I read this article to find out where the statistic of 105,000 homeless youths came from. In fact it does not refer to what we home owners would consider to be homeless - that is, those living on park benches and under bridges - but those sleeping on sofas at friends' places. The author has taken a statistic in the last census and arbitrarily doubled it then added a little, on the grounds that economic conditions are now worse. Perhaps, but double? What did the original stat refer to? Were those caught by the census question genuinely in distress or were they crashing at a mate's temporarily because they had shifted cities or had been thrown out by their girl/boyfriends, and had not moved into a new place, or whatever? I'm sure youth homelessness is a serious problem, but if the author wants to chuck around statistics then we should pick them up and examine them.

Great article George, youth homelessness is a growing problem and schools probably are one of the best places to address it. At a school I used to teach at we had quite a high rate of dropping out, we tried to follow up as much as possible and the reasons almost always revolved around a family crisis and the student being kicked out of home. Once they left school we didnt see them again. They may have found work but I doubt it if they werent able to maintain school attendance.

I don't know the %age of real homeless youths but I'm inclined to think that many are by choice simply because they don't like home discipline.
12 months national service would certainly go a long way towards reducing the incidence of homelessness.

Thanks for the comment Curmedgeon,
First of all its not 105,000 homeless young people - it was 44,547 out of a total homeless population of about 105,000. I tried to make this clear in the article and the references certainly do.

You have identified two of the major issues in homeless research/policy - defining "homelessness" and counting it.

The census might undercount homelessness but it is clearly the most effective survey of the Australian populace.

In terms of defining the term, I understand that many people only consider rough sleepers to be homeless, the ABS would define this as primary homelessness, but they also count secondary and tertiary homelessness. In my view people living in cars and moving from couch to couch are also in need - however we define their circumstances.

I refer in the article to "couch surfing" not a term I particularily like, but one that has gained some traction in the sector. Its pretty hard to stay in school or apply for jobs when you dont know where you will be sleeping that night.

Anyway, thanks again for the comment, much appreciated.

George Seymour

George - I take your point but, no, the article doesn't make the stats clear. You mention a figure of 105,000 and then another of 44,000 but without saying how they are related - except, now that I think of it, by implication in the article, but this still needs to be said explicitly. And the 105,000 figure remains unsourced.. ABS? If so what's the bureau's split of the stats?.. I think we also need to be careful about the split between those who society would consider to be in need - and thus requiring some sort of intervention - as opposed to those going through a bad patch. Sleeping away from home while still at school is never good, but I think we need to go through a few more steps to get a handle on the size of the problem.

I was actually thinking along the same lines as Curmudgeon.
I didn't think the number was explained the way George has now made clear. (Interestingly IIRC social welfare agencies tend to state that homelessness is both difficult to quantify and underreported - surprise)
I do, however, think that youth homelessness (however it is defined) is a significant problem, but I do also agree that, as Individual mentioned, SOME of it may be by choice through such factors as not wanting to succumb to parental discipline.
So, how do we address real need without making the prospect so 'attractive' as to encourage those who simply don't want to live by Mum and Dad's rules?