Londoners reveal how support services can reinforce stigma and exclusion, and what it takes to design them with dignity and trust.

“People need to know where to go for help in order not to feel ashamed.”

Stigma is often cited as a major barrier preventing people in hardship from accessing the support they need. Policy in Practice, drawing on a 2021 Health Foundation report, identified stigma as one of the three key reasons benefits go unclaimed, alongside lack of awareness and the complexity of the system. From their survey, 27.8% of people eligible for benefits avoided claiming because they “did not want to be the type of person who claims benefits.” 

The report recommends ensuring all claimants are treated with dignity and respect and that all DWP staff and Government Ministers consistently speak about claimants respectfully. However, insights from Quids in!’s recent focus groups across London suggest a deeper understanding is required.

We found that low awareness and the complexity of accessing support don’t just stand alongside stigma as separate barriers: they actively reinforce and intensify both self-stigma and the stigma people experience from others. To tackle stigma, we must redefine ‘dignity’ as more than how claimants are spoken to or spoken about. 

About the research

Mental health partnership Thrive LDN commissioned Quids in! Money Guidance to run a multi-media campaign aimed at reducing stigma around poverty and financial hardship. We were asked to make lived experiences and community perspectives central, feeding into an awareness programme across ten London boroughs.

As part of the design phase, Quids in! held discussion groups in community centres and food banks in Brent, Tower Hamlets, Lambeth, and Westminster, gathering insights from 51 participants from diverse backgrounds. Each two-hour discussion group explored participants’ experiences with accessing support and their views on six campaigns targeting their communities. 

All quotes in bold are drawn directly from focus group participants.

Key Finding One:
Stigma prevents people from opening up 

“I don’t know how to share.”

Across almost all groups, participants agreed it was difficult to talk about money. Shame, embarrassment and fear of judgment were cited as major barriers to opening up or seeking support. Some did not want to be seen as “skint” or in financial hardship. Others described social exclusion after disclosing they claimed benefits, with one participant sharing her children being left out of birthday parties. 

Discussions sometimes touched on perceptions of “deserving” versus “undeserving” claimants. Some participants felt benefits were justified after a lifetime of work followed by a period of crisis. Jobseekers, however, were sometimes labelled “losers,” discouraging people from visiting the Job Centre. Three-quarters of one group said they would feel uncomfortable using a food bank, fearing others might be more deserving.

Gender stereotypes also surfaced, with one man saying he would allow mothers and children ahead of him in line. Some disagreed, arguing that need should not be judged by gender. Men in several groups admitted reluctance to access benefits. Women also described male partners avoiding mental health support instead opting to “tough it out.”

Cultural influences shaped openness in complex ways. A Jewish and a Muslim participant both said it was encouraged in their communities to seek help through religious institutions. Others noted that in their countries of origin, family and friends were a first resort for financial help, which is less viable in the UK where “everyone is struggling.” 

Privacy was a recurring theme, with concerns about gossip in close-knit communities, especially among Bengali women. They worried that disclosing financial status could prompt requests for money from relatives. In some cultures, asking for help was viewed as a failure, although participants would approach family if debt or their credit scores were at stake.

Participants also linked openness to perceived usefulness. People were less likely to share if they believed no help was available or if they feared their benefits might be reduced as a result. 

Key Finding Two:
Accessibility barriers cause people to miss out on support 

“Money is out there that people are eligible for, but no one tells you about it and it’s difficult to access.” 

Participants described why it was easy to miss out on support, even when eligible. Language barriers were a major issue. Immigrants arriving in the UK struggled to access services in their first language. Even when people spoke English, they said DWP staff and other services often struggled to understand them because of their accents. Bengali participants highlighted difficulties for elderly people with little English and how they needed to rely on others to translate.

Digital exclusion compounded these barriers. One participant questioned how the elderly could apply to Pension Credit without language and digital skills. Many participants said they did not know how to use a computer, making online-only services inaccessible. Poorly written instructions increased confusion, and people without digital skills said they often gave up. Several groups stressed the importance of clear offline contact details, such as phone numbers and physical addresses. “There is a lot of stuff online and when it gets confusing and you feel like giving up, you want to speak to someone,” one participant said.

Disability and mental health added further challenges. Participants said people with sight and hearing impairments were excluded from online systems. Dyslexia was raised as a barrier, particularly when information was crowded onto flyers. Mental health conditions make navigating a complex system overwhelming. If a mistake was made, people felt discouraged. “The system just doesn’t work for people with mental health struggles,” one participant said. 

Key Finding Three:
Services are experienced as unhelpful or obstructive 

“The worst kind of injustice is the one delivered by the very system tasked and entrusted with preventing it.”

Across groups, participants felt that services often worked against them rather than in their interests. Many believed organisations deliberately withheld or obscured information to reduce demand, providing only partial advice or rushing people “out the door.” Experiences of misleading guidance, untrained staff, and unclear instructions reinforced this sense of distrust. 

Several participants shared personal experiences highlighting the difficulties of navigating the benefits system. One could not access their Universal Credit journal for five years after a claim was closed, saying the Job Centre was unhelpful and hung up when they called. Another described losing transitional support when their benefits stopped, leaving them unsure how to reinstate it. Some felt they were missing out on opportunities because they did not know what they could claim. One woman had lived in the UK with a disability for fifteen years before discovering she was eligible for benefits.

Trust in councils varied across the groups in different boroughs. In Brent, most participants dismissed newsletters as “junk” and feared letters might signal eviction, describing the council as largely untrustworthy. In Westminster, participants were more trusting, with greater awareness of support through community centres, GPs, and schools, though few would approach the council directly about money issues. “When do we speak to the council about anything?” one asked.

Across groups, participants emphasised the need for clear, practical guidance. Those sleeping rough found stigma-focused messaging less relevant and preferred direct signposting. People wanted straightforward information on where to get help, reassurance that support would be free, and guidance that could be trusted.

Final Insights

The discussion groups showed that stigma, lack of awareness, and complex systems reinforce one another. While social stigma can discourage help-seeking, the bigger factor was how services themselves are viewed and experienced. When support is hard to access or feels grudgingly offered, people feel shame, as if they are scrounging rather than being met with an open hand. This dynamic compounds feelings of exclusion and mistrust, leaving many without hope.

Participants were clear about what would make a difference: dignity must be embedded not only in how people are spoken about but also in how services are designed and delivered. This means treating people as if they are entitled to help, making that help easy to access, and bringing support to people instead of forcing them to navigate a maze to find it. They wanted straightforward, practical guidance, delivered in trusted spaces and in accessible formats, with reassurances that support would be free, confidential, and without conditions.

If services and campaigns are to rebuild trust, they must reflect this principle. People do not want sympathy without substance; they want a clear route to support and the sense that someone is actively on their side. A helping hand, extended with openness and dignity, is the first step toward breaking the cycle of stigma and exclusion.

Find out more about the campaign and join our supporters across London here or contact us directly at lisa.woodman@cleanslateltd.co.uk.