Our experience co-producing a zine with LGBTQIA+ young people

Posted by Scarlet Hall, Research Assistant, Durham University and Fuse

We have been collaborating with LGBTQIA+ young people in the North East and South Yorkshire, through Fuse led research funded by the NIHR School for Public Health Research (SPHR) exploring how physical activity spaces could be more joyful and safe. This blog describes how the ‘Moving Spaces’ zine was made and makes suggestions for those wishing to co-produce creative research outputs.

This blog draws from reflective conversations between Caroline Dodd-Reynolds (Fuse), Mary Crowder (University of Sheffield) and Shevek Fodor (Sounds Like Shevek) during the making of the zine. It is written with contributions from Caroline, Mary and Shev.

Seek continuity between research methods and research outputs

At the start of our research project we knew we wanted to host a series of research workshops and then co-produce a physical activity resource with the young people we were working with. After seeing the results of using visual creative approaches in our workshops, we knew we wanted a highly visual and creative resource that would connect and resonate with people.

Shevek Fodor

Working with the right designer and format

We sent an advert out to LGBTQIA+ networks for a graphic designer who would understand the lives of diverse LGBTQ+ people, in particular young neurodiverse people. When Shevek Fodor shared their zines with us our eyes and hearts lit up. We invited Shev to lead on making a collaborative zine. We chose the zine because of its DIY ethos, radical history of self- publishing and as a vehicle for self or group expression of thoughts and feelings.

What is a zine?

Zines originated through people writing letters and sharing information about things they were driven and passionate about. They’ve been used as a way for people who were overlooked within mainstream media to have their voices heard.

Practice reciprocity

We thought the young people would be inspired meeting Shev, a young neurodiverse queer artist. For Shev, this role offered a new opportunity to experiment with collaborative zine-making in a research setting. We offered hands-on guidance (budgeting, finance systems, mentoring) as part of co-production principles of reciprocity. We introduced Shev to the young people prior to the zine session and their curiosity was piqued…’is this person one of us or one of them.…?’

Involving artists at later stages of research is not straightforward. We aimed for a balance between giving Shev space to design and lead the sessions while also sharing our own knowledge, ideas and learning. The trust built in earlier research workshops meant we could also pass on an established  quality of ease in the group when it came to the zine making workshops.

Trust the creative process of each person and the group

Shev laid the zine making table out in a beautiful, organised chaos of found images, stickers, magazines and cards. Young people made creative contributions to the zine, inspired by earlier conversations about physical activity. They found ways to take part and to also hang out in their safe space – which we were encroaching on. Some people chewed and chewed over the right words to express themselves with contributions coming together at the end. One person got stuck and did their piece later with a youth workers’ support. Two zine contributions were made that involved multiple voices, through Scarlet documenting conversations around particular images. Scarlet also made contributions from a researcher’s perspective. Shev took these contributions – writings, drawings and collages – and wove them together into a first draft.

Allowing the time for collaborative editing – it brings difference into conversation

We shared this draft with the youth groups, the SPHR and Fuse communications teams and academic colleagues. We received a lot of feedback – the zine was provoking conversations. The young people gave detailed feedback on what they liked, what was missing, and sequencing of ideas. They spoke the words that became the introduction and expressed their small hopes for a few people to engage with the zine. There was a thoughtful conversation across the youth groups, about whether to personalise individual contributions or depersonalise to show that it could be any LGBTQIA+ young person saying this.

Academic colleagues also read and shared reflections with us, including feedback that policymakers might struggle to engage with the zine’s non-linearity and various people suggested we include a page of key take-home messages and recommendations ‘so things don’t get lost’. The young people responded to this feedback saying that people needed to listen and pay more attention to the messages that were implicitly in there. This dialogue led to the writing of a framing document for the zine. 

Value queer embodied theory and practice 

Another dialogue arose around authorship. Some reviewers found it confusing not knowing who had written what and had a strong wish to know who – a young person or adult – had written different bits – a desire perhaps for a clear identification of distinct voices. For Scarlet, a queer researcher, the ‘queer polyvocality’ (Brice et al., forthcoming) of the zine – many voices that weaved together in to more than sum of their parts – reflected queer practices of overflowing notions of stable identity, disrupting predetermined binaries and unsettling ideas of authenticity (Lescure, 2023).

This somewhat aligned with ideas from the young people. For some, there was a wish for attribution so ‘friends and family would know I made this’, and there was also a wish for zine contributions to be unnamed ‘because any queer young person could have made any piece’ and ‘we made it all together’.

One young person said they appreciated that researchers ‘weren’t butting in with your opinions but also giving your views when right to do so’ and another adding ‘it’s important that the adults’ voices are also in there as you were part of the conversation, and some adults have also had similar experiences’. The young people decided to make creative doodles in place of signatures which were mixed in with academic doodles/logos to show the talking and making and editing together – the polyvocality – of the zine making process.

Through this collaborative editing process (over three months), the young people began to converse indirectly with interested adults who wanted to help, including with the funders. These conversations happened with the young people keeping editorial control. We sense this may open up and shape more generative future encounters between these young people and further influential adults.

Indeed, some of the young people involved have made a plan to hand deliver zines to local venues around town (hairdressers, surgeries etc.). It seems empowerment and co-ownership inadvertently leads to physical activity!

Explore the zine

To find out more about this work, please contact Scarlet scarlet.hall@durham.ac.uk or Caroline caroline.dodd-reynolds@durham.ac.uk 

References

Lescure, R.M., 2023. (Extra) ordinary Relationalities: Methodological Suggestions for Studying Queer Relationalities Through the Prism of Memory, Sensation, and Affect. Journal of Homosexuality, 70(1), pp.35-52.

Brice, S. Marston, K. Wright, R. and Hall, S. (forthcoming). ‘Mycelial Love’ in Harrison, P. Joronen, M. and Secor, A. Love and Catastrophe in Cultural Geography. Edinburgh University Press

When stigma came to town: why a quick fix can never work with a life-long problem

Posted by Ian Treasure, Programme Manager, Changing Futures Lancashire and Cassey Muir, Research Associate, Newcastle University

“When you point a finger, three point back,” a member of our Lived Experience panel said while discussing stigma. Stigma is often invisible, yet it shapes how people perceive themselves and are perceived by others. This saying reminds us that before we judge others, we should first reflect on our own behaviours, actions, and beliefs.

 

The Changing Futures Lancashire Programme and taking a trauma-informed approach

The Changing Futures Lancashire (CFL) programme was one of 15 areas in England chosen to receive funding to test and learn approaches to supporting adults experiencing multiple disadvantage. Anyone experiencing three of the following five conditions were able to access our services:

• substance misuse
• homelessness
• criminal justice involvement
• poor mental health
• domestic violence

CFL was a follow on from Fulfilling Lives which also supported this cohort. CFL was different as it was funded through local authorities in an attempt to gain more traction for system-wide change needed to support a seldom heard group. The funders were Ministry for Housing Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) and The National Lottery Community Fund.

Nationally, we focused on measuring improvements for the people we support, how well services work together, and how decisions are made at a higher level. The aim was to create significant changes in the system so that people with complex needs can access the support they need more easily. We adopted a trauma informed approach in the way we offer and provide support. For example, we understand that individuals who may appear aggressive could actually be scared, confused, or reliving past trauma. This non-judgmental approach not only shapes how our providers assist individuals with complex needs but also affects how the adults we support view themselves.

The majority of beneficiaries (90%+) in the Changing Futures programme face poly-substance use (using more than one substance at a time) as the main condition that developed into multiple disadvantage. Many have shared how chronic drug use often leads to involvement with the criminal justice system, poor mental health, and eventually homelessness. Alongside these challenges, many individuals have experienced parental abuse or neglect. Their negative school experiences, often tied to undiagnosed learning disabilities or other barriers, have also shaped their struggles. Over time, our beneficiaries have developed coping strategies to survive—tools they rely on to navigate a world that often feels unsupportive.

Shining a light on stigma

The CFL Programme has made significant strides in supporting individuals facing multiple disadvantage. However, as we delved deeper into the challenges faced by our beneficiaries, we uncovered an invisible yet pervasive barrier: stigma. This insight shifted our focus and prompted us to ask: 

how can we tackle the stigma that often prevents people from seeking the help they need?

People with lived experience helped shape the CFL model, ensuring that it addresses the needs of those who understand these challenges best. During conversations with our beneficiaries, we found that many initially hesitated to seek help because of the trauma and judgment they felt during comprehensive assessments. We responded by removing this entry barrier, focusing instead on the sharing of information between services followed by a more conversational approach that helps build trust without the fear of interrogation. This small change proved to be a key turning point for many individuals, making them feel more comfortable returning for support.

 

 

Across Lancashire we also have started to shed light on the issue of stigma. We created the powerful and thought-provoking film above featuring people with lived experience and other professionals sharing their stories, which has been viewed thousands of times. One case study highlighted a single mum afraid to visit the pharmacy near her child’s school for fear of being seen picking up methadone by another parent, and the stigma she faces as a result. Another featured a man who is street homeless, sleeping in a public toilet, only to be kicked out by the cleaner in font of commuters. These are painful reminders of some people’s situations and how different they feel from everyone else. It became clear that it wasn’t enough for us to only think about how we tackle stigma across our services, we also had to ask ourselves: what else can be done to prevent stigma and to reduce its impact on individuals?

The CFL board agreed that we should do some credible research into the topic. We sent out an enquiry of interest form and Fuse researchers responded.

Reducing stigma: research findings and key recommendations

The project between the CFL programme and Fuse was to conduct a review of the research into what can be done to reduce stigma for adults who experience multiple disadvantage.

At the heart of our work are the people with lived experience who have been instrumental in shaping our approach. Their first-hand insights have been invaluable not only in designing effective services but also in guiding our research on stigma. Many panel members shared how they overcame their own stigma through achievements like gaining employment, while others still face the stigma of past criminal convictions – something that remains a barrier to moving forward. Their voices are central to the research and the recommendations we’ve developed.

We brought together 51 review papers and found that most focused on reducing mental health stigma. Fewer studies addressed stigma related to drug and alcohol use. There was limited research on stigma linked to domestic violence, homelessness, criminal justice involvement, and poverty. Our panel felt that the findings would be relevant across various forms of disadvantage, reflecting that poor mental health or alcohol and drug use often serve as the primary ways people come into contact with services.

The research we reviewed found that stigma reduction approaches typically focused on:

• individuals experiencing disadvantage and stigma
• practitioners who provide support
• the public

There was little research on system-level changes, such as policy changes, that could address stigma more broadly.

We found that social support, particularly through peer-led or group-based approaches, was highly effective in reducing self-stigma among people facing multiple disadvantage. Peer connections helped individuals build stronger and more positive identities and gain confidence, breaking down feelings of isolation.

Additionally, we discovered that combining educational strategies with contact-based training was a powerful way to reduce stigma amongst practitioners and the public. Educational efforts - such as presentations or information addressing misconceptions about disadvantages - were most effective when paired with opportunities for practitioners and the public to meet and learn from people with lived experience. This combination allowed for a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by those with multiple disadvantages and proved more effective than using either method alone.

We engaged with our Lived Experience panel to discuss and explore recommendations. They came up with eight key recommendations to advance this work into practice:

1. Facilitate peer connections: Provide opportunities for individuals experiencing disadvantage to connect with others who share similar lived experiences. This can help reduce isolation, foster mutual support, and reduce feelings of shame and embarrassment.
2. Promote peer leadership and advocacy: Encourage individuals with lived experience to take on leadership roles or act as advocates within services. This could help challenge stigma and provide role models for others facing similar challenges.
3. Incorporate lived experience in service design and delivery: Actively involve individuals with lived experience in the design, development, and delivery of services to ensure they are relevant, responsive, and inclusive.
4. Embed trauma and stigma informed practices throughout the organisation: Apply both a trauma and stigma informed approach across all levels of the workplace. Training should not only be limited to frontline staff but also extend to managers, supervisors, and directors to ensure everyone is stigma-aware.
5. Ensure long-term commitment to anti-stigma efforts: Integrate anti-stigma interventions into ongoing practice, ensuring they are not one-off sessions. Offer regular refresher courses to reinforce learning and maintain long-term impact.
6. Foster collaboration across services: Promote collaboration between all services to ensure they adopt stigma-aware practices. This includes working together across sectors, such as housing, mental health, and other support services, to create a cohesive approach to addressing stigma.
7. Engage the community: Work on community outreach to raise awareness about stigma and its effects, helping to foster a more inclusive and empathetic environment in the wider community.
8. Implement system-wide change: Advocate for policy changes that address the root causes of stigma, such as social inequalities, and promote fair access to services for all individuals, regardless of their background or circumstances. System-level changes are crucial because stigma isn’t just about individual attitudes; it’s embedded in our systems, policies, and institutions.

We need your help

The insights from the Changing Futures programme and our research are clear: tackling stigma requires a holistic, multi-level approach. By prioritising peer support, lived experience, and trauma-informed practices, we can make real, lasting change. Now, we need your help. Join us in challenging stigma, watch and share our videos, and support this movement. Together, we can create a more inclusive, empathetic society where everyone has the chance to thrive.


Take the next step (useful resources):

• Join the anti-stigma network
• See the presentations from the recent Fuse and Changing Futures Lancashire event - Understanding the impact of stigma and multiple disadvantage, A call to action
• Watch the Changing Futures Lancashire video on stigma
• Watch an animation by Newcastle City Council Adults Safeguarding and Fuse Researchers - Stigma, A Call for Action
• Find out more about Changing Futures Lancashire

Going beyond bricks and mortar to 'Up' awareness of healthy homes

Posted by Natalie Forster, Philip Hodgson, and Alex Kirton from Northumbria University

“It’s just a house”. Words famously uttered by Mr Fredricksen in the much-loved film, ‘Up’. But does this really do justice to the complicated relationships we have with our homes?

There’s a steady stream of evidence now showing that housing characteristics (including issues like overcrowding, poor insulation, damp and mould) can impact on physical and mental health. And far from being just a house, we know that where you live can make a big difference to how socially connected you are, the services you can access and how safe you feel.

This increasing awareness of home as a social determinant of health has led to many local authorities introducing initiatives to address housing-related issues. Yet, evaluations often look at the effects of specific housing enhancements in isolation, and more understanding is needed of how healthy homes services can tackle housing issues in their widest sense.

The Healthy Homes service in South Tyneside is an advice and signposting-based service that aims to address people’s home-related health needs. As Fuse researchers we set out to explore its benefits for residents. We worked with the service to create a data collection tool to help capture the financial benefits of advice given, alongside interviews to explore the experiences of those who used the service.

So, what did we find?

Our analysis showed that the service was reaching people with multiple and complex housing needs, including those related to health conditions, low income and age. We found the personalised approach taken by the service to be especially successful in engaging proactively with older homeowners (like Mr Fredricksen!) who often presumed they wouldn’t qualify for housing improvements, didn’t want to be seen to be asking for help or didn’t want to lose their independence. And without this support they would have otherwise put off seeking help until a crisis hit.

Some participants were keen to swap their bricks and mortar entirely and relocate to a more suitable home or area. For others, longstanding and deep psychological connections to homes and areas meant a move would be too painful. In these circumstances, changes to home environments made through the service (like getting extra bannisters or a stairlift, and support to address cold, damp and mould) helped reduce worries about housing problems and avoided the need for unsuitable coping strategies like coming down the stairs backwards. Participants described how small housing modifications – even getting a different lightbulb when you’re worried about your electricity bills – made a difference both practically and emotionally, helping them resume ordinary and taken-for-granted aspects of life like going to bed upstairs with your partner. Yet, for many, the service also worked on a different level, with the face-to-face interaction and warm and friendly manner of staff helping people feel heard and cared for.

Ultimately, the project illuminates the complex and varied issues and feelings people have around their homes. It underscores the importance of services which see beyond the bricks and mortar of houses and consider the importance of people’s “homes”, such as those offered by South Tyneside Council, but also the crucial role that other (non-home focused) services can play in addressing the interactions between homes, health and wellbeing. Many people we spoke to were unsure of what support they are entitled to and so there’s a need to raise awareness and take up of healthy home enhancements before problems escalate. Finally, both the stories of our participants and Mr Fredricksen demonstrate how our relationships toward our homes can shift and change over time, highlighting a need for long-term and sustainable models of housing care and support.

Natalie Forster, Assistant Professor, Social Work, Education and Community Wellbeing, Northumbria University and co-lead of the Fuse Health Inequalities Research Cluster

Philip Hodgson, Assistant Professor, Nursing, Midwifery and Health, Northumbria University

Alex Kirton, Research Fellow, Northumbria University

Image by Pascal Laurent from Pixabay

Amplifying voices to tackle inequalities in South Asian and Muslim communities

Posted by Zeibeda Sattar, Assistant Professor in Health Policy, Northumbria University

L-R: Greta Defeyter, Humaira Khan and Zeb Sattar 

I recently had the opportunity to chair the Health Inequalities Symposium hosted by the Centre for Health and Social Equity (CHASE) at Northumbria University, in collaboration with Fuse. It was an incredible event that brought together over 100 people, including researchers, policymakers, healthcare providers, and community members, all focused on tackling the pressing health challenges facing South Asian and Muslim (SAM) communities. The main goal was clear: to find ways to bridge the gap between research and real-world impact.

The presentations were enlightening and underscored how critical it is to engage with minority communities effectively to shape public health services. Each speaker highlighted a different, but equally important, health issue impacting SAM communities. Public partner Humaira Khan, who co-chaired the symposium, pointed out that the mental health challenges facing South Asian and Muslim are often misunderstood and stigmatised. Hearing her talk about the need for culturally competent healthcare really hit home. Her words - “researchers are warriors; they don’t fight for themselves - they amplify the voices of the people” - perfectly captured why events like this matter.

“researchers are warriors; they don’t fight for themselves - they amplify the voices of the people” 

Humaira Khan, public partner

Dr Sarah Croke from the University of Manchester spoke about the language and cultural barriers that often lead to untreated health issues. This can leave community members struggling because healthcare services aren’t designed with South Asian and Muslim needs in mind. Dr Saeed Ahmed from Sunderland Royal Hospital took on the tough topic of organ donation disparities. He pointed out the harsh reality: SAM communities are in desperate need of organ transplants but are also among the least likely to donate. His call to raise awareness and educate was powerful, especially when he reminded us that one donor can change up to nine lives.

There were also discussions about everyday barriers that many of us face but rarely see addressed. Professor Defeyter from Northumbria University talked about the lack of culturally appropriate meals, like halal options, in schools. It was a reminder of how even things like food choices can create a sense of exclusion for our children and why legal changes to recognise cultural diversity are long overdue.

I found Simon Luddington’s (SearchNewcastle) presentation about the West-End Befrienders project particularly inspiring. It’s easy to forget how isolating language barriers can be and how vital social connections are for our wellbeing. Their work in bringing people together, especially in helping with access to primary care and breaking down isolation, felt like a model that should be replicated.

One of the more challenging discussions was around drug and alcohol use in our communities. Lydia Lochhead’s (Northumbria University) research laid bare the stigma that prevents so many from seeking help. It’s a tough conversation to have, but hearing about Mushtaq Dakri’s community-led approach to addiction support was a beacon of hope. They offer a holistic service - combining therapy, physical activity, and spirituality - and it’s designed by and for the SAM community. Knowing there’s a women-only support space now available shows their commitment to evolving and meeting community needs.

Fuse Associate Director Dr Floor Christie and Dr Rawand Jarrar from Sunderland University, wrapped up the day with their work on improving cancer screening uptake among Muslim women. Their workshops have reached over 260 women, and it’s encouraging to see how culturally sensitive approaches can genuinely improve health outcomes. This was a reminder of how vital it is to build services that reflect our communities.

As I reflect on the symposium, it’s clear to me that these health inequalities are not just about accessing services - they’re about how these services are designed and delivered. The urgency to address these gaps cannot be overstated. The event reinforced the need for services that truly understand and respect South Asian and Muslim communities, going beyond just offering a service to creating environments where people feel welcomed, understood, and valued.

Leaving the symposium, I felt hopeful. Change is possible, but it won’t happen without consistent engagement with our communities. Trust needs to be built, and community voices must be represented and acted upon. The gap between research and impact can be bridged if we keep pushing for culturally relevant, accessible, and respectful health services.

Plans are already in place for a follow-up symposium in November, focusing once again on the health inequalities that continue to affect SAM communities. I urge everyone to get involved. This is our chance to be part of the change and to make our voices heard in the ongoing fight for a more equitable health system. Sign-up details will be shared soon, and I hope to see more of us there - because turning these conversations into action is how we create a healthier future for all of us.

How can Local Authorities help shape healthier food environments?

Posted by Amelia Lake, Claire O'Malley and Helen Moore, Fuse researchers from Teesside University

This week I joined other health professionals across the country in signing an open letter from the Obesity Health Alliance (OHA) to the Prime Minister, giving our support for new policy reforms, allowing the planning system to better support the creation of healthy, active local communities and reduce health inequalities. The letter was issued alongside the OHA's Local Government Position Statement: “Empowering Communities to Create Healthier Local Food Environments”, which contains a list of recommendations and a supporting package of evidence.

In support of the OHA statement paper and on the back of the news that the government plans to ban junk food TV adverts before 9pm next year, here we highlight the need to make it easier for local authorities to control their local food environments.

Why we need to act now

It’s essential to create healthier environments that make it easier for people to access nutritious food and engage in physical activity. With the cost of living rising, more people are facing food insecurity, and obesity remains a major health issue. Local authorities have a crucial role in shaping healthier communities, but they face challenges due to funding cuts. Despite these difficulties, professionals across the country are working hard, but they need clearer national policies to support their efforts.

The role of National Planning Guidance

Planning guidance should clearly prioritise public health. While policies often focus on individual responsibility, local governments can work with their communities to promote healthier lifestyles. Our research has shown how local authorities can shape healthier environments by collaborating with various stakeholders, from community members to policy makers.

Everyone’s responsibility

Creating healthy food environments requires collaboration among many professionals within local governments. When it comes to handling appeals for fast-food outlets, our research found that good communication between teams is key to defending decisions. It’s also important to understand how fast-food outlets affect communities and health over the long term. To improve the process, professionals should be trained in accessing relevant data and records.

Using regulations to improve the food landscape

Local authorities can use planning regulations to limit the number of fast-food outlets and promote healthier options. For example, in North East town Gateshead, limiting new fast-food outlets near schools, in areas with too many, or in places with high childhood obesity rates has reduced fast-food outlet numbers by 17.5% in just four years. This shows how strategic planning can make a real difference in promoting healthier food choices.

Working with the planning inspectorate

The National Planning Policy Framework supports the idea of “healthy communities,” and local governments can reject fast-food applications if they threaten local health goals. However, these decisions are often appealed, and the Planning Inspectorate makes the final decision. Our Fuse research shows that having a Local Plan in place helps local authorities reject such applications, but even with additional planning documents, success isn’t guaranteed. It's important for new planning guidelines to support public health and ensure that the Planning Inspectorate works with local authorities to meet health priorities.

Regulating outdoor food advertising

We support extending regulations on unhealthy food and drink ads beyond TV and online to outdoor spaces like bus stops. After London banned junk food ads on public transport, local governments began reviewing their advertising policies with the help of Sustain: the alliance for better food and farming. Our research in the North East found that almost half of bus shelter ads were for food, and 35% of those were for unhealthy options. Many of these ads appeal to children, which is concerning. Although local governments face challenges due to complex contracts with advertisers - and research has explored the advertising of unhealthy commodities (e.g. tobacco, alcohol, less healthy foods and gambling) - more work is needed to reduce the impact of unhealthy advertising.

The changing food landscape

A recent study in North East England showed that after a new fast-food outlet opened, visits by 11- to 16-year-olds increased significantly within the first nine months. The young people said they were attracted by the taste, low prices, socialising and free Wi-Fi. While this isn’t covered by current fast-food restrictions, it shows the need to look at the entire food system and where outlets are located. Policies that prevent students from leaving school during lunch could also help reduce fast-food consumption.

Another growing trend is "dark kitchens," which only prepare food for delivery services like Deliveroo and Uber Eats. While these kitchens bring economic benefits, they raise public health concerns, especially in low-income areas. Local authorities need to stay informed about this trend and address the challenges it presents, such as the increase in unhealthy food options. Some professionals worry that current regulations for fast-food outlets don’t work well for dark kitchens, so there’s a need to adapt the system to ensure public health is protected.

Monitoring and evaluation

It's important for local authorities to regularly review the food environment and assess how well their policies are working. By collecting and analysing data, they can identify areas for improvement and make sure their strategies are effective and responsive to community needs.

Focusing on these areas will help local governments create environments that support healthy choices and improve the overall wellbeing of their communities. With thoughtful planning and strong community involvement, they can significantly impact public health. To do this effectively, local authorities need clear understanding of planning policies, support from senior management, adequate staff, and the right resources to handle cases efficiently.

Amelia Lake is Professor of Public Health Nutrition at Teesside University, Associate Director of Fuse, the Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, a dietitian and public health nutritionist.

Dr Claire O'Malley is a Research Associate at Teesside University and a Fuse Associate member

Helen Moore is an Associate Professor at Teesside University and a Fuse Associate member

Adapted with thanks to the Obesity Health Alliance

Photo by Erik Mclean on Unsplash

Food insecurity in pregnancy is putting women’s health at risk and babies at a health disadvantage. That is unfair and unjust

Posted by Zoë Bell, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, King’s College London

In the three years since we started this project a lot has changed, and nothing has changed at the same time. Just as the pandemic was leaving a shadow behind us, we entered a new chapter of social and economic challenge; notably, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Brexit fuelling a cost-of-living crisis with huge impacts on our food system and food prices. These events, in their own unique ways, have left households more vulnerable to experiencing poverty, and the topic of this blog, food insecurity.

During this time, we’ve witnessed food insecurity become a more prominent feature in the news with the help of celebrity advocates and mutual aid groups which brought communities together to support one another. Headline examples are Marcus Rashford’s campaign supporting the extension of free school meals over the summer holidays, and most recently, Taylor Swift’s donation to food banks in cities across the UK as part of her tour. Within the context of a decade long erosion of the social security safety net, the charitable sector has stepped in to provide food relief; but it’s clear this is just a sticking plaster.

As fans gathered at @MurrayfieldStad on Friday for the first of three record-breaking gigs, we found out that @taylorswift13 would be making a donation to support foodbanks across the city 🪩Thank you so much Taylor 🫶
Want to help? Donate £13 (#IYKYK): https://t.co/itIShHqprD pic.twitter.com/zVh2zfbZ42

— EdinburghFoodProject (@EdinFoodProject) June 10, 2024

While temporary economic, social and nutrition policies were put in place during the pandemic to support vulnerable families, long-term commitment has been lacking.

Time is ticking and it is the most vulnerable who are paying the price. Indeed, pregnancy is a time when the consequences of inadequate support come at a premium cost.

We know how important it is for pregnant women to eat a nutritious and well-balanced diet for their own health and for their developing baby. This is where our research fits in. We set out to pull together all the available evidence to explore whether there are differences in pregnancy risks for women and babies when they experience food insecurity.

Our two new reviews of the evidence around food insecurity in pregnancy and the links with maternal weight, diet, and pregnancy health show worrying results, including both physical and mental health risks. While we were expecting to see some health implications, the extent of the risk for poorer health was shocking. Pregnant women experiencing food insecurity were significantly more likely to have poor mental health, obesity, poor quality diets, develop Gestational Diabetes and dental problems.

Infographic to translate the review findings co-designed with experts by experience during an engagement workshop in Newcastle
Upon Tyne, North East England. Funded by Tilly Hale a Newcastle University Faculty Medical Sciences Engagement fund.

Noticeably, these reviews lacked studies from the UK with studies mainly from the USA. You might ask does this matter? Yes. Why? Because the USA has long-standing nutritional support for pregnant women, with evidence of having beneficial impacts on women's diet and health. This embedded support might have reduced or completely masked some of the associations that food insecurity has with pregnancy risks reported in these studies. Whereas in the UK nutritional programs are not as extensive and women lack support. This means we might find that the risks are worse and the need for support is greater than we currently think it is in the UK.

We acknowledge these reviews are based on observational data, exploring association rather than causation. Women experiencing food insecurity are likely living with multiple other causes of stress that could be contributing to food insecurity and pregnancy risks. Nevertheless, we see from the evidence to date that these women are at risk and need more support. Our ongoing work exploring experiences of food insecurity during pregnancy also suggests that current support initiatives are not doing enough, and further policy-related intervention is required, further emphasising the need for action now.

Our new reviews show that food insecurity during pregnancy contributes to health inequalities, putting women’s health at risk, and babies at a health disadvantage from before a they are born. For example, when babies are exposed to gestational diabetes or maternal obesity, they are more likely to develop type 2 diabetes or obesity themselves later in life. That is unfair. That is unjust. So, we ask, how much more evidence is needed before urgent policy action is taken to mitigate food insecurity?

Much more support from government is needed to make sure that women and babies are protected from food insecurity during pregnancy. Only time will tell if tides will turn under this new Labour government.

So, what do we suggest?

First, an uplift in the value of the Healthy Start scheme, a policy directly related to nutrition during pregnancy and early years. Second, greater integrated care across multiple sectors for women during the pregnancy period. Thirdly, considering the wider interlinked, structural barriers for families living in poverty (and based on our broader research program) removal of the two-child benefit cap, continued expansion of childcare support and of free school meals. These policies would relieve financial pressures on households with young families.

In the meantime, watch this space as our research team has two ongoing reviews exploring pregnant women and people's experiences of food insecurity and its relationship with breastfeeding and infant feeding. Some of our other ongoing studies are exploring the experiences, risks and support needs of women during pregnancy and in the postnatal period after birth, and their families across a diverse UK population in Gateshead, Coventry, Middlesbrough, Lambeth and Bradford.

If you are inspired to help add evidence and advocate for food security amongst mothers and children, then please consider becoming a member of our Nourishing Futures Network. This was established by Fuse members working with international colleagues. The network’s mission is to lead knowledge exchange and generate knowledge in this emerging field around food insecurity before and during pregnancy and in the first 2001 days of life.

Find out more

This research has been summarised in the following:

• News item: Unaffordable food putting mums-to-be at risk
• Research brief: What impact does food insecurity have in pregnancy? - with key findings and policy relevance & implications
• Read the papers in full:
• Associations between food insecurity in high-income countries and pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
• Food insecurity during pregnancy in high-income countries, and maternal weight and diet: A systematic review and meta-analysis

From crisis to collaboration: Transforming support for people experiencing homelessness in North East England

Posted by Steven Thirkle, Research Associate, Newcastle University

People experiencing homelessness often have multiple and complex health and social care needs that require support from many services. However, accessing and coordinating this support can be difficult when services are disconnected geographically or relationally. Often the person who is experiencing these challenges is the one who has to reach out for help, and this can be extremely hard for someone also managing day-to-day homelessness.

During our workshop, More Than Minutes visually captured our discussions, providing a dynamic summary. These visuals encapsulate key insights and recommendations, offering an engaging snapshot of our collective journey towards transforming support for people experiencing homelessness.

Over the past two years, our team has been working with services that provide support to people experiencing homelessness in rural and coastal areas of North East England. Our goal has been to explore innovative ways to improve access to care and support for these vulnerable people. Here, we share our research findings, shed light on the challenges faced by people experiencing homelessness and present our co-produced recommendations for creating a more effective and holistic (whole person) support system.

What does hospital data tell us?

To understand why people experiencing homelessness in the North East often turn to emergency care services in rural and coastal areas rather than seeking alternative forms of support, we examined hospital data on people attending emergency care services who had no recorded address. We discovered that there are many contributing factors, including struggles with alcohol and drugs, mental health issues, and challenging social situations. These challenges often occur at the same time, exacerbating their complexity and approaches to treatment.

What is stopping homeless people accessing services?

While this numerical data provided valuable insights, it did not uncover the underlying reasons behind the lack of engagement with other support services. To gain deeper insights, we interviewed people experiencing homelessness as well as those providing support in rural and coastal areas. The interviews aimed to explore experiences with emergency care services, overall health, social lives, and past traumas. They revealed significant barriers to accessing services, such as limited resources, transportation challenges inherent to rural areas, and the isolation often felt in coastal communities. Additionally, rigid service criteria and thresholds prevented people from receiving the support they urgently needed, further compounded by the sparse availability of services in these regions.

What is the current picture?

A comprehensive and integrated approach tailored to the rural and coastal context was needed to provide effective support to people experiencing homelessness in these areas, so we mapped out existing services and their collaborative relationships in the areas. Our findings showed a fragmented system, with many services operating independently and lacking essential connections to the core network of services necessary for addressing the unique challenges faced by people in rural and coastal areas.

How do we address the gaps?

In response to these gaps, we organised a workshop at the Community Hub in Cramlington, Northumberland, bringing together over 70 people including professionals from health, housing, social services, local authorities, law enforcement, emergency response, and third-sector organisations, as well as people with lived experience of homelessness and mental health issues in these regions. Together we developed recommendations for a more effective and collaborative approach to supporting people experiencing homelessness in rural and coastal areas. Seven key areas for recommendations were identified:

1. Long-term funding and resources: Campaign for sustained funding and increased resources to support comprehensive and ongoing assistance for homeless people.
2. Coordination, connectivity, and communication: Establish robust ways to coordinate, foster better connectivity between services, and improve communication channels to ensure a seamless and integrated support system.
3. Accessible services - pathways to support: Develop clear and accessible pathways for homeless people to access a wide range of support services, including health, housing, social services, and mental health resources.
4. Building trust and co-developing services with lived experience: Foster trust and inclusivity by actively involving peoples with lived experience of homelessness in the design, development, and evaluation of support services.
5. Trauma-informed practice: Implement trauma-informed approaches across all support services, recognising and addressing the underlying trauma experienced by homeless people.
6. Improved data sharing: Establish efficient data-sharing agreements for support services to ensure comprehensive and up-to-date information, enabling better coordination and informed decision-making.
7. Staff retention and wellbeing: Prioritise the wellbeing of support staff by providing resources, training, and support to prevent burnout and turnover, fostering continuity of care.

We have developed a handy two-page Fuse research brief which pulls out the key findings and recommendations for practice and policy co-developed with people with lived experience. 

Follow this link to read the brief