Clustered groups at risk of isolation or loneliness In this section people at risk of loneliness or Bereavement isolation have been grouped under six clusters: Widows and widowers do not just suffer from Family-related loneliness emotional loneliness because they have lost an > Disability and ageing intimate relationship. Research has found that > having a partner is also important for keeping Resource-constrained groups > someone connected to a wider circle of friends Stigmatised groups and acquaintances (Dahlberg and McKee 2014). > Occupational loneliness This means services should aim to address both > the loneliness caused by losing a loved one and Deliberately isolated groups. support them to maintain social networks. > These clusters were identified specifically for this In general, though, research investigating stressful review and are not necessarily reflected in the life events such as widowhood emphasises that literature in these terms (with the exception of bereaved people are especially vulnerable to groups experiencing family-related loneliness). emotional isolation rather than social isolation However, the value of clustering groups is that (Weiss, 1973). Stroebe et al. (1996) found that it may help to draw out common themes and marital status affected emotional loneliness linkages amongst different groups at risk of but not social loneliness, while van Baarsen isolation or loneliness. et al. (1999) showed that six months after Certain demographic characteristics cut across bereavement, older widows and widowers felt groups and clusters, and some people are likely emotionally lonelier than before the loss, whereas to fit under more than one cluster. For example, social loneliness had not increased. older people are more likely to have physical or This ties in with the definition of emotional sensory impairments and may have spent several loneliness – as the absence or loss of an years acting as a carer for their partner. People attachment figure – and further underlines the such as these are likely to be at high risk of need to maintain a distinction between these experiencing isolation or loneliness, but may forms of loneliness. Moreover, it points to the need specialised support due to the complexity need for introducing interventions that align with of their situation. isolated/lonely individuals’ experiences. Family-related loneliness Divorce and living without a partner Hombrados-Mendieta et al. (2013) recommend There are several “pathways” leading to living that social intervention programmes should be alone in mid-life (see appendix 2). The research developed that promote positive relationships within showed that divorce (or the end of a cohabiting the family, since the perception of being supported relationship) is the main reason for middle-aged by a partner and family is significantly associated men and women to live alone. Children leaving with decreased loneliness and increased well-being. home and death of a partner were other triggers. Family-related loneliness includes people However, the researchers found a significant experiencing bereavement or divorce, and older proportion of men in mid-life who had never lived people who live alone and/or are widowed, with a partner. Adults living alone in mid-life had separated or divorced are more likely to report that lower incomes than those living with a partner. they feel lonely often or some of the time (Beaumont Further analysis showed two distinct groups 2015). Young people suddenly experiencing that were more likely to lack family and financial independence from their parents or guardians are support: men living alone who do not have also at risk of experiencing loneliness, and this is (or never had) a partner or children, and older especially true of young care leavers who may not mothers who had broken up with their partner. have regular contact (or any contact) with their birth This does not necessarily translate into isolation family or their foster family. or loneliness but the findings indicate that more Isolation and loneliness 13