hrm, re panhandling

[keryx]

I'm starting to do some volunteer work with Daily Planet (it's a homeless services agency here in town). Yesterday I had a conversation there about services and free will/agency of people who might need or want them. Some of the folk at the Planet are big fans of anti-panhandling laws, or at least of giving people literature instead of a dollar.

You know, because the person you give a dollar to is more likely to use it to buy something that doesn't improve their quality of life. Except. By whose standards?

The woman I was talking to implied that coercing people into seeking help is perfectly acceptable, in fact, desirable vs. people choosing to live (with what we assume is lower quality of life, measured by our own standards) without help.

This idea bothers me.

People might have perfectly valid (to them) reasons not to seek help. People might also have untreated mental illness or substance abuse issues, too - they might not be making "good" decisions, and they might be in pain as a result. I just find it very difficult to decide one decision is good and another isn't. There's just following social norms and not following social norms. I'm ok with arguing that, from experience, you know most people you push into mental health treatment and shelter are later happier and glad you did, if that comes with recognition that you might be wrong about this person - and that doesn't make them "unsaveable", just uninterested.

I suppose I'll have some homeless folk I know well enough to ask this question soon. Not that they'll be a representative group, but they're closer to the question than I am. It's easy to think in abstractions.

Comments

I'm afraid that my experience agrees with your guess.

[mtfierce.livejournal.com]

Trying to make people in different situations align closer with "society"'s (middle-class) values is a bad proposition, because you're asking them to give up many of the things that have kept them comfortable. Some of them are negative to one's health - drugs, alcohol, etc., but some of them are more subtle, like connections with others.

Re: I'm afraid that my experience agrees with your guess.

[keryx.livejournal.com]

The connection thing is especially tricky, and getting more so, it sounds. We've got more people in relationships and with kids starting to show up homeless, ferinstance, and shelters are designed largely around single adults.

Re: I'm afraid that my experience agrees with your guess.

[goodgothgirl.livejournal.com]

The issue of the lack of family shelters has been around in Richmond for a long time. I first heard it back in 2001, when I started writing about homelessness for the T-D. It's a gap in the services that are available. "Family" shelters are for women and children, and that means the fathers and teenage sons have to live elsewhere. It's heartbreaking for everyone to have to split the family, but it's a problem that no one has bothered to solve.

[maryjholliday.livejournal.com]

An even more provocative question if the shelter system in your area is following a "housing first" model. Most of my caseworker co-workers are skeptical and think that putting homeless folks into permanent housing immediately is a bad idea, because no one can force them to accept treatment/therapy/education/etc once they know they've got a free place to live.

The way I look at it, at some point us tax-paying touchy-feely liberals have to accept that a good deal of the money we pour into helping homeless folks isn't going to support the "betterment" of the population. That, or stop paying for it and let the rest of the homeless folks who DO participate in AA meetings, housing searches, etc. fix things for themselves. I work specifically with homeless families, so giving up on a parent who seems determined to go without mental-health or substance abuse treatment effectively means giving up on their kids. FAIL.

[vagal-nerve.livejournal.com]

I believe strongly in the housing first model. It can absolutely work, but certainly not if people are forced to do anything. Neither is it simply a free place to live. Children aren't placed with addicted or dangerously ill parents in a housing first model. 'Course, these are my understanding from working in the very few HF programs we have in the northwestern US.

Perhaps, it's semantics but "betterment" seems an odd goal. Connection and stability, HF outcomes, can drastically and dramatically change lives.

[keryx.livejournal.com]

Richmond isn't truly housing-first, though transitional housing is a big point for service agencies here. All of them note that their residency goes down in the spring and fall, when you can comfortably sleep outside and avoid the push for other services. It's a stretch, but when I imagine living without a permanent place to sleep, I understand why one might sleep in the park.

I think maryjholliday used "betterment" to refer to a specific image helping folk might have about homeless folk making the transition to "normal" (job, apartment, money in a bank) life, not that it's a goal per se. Stability and connection are things most people want - but they might take different forms.

[vagal-nerve.livejournal.com]

Of course stability and connection look different for everyone. I feel like it's not just semantics, but also a paradigm shift. What I pick up in "betterment", "normal", even "helping" (folk) feels patronizing. I feel like we largely miss the boat when we subvert self-determination about what normal and betterment are. mtfierce said this: Trying to make people in different situations align closer with "society"'s (middle-class) values is a bad proposition...

[maryjholliday.livejournal.com]

Among the residents with which I work, it is seen as free housing, and, in the same vein, scattered site apartments are more desirable because they get hassled less by caseworkers.

I don't know personally the ins and outs of the housing first system. We are only just working on the transition here in MA. But I can imagine that it would be much harder to determine a parent's drug addiction or mental illness from afar. I guess there's no perfect way!

Yes, betterment seems an odd goal to me, too. That's why I used it in quotes. Right up there with the double-edged sword of "progress." It was simply the most suitable word I could find for what my co-workers are trying to do.

Thanks for the reply. I've been trying to formulate a paragraph here about this and that, but found that I couldn't write it because I kept seeing the flip-side of my arguments (thanks to thinking about what you said). :)

[vagal-nerve.livejournal.com]

Cool, thanks much.

A small part of what I love about HF is that it's never really been done- we aren't exactly sure what any outcomes are, especially in the long term. It's obvious (hi, people who are homeless need homes), but also a gamble. Incidentally, I like scattered sites best. Residents feel less like they are trading privacy for a place to live, and we avoid creating slums.

[maryjholliday.livejournal.com]

P.S. - My town is also in the midst of an anti-panhandling law debate. Bah.

Also, I would personally not give out money to folks on the street, mainly because they're people I see day after day, and I know they have a bed and food. Also, you know, I don't have the money to offer! If it's someone I don't know, I'd be inclined to offer to put them in touch with the local social service agencies to make sure they have a place to go by nightfall.

[keryx.livejournal.com]

Most of this city's homeless can have a bed and food if they seek it - and the census would show that most do. But even knowing that, I'm usually willing to give someone a coupla bucks. It's hard for me not to give someone something they want & I can easily give.

[maryjholliday.livejournal.com]

I hear that. Here in New England, we really do run out of beds in the colder months. And now we're losing lots of state- and other-funding, which is scary.

[goodgothgirl.livejournal.com]

Several years ago in Richmond, an agency made a pocket-sized accordian chart that listed the names, locations, and contact info for ALL of the housing and food programs available to the homeless. These charts were given to people who were panhandling to help them find the services they need. I never heard any numbers on how effective it was, but it was an interesting idea.

[luguvalium.livejournal.com]

In general I usually don't give panhandlers anything, but sometimes my intuition tell me differently and I follow that.

[firecat]

I'm afraid I don't usually give panhandlers anything, but I also don't think anti-panhandler laws really solve anything, and I agree with your concerns.

OTOH, non-profit agencies don't necessarily have as much choice in setting policy as an individual choosing what to do with $2 in their pocket might have.

[cutegaychick.livejournal.com]

Two thoughts:
1) I was always taught (warning: Christian morality ahead) that if someone asks you for a dollar, it's not your concern how he spends it. He asked you for help and you helped him - you did your bit of Christian good and the rest is up to God.

2) I hate the "give to shelters, not to panhandlers message" because really -- if you don't give that dollar to the homeless lady, are you really truly going to give it to the shelter instead or are you gonna spend it on a Coke at 7-Eleven?

3) (Okay, so three points, not two). Isabelle Allende had a great point in House of Spirits that I still remember from high school: We give money to underprivileged people to make ourselves feel better, not to help them because "The poor don't need charity - they need justice."

What?

[goodgothgirl.livejournal.com]

Back in the day -- sometime around 2004, when I was still reporting about homeless issues -- it was the people at the Planet who told me about the willingly homeless population. There are folks with mental health and substance abuse issues who choose to remain homeless, and that's who the Planet is meant to serve. I'm kinda shocked that someone there would be talking about anti-panhandling laws. I completely agree with you that if I choose to give someone money, they can use it to improve their quality of life by their own standards. While panhandling is painfully inconvienent for most people to see or choose to pass by, that doesn't make it less valid of a choice.