Some families move as often as three times a year. Both residents and housing workers see this as contributing to the decline of an area. In a small-scale exploratory study of tenants in the West End of Newcastle, Keith Richardson of Communicate and Peter Corbishley of Research and Change found evidence to suggest that this pattern has its origins in childhood or adolescent experiences, and is not necessarily the result of either economic factors or illegal activities.

• Professionals and others saw frequent movers as being 'problem families', but by usual definitions (for example, being in contact with social services) most interviewed would not have been defined as such.

• People interviewed did not appear to choose frequent moving as a way to make money through benefit or other forms of fraud.

• In terms of family size, the size of social networks, or attitudes to the neighbourhood, frequent movers did not appear to differ from more settled residents.

• However, the frequent movers interviewed were likely to have left home and school at the earliest opportunity; have had their first child at around 19; and have experienced some unaddressed trauma in childhood or adolescence. They were also more likely to be white, unemployed and generally to lack a sense of purpose or ambition.

• The researchers conclude that:
  -     the cumulative effects of low income, parental unemployment, and an unsupportive environment lead to an early and ill-prepared transition from adolescence to adulthood.
  -     this difficult and often incomplete transition may set people on a path of frequent moving as they seek to find the support and love they desire. It is sustained by the break-up of households (often through domestic violence) followed by the renewal of the search which may only end if a supportive partner is found.

Background
An earlier study by the same researchers found that many professionals and local residents saw frequent movers as causing problems; for example, all six recent unusual deaths of children were thought to have taken place within families of frequent movers. Frequent movers were seen as being heavy users of services, often described as poor housekeepers (ie not being able to keep their house tidy or provide a regular routine in a way reminiscent of descriptions of 'problem families' in previous research). However, although all saw frequent movers as problematic, some saw families themselves as culprits while others felt they were more victims of circumstance.

This study's review of existing research found few references to frequent moving, although previous research in the same area had pointed up a link between frequent moving and the state of the local labour market. Previous research studies on 'problem families' suggested that frequent moving might be part of a dynamic pattern across the generations.

Characteristics of frequent movers
The study's preliminary field research found surprisingly few differences between frequent movers and more settled residents. Both groups had similar family sizes and similar views on the state of the area. Frequent movers were more likely to rent from a private landlord and be unemployed but much less likely to be from an ethnic minority background.

Sixteen frequent movers and 17 more settled residents were interviewed in-depth. Although a good number of the frequent movers interviewed at length had had sufficient past contact with agencies to have marked them as 'problem families', most were not using services at the time of the interview. Identifying frequent movers through professional contacts, as most research on problem families has done, would therefore not have identified many of the similarities with other residents.

Analysis of these in-depth interviews again showed that in many ways frequent movers were very similar to more settled residents. They did not appear to be involved in fraudulent behaviour significantly more than other residents. They appeared to be just as sociable and as committed to the area. They were as likely to have 'roots' in the area in terms of contact with their family. A number from both groups had lived in the area for some time, on occasion all their lives.

Analysis of the in-depth interviews with frequent movers revealed three partly overlapping household groupings: families with six or more children, single parents and 'problem families'. These groupings were distinctive within frequent movers in terms of the number of children, how long they had lived in the area, the number of times they had ever moved, and the number of times they had moved in the past three years.

All of the five single parents who had experienced domestic violence appeared to have begun their frequent moving with attempts to escape their male partner/s. This then resulted in continued movement as they were especially vigilant to any perceived threat. Such tension also seemed to characterise other frequent movers who did not report domestic violence, but had been burgled or otherwise harassed. These people seemed to be looking out for trouble around them as a means of determining whether or not they should move. Some of the more settled residents also shared this approach and a feeling of powerlessness; this could also lead them to move home, but less frequently. One more settled resident was surprised that virtually his whole street had been cleared by one family (who were not frequent movers).

"They're good houses. I can't work it out me. Break ins and all that. But plenty of people in this street could have seen them off if they'd all stuck together. So why did they run away?"

None of the frequent movers worked more than a few hours a week and many were on long-term sickness benefit. Frequent movers watched more television than others interviewed and many expressed a general sense of lacking anything to do.

When asked what she did, Marie, a frequent mover, said: "Nothing happens, don't do anything, got nowt to do."

Reasons for moving house
Perhaps surprisingly, frequent movers had on average only slightly weaker friendship ties than more settled residents (in terms of how many friends they had and how often they saw them). But there were differences between frequent movers. The study distinguished three groups, based on their reasons for moving:

• a 'new entrants' group of four, with few or no social ties, who had moved less than average (for frequent movers), had spent less of their lives in the area, and emphasised positive housing reasons for moving, such as getting bigger or cheaper accommodation. This group seemed new to frequent moving, having moved on average around 8 times.
• an 'on the fringe' group of five who were intermediary between the other two groups. They emphasised personal reasons for moving, such as to move in with a partner. Generally they did not report suffering harassment from neighbours and had moved on average around 10 times.
• an 'on the circuit' group of five who emphasised poor housing or harassment as the reason for moving. Nearly all had had contact with the police. They had extensive networks of friends and had lived much of their lives in the area. Again, they had moved on average around 11 times.

Frequent movers were interviewed in-depth about the reasons for their last four moves. The most frequently cited reasons were personal, moving to maintain a relationship or on the break-up of a relationship. Other reasons given were: to get away from the area, to move away from burglaries, to move away from neighbours, or for reasons related to dissatisfaction with the state or cost of the property. Only a few mentioned moving simply to 'upgrade' their property and none of the moves was job-related.

Looking further back at all the reasons elicited from direct questions about moves, as in other research, responses emphasised negative reasons for moving. They included the desire to be closer to family to be secure from trouble. Frequent moving was not something interviewees seemed to control, citing responses to domestic violence, neighbourly harassment or a general build-up of problems. Only in two cases did it seem that moves might have been partly a result of illegal activities.

However, the emphasis changed when reasons for moving were elicited as part of the more general account people gave of their lives. These highlighted more positive personal reasons, such as moving in with a friend or partner. Frequent movers, particularly those in the 'on the circuit' and 'on the fringe' groupings defined above, seemed to be trying to establish their own families. Once relationships failed, as they often did, they moved on. There was evidence that, just as with 'problem families', forming a stable relationship could result in people settling down.

All the frequent movers had experienced traumatic events and poverty in their youth. This could also be the case for more settled residents but they appeared to have received much more support through these crises than the frequent movers had. Frequent movers had often been abandoned by one or both parents or were clearly unloved, being as one said the "black sheep of the family".

Her life includes the violence of her father to her mother, her mother deserting her, the violence of her first husband, harassment because of a murder committed by a flatmate, a criminal record, difficulties at school, the training she has to accept even though she feels it to be useless, the attitudes of the medical profession, the removal of her children and repeatedly being 'scalped' (burgled). She has faced a catalogue of difficulties in her life; when asked what her ambitions are, she says she has none.

It seems that trauma, conflict and poverty do not in themselves create frequent movers. What seems to be lacking is an environment and family to help them deal with these difficulties. Frequent movers had often had family difficulties in childhood and this seemed to lead to difficulties forming their own families in adulthood. For example:

• At the time all the more settled residents were born, at least one of their parents worked; this was the case for only half the frequent movers.

• Only four families of frequent movers had stayed together, compared with all but one of the families of more settled residents.

• The average age of leaving home for frequent movers was 19, compared with 25 for more settled residents.

• On average, frequent movers had their first child at 19, again compared with 25 for more settled residents.

• Six frequent movers had experienced violence from partners; no settled residents reported this.

• Six frequent movers were in long-term relationships, even if not living with their partner, compared with 12 more settled residents.

The strongest relations for many frequent movers seemed to be their attachment to a grandparent who they claimed had loved them and never let them down.

"Nana always used to stick up for me when I was a child."

Conclusion
This research was exploratory and, as such, cannot be used to formulate detailed policies. However, the researchers suggest that a desire to find a stable relationship may underlie frequent moving and this desire may have its roots in early life. Because there is a housing surplus in the area studied, which means people can move on relatively easily, any failure to form a stable satisfying adult relationship seems to lead to a pattern of frequent moving that is only broken if someone is found whom they can love and perhaps more importantly loves them.

If this is the case, it provides further evidence to show that there are no quick fixes to either social exclusion or abandonment of inner city areas. It reinforces the argument that regeneration cannot simply be a matter of pragmatically renewing the housing stock or providing employment training. Preventing frequent moving in this way may at best only hide people's problems and do little to prevent abandonment.

About the study
Judith Brown and Linda Allen also assisted with this research. The study's preliminary field research involved short doorstep interviews with 34 frequent movers (defined as those who had moved 3 times in the past year) and 168 more settled residents. Many moves were between houses that were quite close, sometimes within the same street. Looking at the last three moves of frequent movers, 50 per cent had had more than one house in the West End in the last year. However, 23 per cent had not lived in the North East in the year prior to moving into their current home.

Sixteen frequent movers from the doorstep interviews and 17 more settled residents were interviewed in-depth. The frequent movers were from 15 households, two people now lived together. Interview data were analysed to create an extensive coding grid of their life history and daily routine so as to find out more about them and their reasons for moving frequently. All of the frequent movers lived in private rented property (though most had lived in social housing in the past). In total, eight of the frequent movers lived as single parents, two were living alone and six were living with partners.

The West End of Newcastle suffers from high levels of unemployment and deprivation. It is made up of a mix of social and private rented property with a declining number of owner-occupied properties. It has recently suffered from high levels of empty properties.

There has been little research on this area and studies that did mention frequent moving referred to it obliquely. As professionals often likened frequent movers to problem families, the study's literature review focused on this area and on studies carried out in the West End.

For consistency with existing literature, the study equated 'problem families' with poor housekeeping. However, the study evidence suggested that this was often due to the physical state of some of the housing into which individuals had recently moved, rather than poor management. Indeed a number of frequent movers had developed great skill in doing up properties very quickly at their own expense.

Click on the 'order report' icon in the left margin to order online.