Women’s Welfare in the Maltese Islands

with special regard to women in difficult circumstances

Summary of a report prepared by sociologist Professor Anthony M. Abela, December 1, 2000

Introduction
The Commission for the Advancement of Women within the Ministry for Social Policy, has commisssioned a study on Social Welfare Structures for Women in the Maltese Islands. The following is a summary of main findings from phase two of the project concerned with the social conditions, needs and expectations of women in the Maltese islands, with special regard to women in difficult circumstances; the use they make of welfare services and their evaluation of available services and organisations. It is based on a nationallly representative survey of 500 women, held between March and May 2000.
Main findings
Women derive greatest satisfaction from their family (81%) and the house in which they live (78%). They are less satisfied with the environment (68%), friendships (67%) or the things they buy (57%). Much fewer women, however, are very satisfied with their free time (42%). Most women feel happy, calm and satisfied (36% many times, 54% sometimes) and a few others are full of energy and enthusiasm (20% many times, 54% sometimes). Others feel tired and stressed (20% many times, 54% sometimes) or worried (19%, 50%). Much fewer, however, feel sad (7% many times, 38% sometimes), alone and isolated (6% many times, 30% sometimes) or bored (6% many times, 28% sometimes).
Family relations
Women have frequent interaction with relatives and members of their extended family. Highest contact is reported between mothers and their adult children who are not living in the same household. Generally, most women entertain a very close or quite close relationship with at least one member of their family. At the same time, it is not uncommon for most women to feel estranged from at least another member of their family.
 Not all women see their family and friends as often as they like. Quite a few do not find the time either because they have to look after their children (21%), work outside the house (19%), are busy with housework (18%) or have to look after their family (9%). Others live too far away (15%) and have no private (14%) or public transport (5%). A few others cannot go out because they are old (8%), sick or disabled (5%), are afraid of violence (4%) vandalism or robbery (5%) or because they have problems of physical access (2.4%).

Help from family and friends
The majority recall having received a lot of help from family and friends when they were sick in bed and needed somebody to look after them (86%),  to move furniture or other extraordinary housework (78%), when in need of somebody to talk to (74%) or advice on important decisions in life (73%).  Many others find a lot of help to look after children, old or disabled people (71%).  Many have received much help when they had trouble with their husband or partner (56%). Quite a few others, however, do not find adequate help in the caring of dependent children, older and disabled people (12%) and in particular, when in trouble with their partner (24%).
Living accommodation
The majority (70%) are home owners. A few others are paying a loan on their property (8.4%). Quite a few rent thier house from a private owner (14.4%). Others live in social housing (6.1%). A few others live with friends, relatives or have alternative housing without paying any rent (1.4%). The majority are very (75%) or quite (21%) satisfied with their residence. Quite a few, however, are not at all satisfied (4.4%).  Most live in well kept (85%) or quite well maintained (13.5%) houses. A few others (1.5%), however, are living in houses in a bad state of repair. The most common housing problems are humidity (24%), mould (17%), inadequate heating (12%), lack of space (10%) and dark rooms (5%). Quite a few have broken windows (2.7%) or leaking roofs (2.2%). A few others do not have access to a roof, balcony, yard or garden (1.9%). Quite a few (6.7%) think that their residence has a negative influence on their health.

Health
Four in ten of all women respondents have very good health. Another five out of every ten report occasional sickness, and sometimes feel pain. Quite a few are sick and feel a lot of pain (6.3%). Fourteen percent suffer from a long sickness or a disability. More than half of the sick and the disabled also have activity limitations.

Social Exclusion
Over the past year, quite a few women respondents have often (4.4%) or sometimes (24%) felt socially excluded because they were short of money. The majority (71.3%), however, have experienced no social exclusion for lack of financial resources. The most common reasons for social isolation are lack of  own transport (15%), irregular bus services (12.8%) and having to look after the family (12.8%) and children (12%). Certain women feel isolated because they have problems of access (3.9%) or a disability (0.4%). Some feel cut off because of the demands of their job (3.7%), others because they have no friends (3.9%) or family (2.3%). A few others find fault with sexism (2.8%) and racism (0.4%).  The majority (55.6%), however, do not feel socially excluded for any of the above-mentioned reasons.

Time management
Many women feel stressed for not having completed everything at the end of the day (26.1%) and others out of overwork (21.6%). Quite a few have no time to enjoy themselves (17.4%), are workaholic (15.5%), worried for not spending enough time with their family (13.3%) or do not sleep enough (10.9%). Many others feel isolated in a routine (37%), feel a need to slow down (39%) or to spend more time on their own (16.7%). The majority (53.6%), however, have a feeling of having completed everything at the end of the day.

Home socio-economic situation
The majority of women respondents come from households where there is at least one person working to earn a living (78.6%). Quite a few, however, have an able-bodied family member who is unemployed (11.1%), and a few others have a member of their family receiving unemployment benefits (17.7%).  A few others receive help other than from Social Security (3.4%). In fact, some women receive financial help from friends or relatives (2%), a few others receive donations from the Church or Caritas (0.6%), or obtain services from volunteers (1.1%).

Income management
The majority report being able to save some (45.5%) or quite a lot (11.8%) from their income. Many others spend all their earnings (34.7%). Quite a few live on their savings (6.4%) and a few others (1.7%) have to borrow money. Similar percentages do not find much difficulty to manage their monthly household budget and reach the end of the month with ease (53.4%) and a few others with great ease (9.4%). Many others, however, encounter some (30.6%), quite (4.7%) or many (2%) problems.
 Over the past year almost half of all women respondents reduced spending on small things (46.6%). In particular, more women did without something necessary for themselves (34.5%), than did not buy something necessary for the family (7%). Quite a few reduced spending on food (12%), others did not pay a bill or instalment (4.1%). A few others resumed or kept working to help the family (9.8%). Many others, however, did not take any economic measure (42.8%).
Welfare Benefits
Most common social benefits are children’s allowance (31.9%), old people’s pensions (18.5%) and widow’s pensions (7.4%). Quite a few women respondents receive a university stipend (7.3%) or an unemployment benefit (4.2%). A few others receive benefits for people with disabilities (1.9%), social assistance for separated women (1.9%), home help (1.7%), benefits for workplace accidents (1.5%), children’s disability (1.3%), or single parenthood (0.2%). Other respondents also receive maternity benefits, free medicines or benefits for carers of parents.
Negative experiences
Over the past year the most common negative experience for most women respondents was the death of a close friend or a member of the family (44.4%). Others suffered the loss of a job by a member of the family (11.2%), problems with their parents or relatives (9.6%), incurred debt or a loan (9.3%), had problems with their children (8.2%) or their neighbours (8%), an accident in a public place (6.8%), the separation or break-up of an intimate relationship (6.8%), a sickness or a serious accident (6%). Quite a few had a traffic accident (4.9%), an accident at home (2.5%) or in the workplace (1.5%). A few others had trouble in their place of work (5.5%), changed job (4.6%) or house (0.8%). A few others had food poisoning (1.8%). Over the past year, only three in ten (29.6%) did not experience any of the above.

Social affliction
The majority experienced a not serious illness (71.8% sometimes, and 7.4% many times), fatigue or stress (54.1% sometimes, and 13.4% many times). Many others experienced financial problems (25.6% sometimes, and 4.5% many times), trouble in the family (15.7% sometimes, and 4.2% many times) or a long and serious illness (12.7% sometimes, and 6.6% many times).  Quite a few had to bring up children by themselves (5.2 % sometimes, and 3.6% many times), suffered a depression or mental health problems (9.2% sometimes, and 2.8% many times) or a physical disability  (3% sometimes, and 2.8% many times). A few others had to put up with an unfaithful husband (1.1% sometimes, and 1.1% many times) or domestic violence (0.2% sometimes, and 0.2% many times) and quite a few had conflicts over property (2.4% sometimes, and 1.8% many times). A significant percentage of women respondents (2.6%, 1.9%, 0.9% respectively), however, did not answer these questions, suggesting that unfaithfulness and its related violence and conflicts over property are more widespread than usually reported.
 A few others had children out of wedlock (2.9%), suffered from alcohol (2.4%) or drug problems (1.4%), were physically (1%) or sexually (0.8%) abused, or were victims of prostitution (0.4%). A few others did not answer most of the latter questions, suggesting that unmarried motherhood (0.4%), problems of drug (0.2%) or alcohol abuse (0.4%), just as physical  (0.4%) or sexual abuse (0.4%) and prostitution (0.9%) are more widespread than usually reported. Most women respondents who suffered one or more of the above-mentioned afflictions found solace in the family, a few others were helped jointly by their family and an institution but very few were helped exclusively by friends, neighbours or a welfare institution acting on its own. In some instances quite a few women respondents, victims of sexual  (100%) or physical abuse (55.9%) in particular, received no help, possibly because they kept silent about the matter and did not seek any assistance.
 The majority of women respondents under stress or fatigue (80.2%), with a mild illness (79.2%), in trouble with the family (71.3%), unmarried mothers (68.5%), wives of unfaithful husbands (60.5%), women with physical disabilities (58.3%), lone parents (58%), those suffering from depression or mental health problems (50.4%), and those with a serious and long sickness (50.3%) found help only in the family. On its own, the family was less helpful in cases of domestic violence, substance abuse, and physical or sexual abuse. In similar cases the family requires the subsidiary help of social institutions. In some instances, when afflicted by problems of alcohol (21%), conflict over property (19%), physical abuse (14.9%), drug problems (13.7%), domestic violence (7%), mental health problems (7%), physical disability (6.6%), children out of wedlock (6.4%) or long and serious sickness (5.2%) quite a few women received only the support of institutions.

Social Services
The majority of women respondents are quite familiar (55.4%) and a few others are very familiar (8.2%) with social work and counselling. Quite a few (36.4%), however, are not at all familiar with these services. The majority look most favourably on counselling services offered by the Church closely followed by private voluntary services, Church social work and other private services but less on State social work.

Social Work
Less than one out of every ten women respondents (7%) has ever made an appointment with a social worker in an agency or organisation of social welfare. The majority of those requesting help had their first appointment without any delay (51.3%). A few others were received after a few days (23.3%) or within a week (14.8%). Very few had to wait for two weeks (2.9%), three weeks (2.2%) or one month and longer (5.5%) to see a social worker.
 Most women clients met a social worker once a week (40%), a few others once every other week (14.8%), and many others once every month or less often (36.3%). Very few clients (7.3%) met their social worker more than once a week. Most clients made use of the services for a few weeks (38.7%), others for a few months (23.5%) or a whole year (17.3%). Very few prolonged their contacts over two (2.9%), three (2.5%), or four years or longer (9.6%). A few others do not remember how long they have been seeing their social worker (5.5%).

Welfare services
Irrespective of their familiarity or contact with social work agencies, all respondents were requested to identify the assistance they ever received from welfare organisations. Most women respondents came across useful assistance when they listened to educational programmes on the media (28.7% sometimes, 19.1% many times). Many others received useful information (12% sometimes, 3.8% many times), medical or legal advice (12.7% sometimes, 2.6% many times), spiritual direction (10.5% sometimes, 2.6% many times), spoke to a social worker (10.4% sometimes, 2.3% many times), or attended meetings for people in the same situation (6.1% sometimes, 4.3 % many times). Others sat for counselling sessions (6% sometimes, 2% many times), and a few others were assisted to apply for social benefits (6.3% sometimes, 0.8% many times). Quite a few were advised on the upbringing of children (4.9% sometimes, 0.7% many times), on relations with their partner (5.1% sometimes, 0.5% many times), or on birth control (2.1% sometimes, 0.6% many times). Others received home visits by a social worker (3.7% sometimes, 1.8% many times) or were sent to a special centre (1.5% sometimes, 0.9% many times). A few others obtained financial help (2.3% sometimes, 0.2% many times), childcare (0.2% sometimes, 0.2% many times), housing (1.2%), found employment (0.6%), protected from an abuse (0.4%) or referred to another agency (1.6% sometimes, 0.4% many times).
 The majority assess the help received as good (53.5%) or very good (26.9%). A few others find that it was good quite (17.2%) and only the very few believe that it was not good at all (2.4%).  Women respondents report receiving most concrete assistance in descending order of importance from a church organisation, such as a parish, association or ghaqda (21.9%), Social Security (14.7%), a Health Centre, Hospital or Clinic (14.4%), Caritas (8.5%), the Cana Movement (5.9%), a private organisation or Centre (3.2%), the Centru Hidma Socjali (2.7%), Sedqa (2.7%) or another government department (2.1%). Fewer women respondents report receiving concrete help from Catholic Action (1.4%), the Social Welfare Development Programme or SWDP (1.3%), Merhba Bik (0.4%), Fejda (0.4%) or the Department for Women in Society (0.3%). Many others (18.9%) are unable to recall the name of the programme or organisation from which they received assistance.

Importance of institutions
Health Care Centres, Hospitals and Clinics, Church parish organisations, associations or movements, the Department of Social Security and the Community Chest Fund are the most commonly known institutions. Very few respondents do not know about Caritas (2.5%), the Cana Movement (2.7%), Catholic Action (7.1%) or Sedqa (9.6%). Quite a few, however, do not know about Mer]ba Bik (17.4%), the Centru Hidma Socjali (20.4%), and other Government Departments (23.2%). Least known are private organisations or centres (31.6%), the Social Welfare Development Programme (36.1%), the Department for Women in Society (37.4%) and least of all Fejda (46.5%).
 Caritas (9.46), Fejda (9.39), Sedqa (9.39), the Community Chest Fund (9.34), Merhba Bik (9.33), Health Centres, Hospitals and Clinics (9.28) obtained the highest scores on a ten-point importance scale. Next in importance respondents rank the Department for Women in Society (9.16), Centru Hidma Socjali (9.11), the Social Welfare Development Programme (9.04), the Cana Movement (9.03), parishes, associations or movements of the Church (9.01). Less important are private centres (8.86), the Department of Social Security (8.83), Catholic Action (8.83) and other Government Departments (8.74).

Need of other assistance
Respondents were asked to identify any other assistance they need. They were shown a list of six options, ranging from ‘happy with what I have, need nothing else’, ‘more financial help’, ‘help from professionals’, ‘help from volunteers’, ‘hospitality in a special centre’. Alternatively, in an open-ended option, respondents were able to specify something else of their own liking.
 A considerable percentage (35.9%) of women respondents did not answer this question, possibly because they could not articulate their specific needs. The majority of those who answered replied that they are happy with what they have, and want nothing else (59.3%). Many others expressed a need for more financial help (35.6%). Quite a few would like professional help (3.6%). A few others would like to receive help from volunteers (0.9%), hospitality in a special centre (0.3%), or support services to women who work (0.3%).

Responsibility for services
The majority of women respondents put the onus of responsibility for friendship (71.1%, 23%), entertainment (69.6%, 17.2%) and work (45.2%, 7.3%) firstly on the individual and secondly on the family. Responsibility for childcare (58.7%, 11.1%) and housing (44.7%, 29.1%) is attributed firstly to the family and secondly to the individual. Medical services (55.5%, 30%) and education (45.7%, 26.7%), however, are assigned to the joint responsibility of the State and other major non-governmental organisations or exclusively to the State. Very few respondents attribute main responsibility for health services (4.8%), entertainment (3.2%), education (2.4%), childcare (2.2%), work (2.2%) and least of all housing (0.9%), to the private sector. A few others entrust main responsibility for friendship (2.1%), childcare (1.8%) and entertainment to non-governmental organisations.

Responsibility for people
The majority of women respondents assign a joint responsibility to the State and other major non-governmental organisations for the care of people with disabilities (64.2%), people in need (61.5%), abused children (60.1%), battered women (60%), people with problems of drugs and alcohol (59.8%), people with AIDS (59.3%), the socially excluded (56.6%) and single parents (51.3%). Many others put the responsibility exclusively on the State, or jointly on the State and other organisations for the care of refugees (46.7%, 44.2%), the unemployed (42.5%, 46.6%), homeless people (42.3%, 49.2%) and ex-convicts (33.2%, 48.3%). Quite a few assign the main responsibility for older people (41.1%) and single parents (20.3%) to the family.  Much fewer respondents, however, put the onus for battered women (17.2%), abused children (15.7%), the socially excluded (15.6%), substance abusers (14%), people with disabilities (7.7%) or ex-convicts on the family. Quite a few attribute responsibility for the care of battered women (17.2%), abused children (15.7%), those dependent on drugs and alcohol (14%), single parents (11.1%), people with AIDS (10.9%), those with disabilities (7.7%) and ex-convicts (6.7%) to non-governmental organisations. A few others think that the unemployed (4.8%), ex-convicts (3%), single parents (2.9%), the homeless (1.9%) and people with drug or alcohol problems (1.5%) should be responsible for themselves.

Reforms in Social Welfare
At a time when the State cannot increase its expenditure on social welfare, coupled with ever increasing needs and shifting responsibilities, women respondents were requested to give their proposals for reform.
 In the first place, the majority of women respondents recommend a better use of volunteers and part-time workers in social welfare (56.3% strongly agree and 32.7% agree) but are strongly against the expansion of services if this entails an increase in taxes (61%). The majority are also against State subsidies for childcare if this entails a decrease in other welfare benefits (61.9%). Similarly, the majority do not want an increase in personalised social services if this is accompanied by a decrease in welfare benefits (56.9%). Respondents look more favourably to an increase in cash benefits and a decrease in personalised social services (18.1% strongly agree, 34.7% agree).
 In the second place, women respondents recommend (41.5% strongly agree and 31.8% agree) the integration of, or more plausibly, a greater collaboration between agencies offering similar services.
 In the third place, women respondents recommend policies for an increase in the participation of women in the workforce (23.2% strongly agree, 36.7% agree). Similar measures would enable women to support themselves and reduce their dependency on the welfare state.
 In the fourth place, and closely related to the third above, women respondents recommend the introduction of fees for welfare services. Thus, quite a few women respondents agree (38.5%) or strongly agree (17.4%) for clients to pay for welfare services.
 As a fifth measure, many women respondents recommend (18% strongly agree, 34.5% agree) an increase in cash benefits to women in need even if this requires a decrease in personalised social services.
  Overall, the majority of women respondents do not recommend a decrease in welfare benefits (56.9% strongly disagree), nor the privatisation of social work agencies (54.1% strongly disagree). Above all they are against an arbitrary increase in taxes for the indiscriminate expansion of welfare services (65.1% strongly disagree). The current situation calls for a strategic reorganisation in the management and provision of social welfare.
 In the final analysis, the majority of women respondents are generally willing to pay more taxes in the first place for the improvement of home help services for older women (64.5%), secondly to develop homes for elderly women in the community (61.3%), and thirdly to provide shelters for battered wives (58%). Most women respondents are also willing to pay more taxes to improve social work services for women in difficult circumstances (50.8%), but are much less supportive of mediation services to women in broken marriages (32.6%), housing for unmarried mothers (31.2%) or childcare to working mothers (20.7%).
 It is to be expected that women in different social conditions have specific needs of their own and recommend different solutions for possible reforms in social welfare. In this respect, welfare structures have to differentiate between the provision of services for married mothers and lone parents, employed and unemployed women, the well to do and the less well off, younger and older women. For this purpose, the forthcoming final report to be published next year by the Commission for the Advancement of Women, takes stock of exisitng welfare structures and confronts recommendations made by welfare workers with those of women in general, and the needs and wants of women in difficult circumstances, in particular.