in the home, that it is the responsibility of the landlord to tackle. While I can see a connection to some elements of a landlord’s responsibility, such as employee health and safety, fire safety, safeguarding obligations and money advice services, I challenge the suggestion that landlords should act as ‘custodians of health’.
“There is a risk here of adding to the stigmatisation of social housing tenants.”
So many public policy problems take place in the home – should landlords intervene in all of them? The list would be endless: five fruit and vegetables a day, literacy, alcohol consumption, eight hours’ sleep – the line has to be drawn somewhere.
This is partly because social landlords do not have the resources to tackle all these issues, but mainly because it is not within their remit as a landlord to do so (although smoking cessation may sit under councils’ health responsibilities, away from the landlord function).
The report highlights that few landlords have an understanding of the role their tenants would like them to play in managing smoking in local communities. And based on conversations with frontline colleagues and some of the reaction on Twitter to this article, it seems support for housing professionals to capture the smoking status of tenants and to deliver messages about smoking in the home would be limited.
“So many public policy problems take place in the home – should landlords intervene in all of them?”
The article references the need to focus NHS services on prevention and I am disappointed that this report does not offer any detail on the underlying causes of smoking and barriers to quitting to inform what preventative action could look like.
The report tells us social housing tenants are more likely to smoke than the general population and that someone is more likely to smoke and less likely to quit if they live in a home or community where smoking is prevalent, but the reasons for this and what works to tackle it remains a mystery.
Before acting on the recommendations in this report, I would urge social landlords to consider whether, just because they can do something, they should.
Emma Lindley, housing strategy lead, Ashfield Council
