Advertisement

Grenfell wasn’t an isolated tragedy. Poverty destroys many lives in Britain | Kamran Ahmed

Protesters take part in Justice for Grenfell Tower in Parliament Square.
‘The distress of this disaster will stay with many for the rest of their lives.’ Photograph: Dinendra Haria/Rex/Shutterstock

A tragedy as gut-wrenching as Grenfell Tower has scarcely been seen during peace time in the UK. The negligence and cruelty of the decisions that caused it have sparked justifiable outrage. Concerns raised by residents were ignored and there are allegations that dangerous materials were used to cut costs and make the building look nice for the rich folk. People understandably take to the streets to protest and seek justice.

Those affected by the fire have been traumatised, and we all share their pain. The uncertainty of not knowing if their loved ones are deceased will be prolonging the anguish for those affected. When they do know, it is by no means the end of the horror story, but the beginning for those who must attempt to come to terms with their loss.

The distress of this disaster will stay with many for the rest of their lives, perhaps amplified by the knowledge that it was avoidable. Some will go on to develop mental health problems – three months after a major forest fire in California in 2003, a third of survivors screened positive for depression and almost a quarter screened positive for post-traumatic stress disorder. It is plausible that similar proportions will develop conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder after this tragedy; including symptoms such as hypervigilance (sleep disruption, feeling constantly on edge), avoiding reminders of the trauma, flashbacks and nightmares.

Trauma is a word that has a strong association with poverty, both in its general medical sense – a sudden and fierce physical insult, and its psychiatric (and commonly understood) meaning of psychological injury. The lower your income, the more likely you are to experience a traumatic injury or suffer a traumatic death, and the more likely you are to experience psychological trauma and develop mental health problems down the line.

Sadly, there is truth in the assertions that poverty, and the policies that perpetuate it, killed these people. We have known for decades that low socioeconomic classes inflict a lower life expectancy upon their members, yet our governments have chosen to do little about it, so little has changed. There are still staggering differences in the years of healthy life an individual can expect to enjoy depending on the area they live in: 19 years between the highest and lowest areas for men and 20.2 years for women.

Perhaps most shocking is the fact that Kensington and Chelsea actually has the highest life expectancy at birth for males, and second highest for females in the UK. There is a stark contrast within the borough – the area around Grenfell is among the top 10% most deprived in the country, and the inequalities in healthy life expectancy between those living in the tower blocks and the multimillion dollar mansions next door are the widest in the country.

Poverty is a cause and consequence of accidents and ill-health

I grew up in west London and spent time working as a junior psychiatrist in Kensington and Chelsea. On home visits to see patients in their council housing, I saw the destructive effects of poverty daily. Trying to make the best of their circumstances while exposed to crime and violence, struggling to feed themselves and their families, suffering from mental (and often physical) illness and sometimes using drugs and alcohol to cope. The outcomes in terms of life expectancy seemed dishearteningly predictable, but unnecessary.

Poverty is a cause and consequence of accidents and ill-health. Those with serious health issues find themselves struggling financially and those who are struggling financially are more likely to become unwell, leading them to an early grave. This vicious cycle of poverty takes its toll on children and is passed down through generations, assisted by our shameful record on social mobility.

It has been suggested that health strategies should tackle poverty as a separate risk factor for premature death, since low socioeconomic status shortens lives more efficiently than high alcohol consumption, high blood pressure or obesity. But this will require changes in social and economic policy, the kind that are unlikely with our current government in power.

As well as investing in specific measures that improve social conditions for the disadvantaged such as better, safer housing, the broader policies that enhance this effect must be abandoned. Savaging benefits, including for the disabled, while cutting taxes for corporations and high earners is as good as pledging to increase inequalities in life expectancy for years to come.

In addition, slashing funding to public services such as the fire brigade, police force and healthcare makes it harder to save lives compromised by major disasters and serious illness; so we are faced with the double whammy of rising inequalities and less resources to meet their demands.

This tragedy should be a wake-up call for all those in power. Sprinklers and robust building materials are vital, but are not the only solution. We know that a range of factors associated with poverty such as poor housing conditions, ill-health, stressful life events and hazardous environments precipitate an early death. Without addressing poverty through changes in social policy and adequately funding public services, we will always be fighting a losing battle.