Today for my blog, I am posting a paper that I wrote in order to discuss the public concern of homelesseness. The goal of the paper was to bring awareness as to why it is a social problem and to provide some possible solutions to the problem. One nice touch that you can add to any paper where you are trying to persuade someone is to add a personal story, so I incorporated a few personal stories and tried to empathize with the homeless community.
I have worked for a temporary staffing
agency for the past ten years. During
that time, I have met a lot of people that have a job but are still homeless,
or people on the verge of being homeless because they do not make enough to
support themselves and / or their family. I have also encountered people that are on the
verge of foreclosure of their house or eviction from their apartment, or are
already homeless. More often than not,
they are also experiencing additional taxing situations, such as divorce,
repossession of, or mechanical problems with their vehicle. Although these are personal issues that many
people deal with, homelessness is a public concern due to fact that many times the cause is related to the economy and public policies, as well as, the fact that the cost of homeless affects everyone as it is paid for through our taxes.
Glasser and Hirsch (2014), in Understanding Homelessness: From Memior to
Pathways Home, look at over 40 articles and books about homelessness, and a
handful of websites, that address things such as the history of homelessness,
causes, memoirs, ethnographies and different classifications (women, families,
children, mentally ill, etc.) and finally pathways out of homelessness. Glasser and Hirsch look at multiple authors
in each of the above mentioned areas in their paper, and are able to tie
together a few common findings: reasons for homelessness, policies that are
counter-productive, and an understanding of homelessness must be present in
order to ever have a chance of ending homelessness.
Just as I had encountered in my
experiences talking with so many individuals at the homeless shelter, Glasser
& Hirsch (2014) referenced Snow and Anderson (1993), and Rowe (1999), who
all found that homelessness is frequently a consequence of a series of unfortunate
events and a lack of support from social institutions, friends and family (p.
1524). In the video, Cardboard stories homeless in Orlando, (2014)
they show real homeless people with cardboard signs telling about
themselves. Although many people think of homeless as
vagrants, I believe they would be surprised to learn that college graduates and
ex-executives are homeless. This video shows
that still today, most homeless people were once successful individuals
contributing to society and could be helped in order to do so again. Glasser & Hirsch state clearly that until
policy makers understand the lives of the homeless, they will not be able to
find a solution, and reference Kusmer (2002) who traced homelessness and found
that from its early beginnings people blamed the homeless person for their
situation, even though the rise in homelessness was in direct correlation to
war and economic downturns at those times (Glasser & Hirsch, 2014).
Glasser & Hirsch, went on to
reference many articles, Rossi (1989), Howard (2013), Burt (1992) and Jencks
(1994) that linked the more recent increase in homelessness with the
deinstitutionalization of mentally ill in the 1980’s, along with gentrification
or demolition of low-income housing, motels and skid row (p.1528). Many times it is as though a city believes
that kicking the homeless out of an area will make the problem disappear, when
all it does is make the citizens of that area feel better because they do not
see the problem anymore. It moves the
problem to another location and quiets people down for a little while. Tompsett, Toro, Guzicki, and Zatakia (2006)
in their article Homelessness in the
United States: Assessing Changes in Prevalence and Public Opinion, 1993–2001,
concluded – at that time – that people have a complex view of homelessness and
were more willing in 2001 to support new policies aimed at increasing
low-income housing and services; but, media coverage, the state of the economy
and demographics all have an effect on the public attitude, so these items need
to be considered and new public opinion surveys would be needed to make
effective decisions in the future.
Overall, Glasser & Hirsch tackled the topic of Homelessness in a
very constructive manner, by summarizing and providing a wealth of resources on
various aspects of the topic of homelessness in order to give the reader a
better understanding of homelessness as a whole. They had a bias toward ending homelessness,
and with the multitude of resources to support their view, provided a very
valid argument.
In a less popular approach, Smith (2014)
In Defense of Homelessness, asks
people to stop viewing homeless people as an inferior social status, and
instead, to accept homelessness as a viable lifestyle. By doing so, Smith contends, that society
will alleviate their constant state of susceptibility to stigmatization, open
our eyes to how the current institutions create psychological anguish and
social fragmentations among the housed and homeless, see what systems the
homeless has developed to experience security, dignity and anonymity, and how
these systems can be advantageous to the wellbeing of everyone in society (2014,
p.34). He makes it a point to state that
we should still work on housing the homeless, but defends their successful
encampments that so many frown upon and
work to make them evacuate without
another solution. Smith references multiple
articles that refer to homeless individuals in demeaning and derogatory terms
that are unfair and have intent to create public outcry against the homeless
without providing positive solutions or even considering the fact that these
are human beings, more often than not worrying more about keeping them out of
the public eye, out of encampments, and kept in shelters, where someone is
there to watch over them (2014, ps. 36 & 38). I can say from my personal experience, that
most workers at the shelter treat the residents as inferior, sometimes
bordering on abuse and at the very least would be considered bullying reminding
individuals that they hold the power to kick them out in the cold for the night
if the resident does not follow their orders.
One intern for the NCH wrote a blog
about her participation in the Homeless Challenge where she lived on the streets
for 48 hours. Emily Kvalheim (2010)
describes being treated very poorly by multiple fast food restaurants, yet
welcomed to the bathroom of a fancy hotel and to eat in a sit-down
restaurant. She describes being appalled
by her treatment and writing down the names of the businesses that treated her
harshly so she could retaliate, only to realize that she too had prejudices and
has not always been compassionate toward the homeless (Kvalheim, 2010). Maybe if more individuals that want to judge
the homeless participated in this event, they would see that homelessness isn’t
something that most people would chose, but have to accept as it becomes their
reality.
While Smith does not try to deny that
many homeless individuals do work for sex, are drug abusers, suffer from mental
illness, and are homeless veterans suffering from PTSD, those choosing to live
in communities – or encampments – instead of shelters, thrive on three
principles we can all learn from: “security through community, free sharing of
provisions, and equitable exchange” in a network of support (2014, p. 38). Although public officials and media outlets
often portray the homeless as freeloaders, they neglect to acknowledge the fact
that employment available to the poor and homeless is exhausting, oppressive
and fails to provide an income that will support them or give them a chance to
escape poverty and homelessness (Smith, 2014).
So people choose to live in tent cities where they can have the
protection and support of living in a collective community with a common
majority rule decision making, sharing of resources, and respect of each other’s
privacy (Smith, 2014).
Smith goes on to describe the
hyperindividualism and wastefulness of people today, that is opposite of these
tent cities. He cites McKibben (2010) in
Eaarth describing people walking
around oblivious to those around them, sitting on their back patio instead of
front porch, using every option we can to avoid leaving our home, yet still not
eating dinner as a family – all of this resulting in people having half as many
close friends as they did 50 years ago (p. 47).
He finally concludes that we can learn from the positive attributes of
these encampments, still providing assistance to those that need and want it. This article takes a stance to try to give
some dignity and pride back to homeless individuals, who very well may be
living a life more meaningful and connected to those in their community than
most. He makes very valid arguments and
it is very easy to find a multitude of articles on the problem with homelessness
containing very negative connotations.
This article opens with an aggressive tone against many articles that
degrade homeless individuals and then goes on to educate the reader of the very
humane way of living that more and more homeless people are choosing. It brings awareness of an outlook that is not
popular, while acknowledging that just as there is no one type of person that
is homeless, there is also probably not one solution for the homeless problem.
Amidst all of the articles focusing on
how to help homeless veterans, or homeless victims of domestic violence, or the
mentally ill, or substance abusers (and the list goes on) I found an article
that focused on something that could possibly help almost all of the homeless
individuals from the various categories, save those with physical and some
mental illnesses. Docksai (2009)
followed the success of a running program in Philadelphia, a chapter of the
Back On My Feet organization, titled Running
from Homelessness. The organization
has found a way to help homeless individuals join a
group of runners that all
have the same end goal to gain employment and housing. According to the article, the Philadelphia
chapter puts people in groups of 10 – 15 runners, who after two months of at
least 90 percent participation can participate in educational classes, as well
as, job training and placement, and are eligible for grants to assist with
education, job-related expenses and housing (Docksai, 2009, para. 6). When the article was written, over 16 percent
of participants in Philadelphia had secured housing and over 28 percent had
secured employment (Docksai, 2009, para. 7).
The most current data on the Philadelphia chapter shows that it’s
success has sustained as nearly 27 percent of participants have secured housing
and almost 36 percent have secured employment – which is almost identical to
the organizations numbers as a whole (BOMF, 2015). Docksai referenced a survey by Back On My
Feet where 89 percent of participants felt more confident and 88 percent felt
more productive and 90 percent felt more positive about their future; although,
these statements are not cure, a more positive outlook on life by homeless
participants is a good start in the right direction (2009).
Although a very short article, the fact
that the program addresses so many of the problems of the homeless – poor
health, education, job readiness and access to assistance for housing and
employment – it seems that the program may be able to help a large portion of
the homeless population. The program
fosters community relationships, by putting runners in groups that all have the
same common goal, so they can support one another. The author reported facts without giving any
opinions of their own. Their purpose was
to expose the early success of the program, which he did well.
According to the National Coalition for
Homeless (NCH), there are not accurate numbers for how many people are homeless
because most surveys only provide numbers from individuals that utilize social
services, yet there are many homeless people that do not use services; still
the estimates range from 1.6 million by USA Today (2009) to 3.5 million by
National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty (2007) and the NCH sides with
the higher estimate (2009, para. 11). After
participating in homeless counts as a volunteer and as a paid analyst for year,
Christine JoCoy (2013), began to ask questions and states in her article that
the social policy did not effectively link the data with solutions to
homelessness and the yearly counting “…consumes resources better used
elsewhere, and generates among well-meaning people, particularly count
volunteers, a false sense that they are addressing a problem simply by
quantifying it” (p. 398, para 1).
When looking at who makes up the
homeless population, the NCH relies on studies conducted by many government
agencies. They reference The National
Law Center on Homeless and Poverty’s (2004) study found that 39 percent of the
homeless were under 18 and 42 percent of those children were under 5, 25
percent were 25 – 34 years old, while 6 percent were 55 to 64 (NCH, 2009). When looking at gender, families and
ethnicity they reference the US Conference of Mayors from 2007 which found that
23 percent of the homeless are families and 65 percent of those families are
females with children, yet 76 percent of the single homeless individuals are
male (NCH, 2009). In addition, they
found that 42 percent of the population in shelters are African-American, 38
percent are white, 20 percent are Hispanic, while 4 percent Native American and
2 percent are Asian (NCH, 2009). It is
believed that anywhere from 11 – 40 percent of homeless men are veterans and
around 26 percent of
the homeless population suffers from severe mental illness
and the numbers for individuals will addiction range from 30 – 65 percent (NCH,
2009).
The concern with these numbers is not
only inaccuracy due to not being able to count all homeless individuals, but
also inaccuracy in reporting. JoCoy
(2013) even recalled being asked to remove report comparisons of the homeless
and general populations in the area she covered as those statistics could show
an “overrepresentation” of African Americans, which JoCoy concluded was because
controversy could be caused from showing any racial disparities (p.399). The biggest point here is that counters may
be helping government agencies decide how to allocate resources, but they are
not doing anything to help solve the problem of homelessness.
In 2003 five different agencies formed
the Collaborative Initiative to Help End Chronic Homelessness (CICH) and
awarded grants to 11 different cities in the United States, with the goal to
help end chronic homelessness (McGraw, Larson, Foster, Kresky-Wolff, Botelho,
Elstad, Stefancic, & Tsemberis, 2010).
Two models were adopted across the eleven cities: Assertive Community
Treatment (ACT) – a team-based approach of rigorous services for people with
persistent mental illness outside of hospitals, and Motovational Interviewing
(MI) – meant to provoke behavior change, using interpersonal relationships
between individual and worker (McGraw et al., 2010). The authors found that this collaboration had
five areas that created challenges for success of the projects: “(1) Incomplete
and underdeveloped staff teams; (2) Incomplete understanding of the practice
models; (3) Using the elements of the practice models; (4) Interagency teaming;
and (5) Competing expectations of multiple federal agencies” (McGraw et al.,
2010). I believe that the sixth flaw with
this initiative is that it only focused on one portion of the homeless
population. In the article, Health Care for the Homeless: What We Have
Learned in the Past 30 Years and What’s Next, the authors discuss the need
for proper health care for all homeless individuals and argues that attention of
many policies turn to economic concerns about costs of health and social
services provided, which then throws money to a segment of the homeless,
instead of addressing the causes and accepting that homelessness is a public
concern (Zlotnick, Zerger & Wolfe 2013).
Academic knowledge helps one to execute a
higher quality of research, think critically about issues and develop solutions
to issues. Educating one’s self about
their community, locally and globally, helps one to be more involved and make a
difference where they may not have otherwise.
If more people researched the cost of homelessness, I believe they would
stop supporting the building of shelters without implementing better resources
and programs to foster an environment for growth and a way out of
homelessness.
According to the National Alliance to
End Homelessness (2015), taxpayers and cities incur expensive costs associated
with the incarceration, hospitalization, medical treatment and emergency
shelters for the homeless (para. 3).
Homeless people spend more time in overnight jail stays (usually from
police cleaning the streets or on purpose to have a warm place to sleep) and
prison and the
average cost federal prison bed is $20,000 a year (National
Alliance to End Homelessness, 2015).
Even more concerning to me is that emergency shelters cost an average of
$8,067 more a year than subsidized housing, and we chose not to help homeless
people obtain more permanent housing (National Alliance to End Homelessness,
2015). One study in Los Angeles,
California found that the city could save over $80,000 a year by placing just
four chronically homeless individuals into permanent housing (National Alliance
to End Homelessness, 2015).
If the public would educate themselves
about the causes, they could empathize with this part of their community and
demand solutions. If people would get
involved by volunteering they could help these individuals gain the confidence,
relevant work skills, interview skills needed to acquire gainful employment
which could lead to housing. In
addition, America as a whole needs to realize that without teaching relevant
work skills to these individuals, they will likely only be able to land low
paying or minimum wage jobs, still not able to afford housing since we continue
reduce the amount of low-income housing available. By a large majority of the community getting
involved and requiring a solution instead of a band-aid, we can force the
government to make a change that could reduce homelessness greatly in the next
decade.
Time and time again, throughout my
research there was one resounding echo that the United States cannot find a
solution to the homeless problem, without understanding who is homeless and
why, then educating the public in order to change perceptions and gain more
support for efforts to end homelessness.
Creating social policies that would focus more with the “why” in order to
come to the “how”, would greatly reduce the counter-productive policies that
waste taxpayers dollars. Reducing or
eliminating homelessness would reduce taxes, health care costs, the number of jails
needed and create a greater local and global community through working together
and treating our fellow citizens more humanely.
References
Burt,
Martha (1992). Over the Edge: The Growth of Homelessness in the 1980s.
Russell Sage Foundation.
Docksai,
R. (2009). Running from homelessness. The
Futurist, 43(5), 6. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/218592941?accountid=32521
Evans,
B. (2013) Drop Inn Center to move to
former bread factory in Queensgate. [Video Recording] Retrieved from http://www.wlwt.com/news/local-news/cincinnati/drop-inn-center-to-former-bread-factory-in-queensgate/23111578
Glasser,
I., & Hirsch, E. (2014). Understanding homelessness: From memoir to
pathways home. Choice, 51(9),
1523-1528,1530-1531. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1535050476?accountid=32521
Howard,
Ella (1993). Homeless: Poverty and Place in Urban America. University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Jencks,
Christopher (1994). The Homeless. Harvard University Press.
Jocoy,
C. L. (2013). Counting the homeless: The culture of quantification in american
social policy. Cultural Geographies,
20(3), 397-403. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1474474012454999
Kvalheim,
E. (2013, October 25) I chose to be homeless:
reflections on the homeless challenge [NCH Bring America Home Blog]
Retrieved from http://nationalhomeless.org/WordPress/
McGraw,
S. A., PhD., Larson, Mary Jo,PhD., M.P.A., Foster, Susan E,M.P.H., M.S.S.W.,
Kresky-Wolff, M., Botelho, E. M., M.S., Elstad, E. A., M.P.H., Stefancic, A.
MA., Tsemberis, S., PhD. (2010). Adopting best practices: Lessons learned in
the collaborative initiative to help end chronic homelessness (CICH). The Journal of Behavioral Health Services
& Research, 37(2), 197-212. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/205224129?accountid=32521
McKibben,
B. (2010) Eaarth New York: Henry Holt
and Co. p. 133.
National
Alliance to End Homelessness (2015). Cost
of Homelessness Retrieved on February 21, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.endhomelessness.org/pages/cost_of_homelessness
National
Coalition for the Homeless (2009) How
many people are homeless? Retrieved from http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/How_Many.pdf
National
Coalition for the Homeless (2009) Who is
homeless? Retrieved from http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/Whois.pdf
Rethink
Homelessness (2014) Cardboard stories homeless
in Orlando [Video Recording] Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/user/impacthomelessness
Rossi, Peter H (1989). Down and Out in America: The Origins
of Homelessness. University of Chicago Press.
Rowe,
Michael (1999). Crossing the Border:
Encounters between Homeless People and Outreach Workers. University of
California Press.
Smith,
A. F. (2014). In defense of homelessness. Journal
of Value Inquiry, 48(1), 33-51. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10790-013-9405-x.
Snow,
David A., and Leon Anderson (1993). Down
on Their Luck: A Study of Homeless Street People. University of California Press.
Tompsett,
C. J., Toro, P. A., Guzicki, M., Manrique, M., & Zatakia, J. (2006).
Homelessness in the united states: Assessing changes in prevalence and public
opinion, 1993-2001. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 37(1-2), 47-61.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10464-005-9007-2.
Zlotnick,
Cheryl,R.N., DrP.H., Zerger, S., PhD., & Wolfe, Phyllis B, LICSW,M.S.W.,
M.A. (2013). Health care for the homeless: What we have learned in the past 30
years and what's next. American Journal of Public Health, 103(2), S199-205.
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1468675937?accountid=32521
No comments:
Post a Comment