Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on News Flash: Being Homeless Still Really Sucks

1

I'm glad I live in a neighborhood with people that don't give a shit about anybody else, who use drugs and toss their rigs and pipes in my yard, who vandalize my property, who steal from me, who harass me on the way to and from the grocery store. I'm pleased as punch that the mentally deranged are not taken care of, that they haunt the streets fighting their demons, that spun out tweakers fight invisible opponents right on Broadway, and that I have to very often step over reeking junkies to get the mail. All of those things make me feel really good.

Posted by Really??? | June 14, 2008 8:47 PM
2

Peace for the Streets! Kids from the Streets! Beat Kids! Beat Kids!

Wondershowzen, where art thou?

Posted by Jubilation T. Cornball | June 14, 2008 11:23 PM
3

The real problem is that not enough homeless people prefer being homeless on Capitol Hill. Keep trying, though, and hopefully enough of them will leave Ballard so I can walk down the street without smelling urine.

Posted by joykiller | June 14, 2008 11:29 PM
4

The mentally ill ones need to be evaluated and/or put in an institution. The addicts need to go to rehab and the rest will have a choice of farms here in WA or go to the rust belt. They will work and later be joined by those who have been helped. Once they've earned enough money they can leave if they choose but can keep their jobs.

Posted by Bud Dickman | June 14, 2008 11:37 PM
5

Seattle is so kind it is cruel. A few of the homeless choose that lifestyle by choice. The rest need some sort of confrontation, be it rehab or institutionlization. Are we really doing the homeless any favors by letting them suffer anonymously?
Typical Seattle passive bs. We mean well but don't want any confrontation. So the situation perpetuates itself day after day and year after year.

Posted by Zander | June 14, 2008 11:44 PM
6

I took them *two days* to come up with that list?!

Rather than simply telling us yet again that homeless people need more more more from us, why don't they stress the need for homeless people to do their part. Like, you know, don't leave your needles in the park. Don't harass people on the street. Don't rip off small businesses.

Posted by bob | June 14, 2008 11:47 PM
7

Zander - you're missing the point, it has nothing to do with Seattle passivity, legally it's very difficult to institutionalize anyone against their will these days.

So "confronting" them will do very little good, anyway, homeless people are used to being confronted and told to get a job, clean up, etc. Doesn't make any difference.

Posted by bob | June 14, 2008 11:55 PM
8

No Shit, homelessness sucks? So does being poor in general in this city. I've spent my whole life here & how always found hard to find decent housing, that affordable, which is the real issue.

Posted by ABM | June 15, 2008 5:24 AM
9

"Confrontation" might work within the context of ongoing Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (if one supports that modality) but getting a homeless person into such a program and having funding for the program is difficult to arrange. Once in progress treating the homeless even if it is well funded is long, slow and full of setbacks. It's not surprising that many people, exposed to the dysfunction of homelessness, become scared, angry and advocates of what is a essentially a 'ship'em off somewhere else' solution. Not only does this idea reek of forced labor camps for the mentally defective, it creates a situation where mental illness and poverty are criminalized. This is already leading to Transinstitutionalization. This is an inhumane and expensive response to a problem that is endemic to the system.

Posted by LMSW | June 15, 2008 5:46 AM
10

I worked at a homeless shelter back in the 80s when I was in seminary. It was in the basement of the church where I was placed, in the downtown area of a New England city of approximately 40,000. We offered 34 beds, 3 meals a day and free clothes and other items that people donated. Our toilets, showers and laundry facilities were open to residents 24 hours a day, and to anyone else free and no questions asked from 7am to 7pm 7 days a week.

Unfortunately we were just a drop in the bucket of what was needed. We did not have the resources to address the problems of mental illness and chronic addiction. Our parish nurse did her best, but could only do so much. The usual problems still persisted around town--panhandling, drugs, even urinating. Why someone would pee in a back alley when our perfectly clean and available rest rooms were only a few blocks away remains a mystery to me but that's mental illnes for you. We also were unable to provide much in the way of follow up services for those who found work and a place to live. Their jobs usually only paid enough for them to afford a roach infested dump and they either drank or shot up their money anyway. Or they would forget to take their meds, start hallucinating, get scared of the ghosts, gangsters or mariachi bands (I'm not making that last one up) who they imagined lurking in their rooms and return to the shelter where they felt safe. We were constantly battling NIMBYs around the neighborhood and the mayor's office who felt the presence of a centrally located shelter would scare away the tourists (our town had a lot of historic sites) and attract the derelicts from Boston and other communities. Our staff had a high turnover rate, not surprising given the nature of the job. I lasted 3 years but burned out, left my job and the ministry entirely, almost became homeless myself, entered a state of severe depression and almost met a tragic end but that's a story for another day.

Addressing the issue of homelessness requires cooperation between city leaders, employers, housing developers, well meaning religious communities and secular volunteer organizations, mental health advocates, substance abuse counselors, police, social workers and a host of others--that is, every one of us. Given Seattle's approach to solving problems (study the issue ad nauseum hoping it will just simply go away) I don't know if anything is going to be done soon. This meeting is a good start, but if it is just the first of many meetings, studies, public forums, blah blah blah without any concrete action coming out of it, we will still be smelling urine, seeing needles and being begged for spare changed outside the QFC for years to come.

Posted by RainMan | June 15, 2008 9:12 AM
11

@1 & @3 -- The homeless were in your neighborhoods before you were. I bet they're sick of you mowing your lawn and painting and all the other stuff you do to piss them off.

What this county needs is a comprehensive plan. Accept that we can manage / accommodate X number of unhoused residents. Care for, treat, assist, manage those people. Give every public agency access to the information they need for their interface.

When the homeless exceed X, provide basic service and a waiting list.

It's a start.

Posted by six shooter | June 15, 2008 9:56 AM
12

"-Police get to know certain homeless people, and “profile” them."

Profiling is when the police make assumptions about someone based on their appearance or ethnicity.

Once the cops "get to know you" - well then it's just knowledge. Or a rap. Or a record.

Sucks to be a dirtbag when the cops know your name.

Posted by snort | June 15, 2008 10:28 AM
13

legal campsites on capitol hill? hahahahhahahaha, okay. people on capitol hill are more open minded? hahahhahaha, okay.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | June 15, 2008 11:04 AM
14

I've always thought that there should be a voluntary program for people who are homeless, where they are housed on a cooperative farm or something like that, far from the web of urban life the seems to trap people in homlessness: Pushers, users, 40 ouncers, manipulative religious types, cops, etc).

No one would be forced to go there, and they wouldn't have to stay there, but it would be a chance for them to get some fresh air and perspective.

I know that sounds hopelessly utopian, but sometimes a change of scenery and the opportunity to get away from harmful people or environments really helps a person. I know it has helped me in my life on occasion.

Posted by Catalina Vel-DuRay | June 15, 2008 11:53 AM
15

14:It might sound utopian, but it's better that the avoidance strategy everyone in Seattle seems to prefer.

And while we're on the subject, what happened to those sociopathic "self-made" uber-capitalists who always like to bring up their genocidal/eugenicist urges anytime the homeless come up? It's always good to get their "superior" input.

Posted by Jay | June 15, 2008 4:52 PM
16

Why don't the good liberals at the Stranger give the homeless jobs? They could certainly help distribute the Stranger every week.

Posted by bob | June 15, 2008 9:34 PM
17

It doesn't look like it's going to get any easier for the homeless in Seattle.

What with the encampment sweeps; removal of the notorious automated toilets (though their usefulness is definitely debatable); V-for-Vendetta-esque security cameras in parks specifically installed to -- among other things -- discourage the homeless from sleeping there; and the slashes to King County public health budgets, it looks like the situation on the streets is going to get worse, not better.

What's going to happen to the sections of King County government that depend on "discretionary" funds like the Department of Community and Human Services? This department contracts with community agencies to address addiction, mental illness, and, oh yeah, homelessness. They also represented almost 2,500 defendants in involuntary commitment cases in 2004 (the most recent statistic available) through their Office of the Publice Defender division.

According to the King County Web site, the county spends 71 percent of its budget on "criminal justice." If we take money away from preventative measures as opposed to reactionary, it could be too little, too late.

Helping to ameliorate homelessness and the factors that contribute to it is not just a social problem, it's a budgetary one as well.

PS @1 Looks like there are others who "don't give a shit about anybody else." What's your excuse?

Posted by zellers | June 15, 2008 9:34 PM
18

@14: Your idea has not only been tried, it has been successful in many cases for 75 years. After Dorothy Day established the first Catholic Worker house in New York City during the depression the community acquired a small farm in New Jersey where shelter residents were sent to work growing vegetables to be sent to the house back in the city. Today there are Catholic Worker comunities in rural as well as urban settings around the United States, Canada and Great Britain among other places.

The only problem with this approach is that it is generally successful only with those for whom homelessness is a temporary condition. These are the cream of the crop in terms of this population; i.e. those who are not plagued with substance abuse or mental health issues. They may have simply met a string of bad luck that landed them on the street but generally bounce back and would have done so whether they were sent to a farm or not. (They may be already working but don't make enough to afford a place to live, a very real possibility in a city like Seattle with astronomical housing costs. Since Barbara Ehrenreich wrote on this topic in Nickel and Dimed I won't elaborate further.)

The chronic homeless, however, would probably not benefit from exposure to life in Green Acres. The seriously deranged should not be permitted behind the wheel of a tractor and probably don't even know which end of a cow is up. And given that alcoholism and drug addiction are diseases, removing a substance abuser cold turkey from any nearby liquor store or dealer without appropriate medical treatment is just asking for trouble.

But more than that, a mindset often develops among the homeless and near homeless that turns into an almost agoraphobic insularity. I observed this in my previous work and while I would not want to generalize from my own experience I should note that Michael Harrington writes on this subject at length in his 1962 The Other America, the book cited as sparking the Kennedy/Johnson War on Poverty (which Reagan later, as I witnessed at the time firsthand, turned into the War on Poor People). Harrington was astonished when slum dwellers in Harlem and the South Bronx told him that they had never seen the ocean even though the beach at Coney Island was only a subway ride away. Some had never been out of their home borough and existed entirely within a few city blocks. There was no desire to explore, even vicariously, beyond their immediate world even though free or low cost resources (the public library for instance) were at their disposal.

I observed this phenomenon in my work. Interestingly, the world of the homeless in our town was very small. Everyone knew each other as well as the homeless of other communities. They had a gossip grapevine that would rival that of a major corporation. There was also a curious social hierarchy among themselves with the alcoholics who did day labor at the top, then the nonworking drinkers, the druggies, and finally the mentally ill at the bottom who were unmercifully taken advantage of. Outside this caste system were the temporary homeless I mentioned above who, in a bewildering example of reverse snobbery, were regarded as dilettantish interlopers, invading their exclusive club. And despite having "nothing to do and all day to do it", they actually had plenty to do. They had daily routines as regimented as that of a soldier in boot camp and showed not the slightest inclination to depart from it.

Whether this behavior was a cause or effect of their chronic poverty is a chicken-and-egg debate we won't settle here. But finally I regret that among the list in my post @10 of those necessary to solve the problem of homelessness I neglected to include the most important: the homeless themselves.

Posted by RainMan | June 15, 2008 10:11 PM
19

I think we should have a forum on all things obvious.

Posted by nolaseatac | June 15, 2008 10:31 PM
20

A solution to our homeless problem is using old boats retrofitted to serve as floating shelters/housing out on Puget Sound. And then we sink the boats. Problem solved.

Posted by Rotten666 | June 16, 2008 7:26 AM
21

Great posts, Rainman. Thank you for contributing your observations.

Posted by LMSW | June 16, 2008 5:47 PM
22

Hey, I am one of the organizers of the CH Homeless Summit. This was our first one. I wish more residents were present. We are interested in following up with actual action steps. We only had two days with the homeless for the third day presentation.
There is still lots of work to be done.
Our organization is on Capitol Hill and many of our clients are activist they attend community meetings on Committee to End Homelessness, and are willing to step up to make social change. Some of our clients are the ones who have mental or drug addictions that prohibits them from making social change. But when they are ready they are the first to step up and volunteer at a food bank, do outreach with our outreach worker and hand out socks on B-way, keep the center clean and drug free. We have been on the hill for over 10 years and need the community support to fill the gaps that our store front organization can't fill i.e. housing, emergency shelter, hygine center etc.
Check out our web site, volunteer, be a part of the solution rather then talk
about it...
www.psks.org

Posted by Elaine | June 16, 2008 7:15 PM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.