Background Community safety is a key determinant of mental well-being, yet racially and ethnically minoritised communities in the UK face disproportionate exposure to insecurity alongside barriers to formal protection and support. Structural racism shapes exposure to violence, institutional responses to safety concerns, and access to care, compounding mental health burdens. This study examines how community safety and mental well-being are mediated through informal support networks, focusing on two key mechanisms: the gendered dynamics of violence against women and girls (VAWG) and institutional mistrust that limits access to formal support. It explores these processes among racially and ethnically minoritised communities in the London boroughs of Lambeth and Southwark. Methods Semi-structured interviews (n=31) were conducted with racially and ethnically minoritised participants aged 16+ living or working in Lambeth and Southwark. Using a co-produced design involving eight peer researchers, interviews explored informal networks, community safety, and mental well-being. Data were analysed thematically. Results Four interconnected themes were identified. Neighbourhood cohesion and belonging supported mental well-being but were undermined by structural neglect. Women bore disproportionate responsibility for managing everyday safety. Barriers to formal support reflected institutional mistrust, cultural insensitivity, and anticipated discrimination. Community-led and peer initiatives functioned as alternative safety infrastructures where formal provision was inaccessible. Conclusion Informal networks are central to navigating community insecurity, buffering harm and compensating for inaccessible formal services. The vital role of these networks highlights how deeply communities must adapt to the ongoing impacts of structural racism and violence. Improving community safety hinges on investment in neighbourhood infrastructure, culturally responsive services, and enduring partnerships with community-led approaches.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Benjamin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: