Withdrawal experience and possible way-outs from withdrawal behavior in young people

Abstract

The term NEET (not in employment, education, or training) has been increasingly applied to young people in Europe not engaged in the three systems mentioned. Young people who seclude themselves at home and progress to social withdrawal can be considered a NEET subgroup—the “disengaged.” This phenomenon was first identified in Japan, where such reclusive individuals are referred to as hikikomori, but youth social withdrawal has also been reported in other countries, including South Korea and Hong Kong. Research on youth social withdrawal has mainly focused on describing and identifying contributing factors to this withdrawal behavior. Very few studies have examined the transitional processes from the initial self-seclusion to later help-seeking. Examining the mechanisms behind the engagement process for helping professionals is important to guide social work services for this unique group of young people. We conducted a qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 30 socially withdrawn young people in Hong Kong. Thematic analysis conceptualized their social withdrawal processes into three subthemes: private status, de-friending spiral, and suspension of experiences. Three reasons for changing their withdrawal behavior were also identified: rebalancing one’s ideal self with reality, reconnecting with tuned-in people, and regaining momentum in life. This study provides practical implications for social workers to develop approaches to engage withdrawn young people.

Keywords

Psychosocial Social intervention Social work practice NEET Youth social withdrawal Engagement

Introduction

Young people aged 10–24 represent about 27% (1.8 billion) of the world’s population (Sawyer et al., 2012), and nearly 85% of them live in low- or middle-income countries and face the challenges of poverty and malnutrition (Walker et al., 2007). The remaining 15% live in high-income countries and face a different set of challenges (Sawyer et al., 2012; Santelli et al., 2015), including increasing rates of single parenting, worsening income inequality, and increasing competition in employment and education (Bor et al., 2014).

Increasingly, policymakers in Europe apply the term NEET (not in employment, education, or training) to indicate young people’s degree of social disengagement. Youth unemployment in the European Union has risen by 1.5 million since 2009, and reached 5.5 million (around 21%) in 2011. The economic cost of this disengagement was estimated, in 2011, at €153 billion (Eurofound, 2012); the phenomenon’s social cost is far greater, as prolonged periods without education and employment can lead to marginalization and dependence (Côté, 2000), loneliness, powerlessness (Creed and Reynolds, 2001), increased use of drugs, criminal activity (Fergusson et al., 2001), and homelessness (Cusworth et al., 2009).

Five types of NEET have been identified: (1) the conventionally unemployed; (2) the unavailable; (3) the disengaged; (4) the opportunity-seekers; and (5) the voluntary (Eurofound, 2012). This study is concerned with the third type, the disengaged, which comprises young people who have been socially withdrawn for a protracted period. In Japan, adolescents or young adults with problematic patterns of long-term self-exclusion are referred to as hikikomori(an), and were first identified as a serious problem in the late 1990s; at that time, it was estimated that there were about 1 million hikikomori (Saito, 1998). The social and economic consequences of the phenomenon are arousing concern as the “first-generation hikikomori” to have secluded themselves in their parents’ homes in adolescence, are now approaching middle age and their aging parents are retiring and beginning to pass away (Li and Wong, 2015a).

Youth unemployment in Hong Kong remains 2–5 times greater than the overall unemployment rate. In the first quarter of 2016, unemployment rates for 15- to 19-year-olds and 20- to 29-year-olds were 15.1% and 5.5% respectively, equivalent to 53,700 unemployed young people (Census and Statistics Department, 2016). The lack of opportunities for young people to participate productively in the labor market in Hong Kong has pushed many young people into a very frustrating situation: some choose to speak out through various forms of protest (Pau, 2014), while others become withdrawn from society (Wong, 2009). Telephone interviews we conducted in 2015 with 1010 Hong Kong individuals aged 12–29 revealed that 1.9% had been dealing with social withdrawal for more than six months, 2.5% had had the problem for less than six months, and 2.6% perceived it to be non-problematic (despite meeting the diagnostic criteria for social withdrawal). Based on those findings, we estimate that more than 16,900 young people in Hong Kong may have been facing problematic social withdrawal for more than six months (Wong et al., 2015).

Theoretical explanations of social withdrawal in young people

As the phenomenon was first identified and named by Japanese psychiatrists, it was understood to be a psychiatric syndrome and scholarly accounts of the cause of social withdrawal in young people originated from exploring the psychological factors that contribute to their social withdrawal behaviors. Hattori (2006) first related youth social withdrawal to insecure attachment. Krieg and Dickie (2013) further examined this association, and suggested that socially withdrawn young people normally undergo different developmental problems and develop an ambivalent, insecure attachment style. Furlong (2008) explained youth social withdrawal as a form of psychological moratorium, as originally suggested by Erikson (1968), which is a coping method that young people use to manage previously unresolved crises during their transition from childhood to adulthood and during their search for self and the meaning of life. Later studies recognized the influence of sociocultural factors on youth social withdrawal. Many scholars argue that the shift of the global economy and labor system, coupled with the failure of the school system to address these changes, has caused more and more young people to disengage from society (Suwa and Suzuki, 2013; Todd, 2011; Toivonen et al., 2011). Problematic parenting styles and family dynamics (Chan and Lo, 2014b; Heinze and Thomas, 2014), bullying, and other negative schooling experience (Uchida, 2010; Todd, 2011) are found to be highly associated with young people’s withdrawal behavior. Li and Wong (2015b) summarized previous findings on youth social withdrawal and suggested that the issue was an interplay between psychological, social, and behavioral factors. Instead of regarding youth social withdrawal as either a negative consequence of insecure attachment (Hattori, 2006; Krieg and Dickie, 2013) or an essential self-seeking process in the transitional period (Furlong, 2008), Li and Wong (2015b) advocated a more balanced and integrative view to illustrate withdrawal processes and proposed tailor-made support services to socially withdrawn young people.

Interventions with socially withdrawn youth and the research gap

Some specialized services for withdrawn young people have become available in certain Asian societies, including Japan, Hong Kong, and Korea, as well as in Western countries such as France, America, and England (Chan and Lo, 2014a). These services are based on different conceptualizations of the nature of social withdrawal and can range from educational programs and social activities to clinical interventions (Li and Wong, 2015b).

Before socially withdrawn young people can benefit from intervention, they must first be physically identified and engaged, which can be a very challenging process for helping professionals. Since social withdrawal is an avoidant behavior, socially withdrawn young people are also unlikely to seek help (Chong and Chan, 2012). Some helping professionals in Korea (Lee et al., 2013) and Japan (Chan and Lo, 2014a) thus provide outreach services to withdrawn young people in their homes. However, professionals still rely on caregivers (i.e., parents) to identify them. While their parents may be afraid of losing face by disclosing their socially withdrawn children to others, they will seek help for their children when their withdrawal becomes too severe and intolerable (Chong and Chan, 2012). Parents thus remain the primary source of information allowing professionals to identify socially withdrawn young people (Chan and Lo, 2014b; Rubinstein, 2016).

Researchers in Japan have found that two-thirds of socially withdrawn young people have no intention of meeting health professionals and that only severe cases are willing or referred by parents to visit health centers (Koyama et al., 2010), it is thus believed that only a small portion of the socially withdrawn youth population can be identified, interviewed, and helped. Moreover, socially withdrawn young people are unwilling to talk when social workers attempt to engage them (Wong, 2009, 2012). Wong (2012, 2014) noted that one of the mottoes of social work is “start where the client is”; so, to engage socially withdrawn young people, one must not only visit them in situ (i.e., go to their homes), but initiate conversations based on their interests (i.e., think from their perspective). Wong’s studies illustrate that focusing on socially withdrawn young people’s interests and strengths can help to gain their trust and help forge a helping alliance during the engagement process.

Timely and innovative services may allow socially withdrawn young people to reintegrate into society, and return to either education or employment (Wong et al., in press). However, without going through the prior stage of identification and engagement, it is not possible to provide interventions to withdrawn young people. Due to our limited knowledge of the different characteristics of young people’s social withdrawal behavior, little is known about how to engage withdrawn young people in efficient and effective way(s). This information is essential to devising a pertinent engagement and intervention approach. The present study aims to reveal how socially withdrawn young people perceive their experience of social withdrawal and the process through which they begin to change it.

Methods

Recruitment process

The recruitment process of the present study combined agency-based and outreach recruitment approaches (Abrams, 2010). Participants were withdrawn young people who were receiving, or had received, social services from one of the five organizations providing outreach and/or intervention services to socially withdrawn young people in Hong Kong (Chan and Lo, 2014a). They were mainly identified through referrals from non-governmental organizations, schools, parents, and the hotline inquiry service managed by the collaborating organization. Apart from existing clients, participants were also recruited through home visit outreach for severely withdrawn young people who had yet to become service recipients of the organization.

Potential participants were recruited into the study based on the proposed research diagnostic criteria for hikikomori (Wong et al., 2015), with special consideration of their availability; the specific inclusion/exclusion criteria for participants were that they:

had spent or were spending almost every day confined at home;

had persistently avoided or were avoiding social situations (school, work) and social relationships (friendships, contact with family members);

were not homebound due to physical illnesses or disability, or in need of home-based healthcare;

had not been diagnosed with social phobia, major depressive disorder, schizophrenia, or avoidant personality disorder; and

were able to give informed consent.

Social workers in the collaborating organization were responsible for assessing criteria (1), (2), (3), and (5) as they were more familiar with the young people’s daily lives and withdrawal conditions. A clinical psychologist was responsible for assessing criterion (4). Social workers identified all of their clients who met these criteria with verbal and written information about the study, and invited them to participate in the interviews. Some young people refused to participate due to shyness or an unwillingness to recall their experiences of social withdrawal.

Thirty participants were recruited to the study. They differed in age, gender, duration of social withdrawal, and length of contact with a social worker, thus maximizing sample variation in the study (see Table 1).

Table 1.

Background of participants.

	No. of participants
Gender
Male	22
Female	8
Age
14–17	8
18–22	14
23–29	8
Withdrawal duration
3 to 6 months	2
6 months to 1 year	13
1 to 2 years	6
2 to 3 years	2
More than 10 years	1
Uncertain	6
Program stages
In contact with the social workers for less than 3 months	9
In the intervention program in the center for more than 3 months	8
Finished the program	13

Interview process

TMHL interviewed the participants and reviewed the interview process continuously with PWCW between January and April, 2014. TMHL avoided asking sensitive and embarrassing questions which could cause harm to the interviewees. He treated the interviewees respectfully and maintained nonhierarchical dialogues with them throughout the interviews (Ogino, 2004; Wong, 2014). The interviews encouraged the young people to speak about their feelings and experiences of social withdrawal (Peled and Leichtentritt, 2002). If any interviewee was distressed during their interview, his/her social worker was notified immediately, and a clinical psychologist provided follow-up. No interviewee needed emergency intervention during this study. When interviewing a severely withdrawn young person, TMHL invited his case social worker, with the participant’s consent, to observe the whole interview process, in order to offer timely assistance in case of crisis. This reflects the most challenging ethical issue of the interviews: that we respect our participants’ privacy but sometimes need to provide clues to help social workers assess potential hazards and prevent crisis.

The semi-structured interviews, generally lasting 45–60 minutes, were conducted at the offices of the collaborating organization. Participation in the interviews was completely voluntary and the participants could withdraw at any time. Social workers in the collaborating organization introduced TMHL to each interviewee and debriefed the latter after their interview. Each interview began with the interviewee recounting which of the organization’s service s/he used, and gradually moved on to generating deeper understanding of the interviewee’s social withdrawal behaviors. Each of interviewees was asked probing questions including:

Why did you decide to stay at home?

What do you think about staying at home for a long time?

How did the social workers in the organization engage you?

Why did you decide to go out/stop staying at home?

What difficulties do you think you will encounter when you get back into society?

All interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim for later analysis. Background information on the participants—for example, demographic data, duration of social withdrawal, social withdrawal behaviors—was collected from the social workers, with the participants’ consent. This background information served as supplementary data and helped to triangulate the interview data. To ensure confidentiality and anonymity during analysis and reporting, the participants’ identities were not disclosed; their comments are presented under different names. Ethics approval, from the Human Research Ethics Committee for Non-Clinical Faculties at the University of Hong Kong, was obtained before the interviews (Reference number: EA341213).

Data analysis

Thematic analysis was adopted to investigate how participants defined and experienced social withdrawal situations, and the meaning they gave to the experience (Boyatzis, 1998; Flick, 2002). We followed Braun and Clark’s (2000) step-by-step guide while conducting the analysis. TMHL and LL first analyzed half of the interview transcripts (15 interviews) separately and generated initial codes from them. They then compared, discussed, and merged these codes into a list of 23, which was then used when coding the rest of the interview scripts. Once TMHL and LL had reviewed and coded all of the interviews for major findings, they re-examined the codes together and sorted them into potential themes. All three authors conducted additional rounds of read-throughs and comparisons, until the codes best reflected the themes that had emerged from the interviews. The three authors, who come from different disciplines—youth studies, education, and psychology—used peer debriefing and worked together to incorporate multiple perspectives to deal with their individual biases in the analysis process.

The authors then discussed the potential themes with social workers in the collaborating organization to evaluate the themes identified and the data analysis. Member checking was conducted by sharing the themes with the participants and listening to their feedback (Lietz et al., 2006). However, it was difficult to gather all the participants at once, and undoubtedly most of them would not have expressed their thoughts in the presence of many other people. Therefore, TMHL, who interviewed the participants, talked with some of them individually after their activities in the organization or in casual meetings to share with them the results of the data analysis and make sure that the findings accurately reflected their experience.

Results

The narratives of the young people were collated into two major themes: socially withdrawn young people’s perspectives on withdrawal and reasons for changing their withdrawal behavior. The former theme yielded three social withdrawal subthemes (private status, de-friending spiral, and suspension of experiences) as did the latter (rebalancing one’s ideal self with reality, reconnecting with tuned-in people, and regaining momentum in life).

Withdrawal experience

Private status

Ogino (2004) observed that socially withdrawn young people in Japan were afraid of being asked “What are you doing?” since they regarded themselves as having no legitimate social status. However, staying at home is no longer an uncommon behavior in Hong Kong because freelance work has become much more common. Pak was not afraid of being asked such questions, and was able to provide a reasonable excuse for his withdrawal:

Seeking a job! I would say, since many people nowadays look for jobs at home. For example, my friend took a year to get a job, even though he didn’t withdraw. This is a common phenomenon.

Some socially withdrawn young people might not think they are very different from non-withdrawn individuals, as they engage in various solo activities, such as playing computer or video games, and reading books or manga (Japanese comics) during their social withdrawal, rather than doing nothing. Peter was a typical socially withdrawn young man who secluded himself in his room and spent much of his time playing online games; he also underwent day-night reversal and even skipped taking showers. He described his room as his own space, which no one could enter to disturb him. Peter regarded online games as an alternative means of meeting his needs, which were not satisfied by reality:

I can do nothing, but I don’t care. No one will bother me and I feel very relieved. I always play online games and obtain victories, which is not achievable in real life. However, I can do it in online games, so I feel very smart.

Peter immersed himself in the virtual world of online games during his social withdrawal to gain a sense of competence and achievement.

Other socially withdrawn young people read books to kill time. Donald, who was unemployed for some years, explained that he needed to improve himself by reading books and absorbing information at home, and occasionally going to libraries by himself to borrow books. He stressed that he did not need to talk to people, as he experienced enough social communication just by taking in authors’ thoughts:

I can communicate with authors through reading their books even though I don’t meet them in person.

Therefore, young people in Hong Kong may not withdraw to protect their dignity or self-esteem (Ogino, 2004), instead they withdraw to create their private status and enjoy doing different things thanks to the status.

De-friending spiral

Socially withdrawn young people usually display a marked distrust of others (Hattori, 2006), which led to several participants’ marked inability to get along with their peers. They recalled traumatic experiences of being bullied by their peers, including being gossiped about in Chang’s case:

[Peers] pretend to be getting along well with you, but actually they gossip behind your back. Maybe my classmates have not been honest.

And having their secrets disclosed in Wing’s case:

I told [my peers] something but they disclosed it to everyone afterwards. Thus, I am afraid of telling anyone my secrets.

Socially withdrawn young people become guarded and unwilling to open up to people, and withdraw to their homes to avoid social interaction. Even though some participants were able to trust a few people and successfully established peer relationships, they nonetheless encountered difficulties maintaining those relationships after leaving social environments to which they were accustomed (e.g., school). By staying at home, rather than engaging in another social environment, participants not only missed opportunities to meet new people, but also tended to lose their existing peer relationships due to a lack of common engagement and shared experiences.

Ah Man: In fact, I didn’t have anything to do at home. I was bored but I had to stay at home because most of my classmates and friends had to study or work. I couldn’t stay with them all the time.

Socially withdrawn young people lose peer relationships gradually during their period of social withdrawal; they cannot develop a sense of belonging to their peer group, because they interpret peer relationships as merely temporary.

Donald: I had close friends, but after I moved to other places, we had no contact at all. This is a pity but I am also used to relationships changing like this – going from being very close to having no contact.

While Furlong (2008) reported that some socially withdrawn Japanese youth leave their houses daily and pretend to go to school or work to hide their social withdrawal, some of our participants withdrew to their homes to hide their lack of peer relationships; as Wendy explained:

If I stayed at home, people would not know that I had nowhere to go and that I had no friends. Thus, I wouldn’t feel embarrassed when staying at home.

She feared feeling embarrassed in social situations by her lack of peer relationships. This lack may do more than just characterize youth social withdrawal; it may also intensify or prolong it. This suggests that withdrawal behavior and a lack of peer relationships are mutually reinforcing phenomena.

Suspension of experiences

When we asked about their activities during the period of their social withdrawal, many participants narrated a similar pattern. In the beginning, many disclosed that they enjoyed withdrawal and that it was the first time they had ever felt free from the many restraints and timelines they had had to follow before. Next, they immersed themselves in the activities that were most appealing to them, for instance, online gaming, watching movies, reading books or manga. This also echoes Furlong’s (2008) assertion that some young people need to experiment freely and explore on their own before eventually developing their own sense of direction. For socially withdrawn young people, staying at home in solitude seemed to be a way of breaking free from the linear developmental path prescribed by society—that is, ascending from one grade to the next during their schooling, and then directly and immediately transitioning to the work force at the end of it. Chang’s reflection captures the meaning of his withdrawal experience:

I think it’s better to stay at home, take a break and think through my future path. Ever since I was a kid, everything has been arranged tightly; I never had a chance to stop for a while. Now I really want a break.

For similar reasons, Donald read books and watched documentaries extensively to seek a future career path.

Although how these socially withdrawn young people made use of this “break time” and the outcome to which it led varied, it is not uncommon to see that after the initial period of enjoyment, many of them began to lose their sense of direction during this transitional period. Kwong, for example, stated that he became confused during his withdrawal, and that his disorientation affected his normal functioning, including his ability to socialize:

In the confused stage, although I might have the need to have contact with people, I simply didn’t want to go out.

Therefore, it is questionable whether social withdrawal is a “break time” that allows directionless young people to re-establish a purpose. Wendy described losing her bearings after graduation; however, instead of re-establishing them, she drifted into a period of social withdrawal:

After graduation, I didn’t have a clear direction for my career. Thus, I stayed at home every day and muddled along for a long time. Why didn’t I go out and walk around? I didn’t think of that at the time, because I thought, I had already stayed at home for almost the whole day, so it didn’t matter if I stayed in my room for a few more hours before going to bed.

As a result of the self-exploration and self-reflection brought about by a long period of social withdrawal, some participants, such as Wendy, became unable to experience or interact with the outside environment. Some researchers have suggested that prolonged withdrawal can hinder young people’s psychosocial development, and might deskill young people, affecting their communication and socialization abilities (Wong, 2009), potentially cultivating an overwhelming sense of apathy (Teo, 2010). Tom described a change in his social withdrawal process, from enjoying staying at home, to feeling apathetic:

Many people think that staying at home will not be boring because it was all fun and no work was needed. I really believed this at the beginning [of my social withdrawal]. However, after a year, I could no longer stand [staying at home]. I wasn’t interested in the computer games that I had loved. I didn’t understand why I stayed at home.

Tom’s experience seems to support Teo’s (2010) suggestion that social withdrawal gradually results in a sense of apathy—a developing lack of interest, motivation, feeling, and emotion.

Reasons for changing their withdrawal behavior

When the young people recalled their experience of coming out of their reclusive state, they commonly identified self-motivation and active engagement from social workers as the major factors contributing to this change. The following three factors summarize their reclamation process, and suggest ways of working with socially withdrawn young people.

Rebalancing one’s ideal self with reality

Some participants admitted that their plans could sometimes be unrealistic, and that while they were willing to devote their time to making those plans, they normally took no concrete action to realize them.

Donald: What I want to do is in the “proposal” stage, since I know that what I want to do takes a long time to start.

Some socially withdrawn young people were conflicted about whether they should hold onto their dreams or face reality, in part because they realized the difficulties they would likely face in the future, such as the need to care for themselves after their parents retired or passed away.

Keith: I need to face reality. My parents may rely more on me as they get older, and I also have to plan for myself.

Although some socially withdrawn young people were willing to compromise and explore the outside world, social workers still found it challenging to help them reintegrate into society. For example, while one of the most direct ways of reintegrating a socially withdrawn young person is to secure him/her a job, the participants had strong opinions on this. For example, Gloria suggested that one’s employment should be associated with one’s interests, but Chang thought that the resulting work-related pressure could cause him to lose his passion for those interests.

Gloria: No matter how flexible a job is to allow room for socially withdrawn young people to learn and adapt to the working style, it doesn’t work because it is a job. I think if you want to draw them out, the best way is to help them identify their interests. Their interests will become the motivation for them to work and they will earn money to support their interests. This is exactly what I am doing now.

Chang: Once your interest becomes a job, it becomes something different. For example, although you like cooking, the pressure you need to face working as a chef can exhaust you. Therefore, I will lose interest in what I like when it becomes a job.

This ambivalent relationship between personal interests and employment made it more challenging for social workers to develop appropriate programs for socially withdrawn young people. Wong (2012) recommended adopting several flexible arrangements to accommodate socially withdrawn young people’s needs—for example, “taster” courses to arouse their interest and facilitate their exploration of a future career, or shorter schooldays or workdays to ease their transition from self-seclusion to involvement at school or work. Therefore, social workers may not only help socially withdrawn young people realize their interests and goals, but also negotiate for flexible arrangements with different parties such as employers and schools.

Reconnecting with tuned-in people

For some socially withdrawn young people, social support was an important means of regaining their motivation to abandon social withdrawal. Amy was grateful for the support of companions and peers:

I really need social support and encouragement from others to get motivated, especially when I work on something.

Although social withdrawal is generally a de-friending spiral, some socially withdrawn young people explored the Internet to identify alternative ways of meeting people. The Internet provided them with a secure platform to communicate with others, and even disclose their social withdrawal conditions. Gloria said that other Internet users did not discriminate against her; instead, they offered encouragement and support, which made her feel cared for:

I think I can only tell the truth online; it feels easier to say, “I was a hidden youth before” or “I am a hidden youth” online. They [other Internet users] will not blame you and some of them may even say, “I am a hidden youth too” or, “It doesn’t matter, keep it up!” I think they are better than the people I know in real life.

Some participants, particularly those who had withdrawn to their homes for a long period of time, had less experience with the outside world than their friends, and thus fewer common topics on which they could converse, which further weakened their relationships with those friends. However, some Internet platforms, such as YouTube, provide convenient communication channels that can provide common topics for initiating conversations.

Ah Man: People watching YouTube Live share many common topics. I think I lack common topics with my friends and that’s the real challenge to maintaining friendship.

Based on the experiences of some participants, such as Peter, online communication can encourage face-to-face communication. Initially, participants relied on textual communication with their online friends, as they found it more flexible and relaxing, and allowed them to safely build online relationships to the point where they felt less anxious about meeting in real life.

Peter: I used textual communication a lot at the beginning, but after meeting my online friends in person, I spoke more, as it was not possible to use text for face-to-face communication. When someone talked to me, I needed to respond.

Internet communications allow some socially withdrawn young people to reconnect with other people; moreover, after reconnecting, participants showed a desire to further improve their relationships with others. Wendy and Kwong, for example, became more confident about talking to people and making friends, and more willing to open up and let others understand them.

Wendy: I am trying to be more proactive and speak more in order to let my friends understand more about me. This may help me get closer to them.

Regaining momentum in life

After a prolonged period of social withdrawal, many participants wanted a change in life. Ah Wah, for example, felt lost and wanted help from others, while Tom described how reflecting on his lack of happiness led him to “wake up” from his social withdrawal.

Ah Wah: I wanted to make my thoughts clearer. However, my thoughts became even more confused and I needed someone who could answer my questions objectively.

Tom: I would suddenly ask myself why I withdrew at home for a long time and whether I felt happy about this withdrawal state. After that, I “woke up.”

After realizing that their lives should move forward, these socially withdrawn young people became more open to receiving help; however, despite acknowledging their need for help, they remained defensive and sensitive to people’s intentions. Chang said that he could feel whether the social worker visiting him genuinely intended to help him; John seldom responded to social workers, but was willing to listen to what they had to say.

Chang: Since I can feel whether people are genuine when talking with them, I am more sensitive to people’s intentions. At least I could feel he [social worker] really wanted to help me, so I didn’t mind seeing him.

John: I would listen to you without responding. What you say is important. If you said something negative, I would begin thinking in a negative way. It is just like planting a seed and letting it grow in my mind: I would remember and constantly think about what you said because at that time my mind was blank, and it was easier to absorb what you said than when I was in a confused state.

Both valued persistency and unconditional positivity, and were more likely to respond to social workers with such qualities. Social workers’ home visits and assertive engagement played important roles in motivating young people to self-reflect on their situation and abandon social withdrawal—a process Tom called “waking up” from social withdrawal. Socially withdrawn young people valued the opportunity and tried to improve themselves and their lives.

Chang: I wanted to change after half a year of withdrawal and he [social worker] gave me a chance. Therefore, I wanted to grasp this opportunity to change and improve my life.

Discussion

While socially withdrawn young people are regarded as avoidant and asocial, we were pleasantly surprised to find that some were willing and able to talk in detail about their experiences of withdrawal and motivations to change. Although the socially withdrawn young people involved in this study viewed their condition positively as a sort of private status, they understood that social withdrawal can have long-term negative and destructive consequences, such as losing one’s social network in a de-friending spiral and/or ceasing to interact with the outside environment, which leads to a suspension of experiences that affects their study and work opportunities in the future.

Most of these young people did not realize they were withdrawing at the beginning and it seemed that there was no need to seek help at this stage. For example, our participants stated that staying at home meant they could take a break, play computer games, and hide from the embarrassment of lacking friends. However, when they recognized their social withdrawal situation and its negative impacts, they had already entered into a more severe withdrawal condition. Instead of seeking help, they became confused, apathetic, and asocial, and engaging them became very challenging. This phenomenon raises the question, “How early and how should services or intervention be rendered to socially withdrawn young people?”

Early identification and assistance for young people at risk of social withdrawal is deemed crucial. As school is one of the most important social environments to which young people are connected when they start to demonstrate social withdrawal behavior or inclinations, we suggest that social workers can enhance their sensitivity and skills for working with disengaged young people, and proactively provide follow-up services before they have completely dropped out of school. For example, students who have peer problems may tend to be more socially disengaged at school, similar to Chang and Wing’s experiences. It would be more feasible for school social workers to first identify such students and provide timely assistance. Even though they eventually drop out of school and become socially withdrawn, their school social workers can still follow-up with them or refer them to other youth social workers so that they will not be completely disconnected from society. On the other hand, some students have low motivation to participate during their time in school. They may find studying and other traditional school activities uninteresting, rigid, and even not useful to establishing their future directions (Li and Wong, 2015b). The interviews showed that some young people realized their own interests; for instance, Gloria liked makeup and Chang liked cooking. Thus, youth social workers can consider organizing more positive youth development programs at school and help them develop their interests and directions.

It is encouraging to find that engaging socially withdrawn young people is not totally impossible. While socially withdrawn young people stay at home every day without connecting to the outside world, they find that the Internet is a useful platform for them to explore. For example, Gloria gained support and encouragement from other Internet users, and Ah Man obtained common topics for initiating conversations with others. The Internet also allows socially withdrawn young people to have a taste of interpersonal relationships without worrying excessively about their interpersonal skills. Peter could use textual communication on the Internet and enjoy relationships with his online friends. Social workers, acting as Internet users, can open the door to interacting with socially withdrawn young people at home. Such online social workers can learn more about individuals’ thoughts and needs in the inherently nonhierarchical virtual environment and build trust with them before inviting them to face-to-face meetings. Some social workers in Hong Kong have attempted to engage withdrawn young people through social media such as Facebook and web forums (Chan and Holosko, 2016), and it has been reported that 588 such individuals were engaged through online gaming from 2007 to 2010 (Chan and Lo, 2014c). However, online engagement can raise some unique ethical concerns such as questions of liability regarding a client in crisis, the difficulty of validating social workers’ identities, and online privacy issues, which should be further investigated.

It is also possible for social workers to make direct home visits to socially withdrawn young people after the latter’s caregivers refer them for social services. However, socially withdrawn young people can become very sensitive to social workers’ intentions during home visits. Social workers must be genuine and open up in order to understand these young people. The timing of home visits is also crucial as socially withdrawn young people may be in the confusion stage and unwilling to talk or listen to anybody. But, as John said, after his mind became blank, he would think about what social workers said during home visits. Therefore, social workers at that time can instill alternative perspectives in these young people which help them to explore the direction of their life. Besides offering new social and outreach skills (Kaneko, 2006; Wong, 2012, 2014) to determine the timing of engagement, social workers need to collaborate closely with socially withdrawn young people’s parents and caregivers as they are the ones who should truly understand their children’s withdrawal conditions (Rubinstein, 2016). Therefore, future research should not only focus on socially withdrawn young people, but also their significant others such as their parents, siblings, and even close friends. This line of research can begin with the investigation of how to identify, engage, and work with families with socially withdrawn children. By understanding withdrawal behavior from different stakeholders’ perspectives, researchers will acquire new knowledge and practice behaviors for advanced services for withdrawn young people.

Conclusion

The interviews in this study provided a platform for young people to share their withdrawal experiences. Young people experience and express distress and frustration while they are socially withdrawn, and some wish to be helped. This particular subgroup of the NEET population is a relatively new youth phenomenon and given the trend of its prominence in many developed countries, it should not be trivialized; more (and more appropriate) prevention works, engagement strategies, and intervention services should be devised to match the distinctive characteristics and needs of this group of young people. To reach out and help them, we advocate that current social work practice should be developed to incorporate more innovative outreaching approaches and strengthen interdisciplinary collaboration with other professionals and stakeholders in the future.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We thank all the colleagues from the Chinese Evangelical Zion Church, Hong Kong SAR for their efforts in providing animal-assisted interventions for withdrawn young people and allowing us to learn from their practical experiences and wisdom. Special thanks to all the participants for sharing their social withdrawal experiences with us.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Abrams

(2010) Sampling ‘hard to reach’ populations in qualitative research: The case of incarcerated youth. Qualitative Social Work 9(4): 536–550.

Bor

Dean

Najman

et al. (2014) Are child and adolescent mental health problems increasing in the 21st century? A systematic review. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 48(7): 606–616.

Boyatzis

(1998) Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development, London: Sage.

Braun

Clarke

(2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101.

Census and Statistics Department. (2016). Unemployment Rate by Sex and Age. Hong Kong: Census and Statistics Department, Government of the Hong Kong. Available at: http://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hkstat/sub/sp200.jsp?tableID=011&ID=0&productType=8.

Chan C and Holosko MJ (2016) The utilization of social media for youth outreach engagement: A case study. Qualitative Social Work. 16(5): 680–697.

Chan

GHY

(2014a) Hidden youth services: What Hong Kong can learn from Japan. Children and Youth Services Review 42: 118–126.

Chan

GHY

(2014b) Family relationships and the self-esteem of hidden youth: A power dynamics perspective. Journal of Family Issues 37(9): 1244–1266.

Chan

GHY

(2014c) Quality of life of the hidden youth in Hong Kong. Applied Research in Quality of Life 9(4): 951–969.

10.

Chong

Chan

(2012) A case study of a Chinese ‘hikikomorian’ in Canada – Theorizing the process of hikikomorization. Journal of Special Education and Rehabilitation 13(3–4): 99–114.

11.

Côté

(2000) Arrested Adulthood: The Changing Nature of Maturity and Identity, New York: New York University Press.

12.

Creed

Reynolds

(2001) Economic deprivation, experiential deprivation and social loneliness in unemployed and employed youth. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 11: 167–178.

13.

Cusworth L, Bradshaw J, Coles B, et al. (2009) Understanding the risks of social exclusion across the life course: Youth and young adulthood. Report for the Social Exclusion Task Force, Cabinet Office. London: Crown.

14.

Erikson

(1968) Identity, Youth, and Crisis, 1st ed. New York: W. W. Norton.

15.

Eurofound (2012) NEETs – Young people not in employment, education or training: Characteristics, costs and policy responses in Europe. Report no. ef1254, 21 October. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

16.

Fergusson

Horwood

Woodward

(2001) Unemployment and psychosocial adjustment in young adults: Causation or selection? Social Science and Medicine 53: 305–320.

17.

Flick

(2002) An Introduction to Qualitative Research, London: Sage.

18.

Furlong

(2008) The Japanese hikikomori phenomenon: Acute social withdrawal among young people. The Sociological Review 56(2): 309–325.

19.

Hattori

(2006) Social withdrawal in Japanese youth: A case study of thirty-five hikikomori clients. Journal of Trauma Practice 4(3–4): 181–201.

20.

Heinze

Thomas

(2014) Self and salvation: Visions of hikikomori in Japanese manga. Journal of the German Institute for Japanese Studies Tokyo 26(1): 151–169.

21.

Kaneko

(2006) Japan’s ‘socially withdrawn youths’ and time constraints in Japanese society: Management and conceptualization of time in a support group for hikikomori. Time & Society 15(2–3): 233–249.

22.

Koyama

Miyake

Kawakami

et al. (2010) Lifetime prevalence, psychiatric comorbidity and demographic correlates of “hikikomori” in a community population in Japan. Psychiatry Research 176(1): 69–74.

23.

Krieg

Dickie

(2013) Attachment and hikikomori: A psychosocial developmental model. International Journal of Social Psychiatry 59(1): 61–72.

24.

Lee

Choi

et al. (2013) Home visitation program for detecting, evaluating and treating socially withdrawn youth in Korea. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 67(4): 193–202.

25.

Lietz

Langer

Furman

(2006) Establishing trustworthiness in qualitative research in social work implications from a study regarding spirituality. Qualitative Social Work 5(4): 441–458.

26.

TMH

Wong

PWC

(2015a) Editorial perspective: Pathological social withdrawal during adolescence: A culture-specific or a global phenomenon? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 56(10): 1039–1041.

27.

TMH

Wong

PWC

(2015b) Youth social withdrawal behavior (hikikomori): A systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 49(7): 595–609.

28.

Ogino

(2004) Managing categorization and social withdrawal in Japan: Rehabilitation process in a private support group for hikikomorians. International Journal of Japanese Sociology 13(1): 120–133.

29.

Pau J (2014). Lack of opportunities in Hong Kong create generation without hope. South China Morning Post, 21 October. Available at: http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1621365/lack-opportunities-hong-kong-creating-generation-without.

30.

Peled

Leichtentritt

(2002) The ethics of qualitative social work research. Qualitative Social Work 1(2): 145–169.

31.

Rubinstein E (2016) Emplotting hikikomori: Japanese parents’ narratives of social withdrawal. Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry. 40(4): 641–663.

32.

Saito

(1998) Shakaiteki Hikikomori [Social Withdrawal], Tokyo: PHP Kenkyuujo.

33.

Santelli

Baldwin

Heitel

(2015) Rising wealth, improving health? Adolescents and inequality. Lancet 385(9982): 2026–2028.

34.

Sawyer

Afifi

Bearinger

et al. (2012) Adolescence: A foundation for future health. Lancet 379(9826): 1630–1640.

35.

Suwa

Suzuki

(2013) The phenomenon of “hikikomori” (social withdrawal) and the socio-cultural situation in Japan today. Journal of Psychopathology 19(2013): 191–198.

36.

Teo

(2010) A new form of social withdrawal in Japan: A review of hikikomori. International Journal of Social Psychiatry 56(2): 178–185.

37.

Todd

KHL

(2011) Hikikomania: Existential horror or national malaise. Southeast Review of Asian Studies 33: 135–147.

38.

Toivonen

Norasakkunkit

Uchida

(2011) Unable to conform, unwilling to rebel? Youth, culture, and motivation in globalizing Japan. Frontiers in psychology 2: 207.

39.

Uchida

(2010) Apathetic and withdrawing students in Japanese universities: With regard to Hikikomori and student apathy. Journal of Medical and Dental Sciences 57(57): 95–108.

40.

Walker

Wachs

Gardner

et al. (2007) ‘Child development: Risk factors for adverse outcomes in developing countries. Lancet 369(9556): 145–157.

41.

Wong

PWC

TMH

Chan

et al. (2015) The prevalence and correlates of severe social withdrawal (hikikomori) in Hong Kong – A cross-sectional telephone-based survey study. International Journal of Social Psychiatry 61(4): 330–342.

42.

Wong PWC, Yu RWM, Li TMH, et al. (in press) Efficacy of a multicomponent intervention with animal-assisted therapy for socially withdrawn youths in Hong Kong. Society & Animals.

43.

Wong

(2009) Youth locked in time and space? Defining features of social withdrawal and practice implications. Journal of Social Work Practice 23(3): 337–352.

44.

Wong

(2012) Social withdrawal as invisible youth disengagement. The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 32(7/8): 415–430.

45.

Wong

(2014) Social work with youth in social withdrawal: In-home and beyond-home intervention modalities. China Journal of Social Work 7(2): 161–174.