Giving to Homeless (politicians, Walmart, programs, states)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I had this response, but I'm going to wait for a second, because I want to ask you something.
Why do we have to wait for the mentally ill to hit the judicial system? Mental illness is not a criminal offense.
Not everyone or everything that goes through the judicial system is because of a criminal offense. I have to go through a judge (meaning judicial) to show that my daughter is physically handicapped due to her arthtritis. I have to wash her hair, she can hardly stand up by herself, she can't open cans, etc.
Now say for example my brother who is over the age of 18 and needs help because he's schitzo I would probably have to go through a judge to show his imcompetence.
You have to go through a judge so you don't take away any personal rights some one may have.
Not everyone or everything that goes through the judicial system is because of a criminal offense. I have to go through a judge (meaning judicial) to show that my daughter is physically handicapped due to her arthtritis. I have to wash her hair, she can hardly stand up by herself, she can't open cans, etc.
Now say for example my brother who is over the age of 18 and needs help because he's schitzo I would probably have to go through a judge to show his imcompetence.
You have to go through a judge so you don't take away any personal rights some one may have.
Well, yeah, I work at a court, specifically, juveniles. And the only way we have that come through is if it is a ward of DCS that has been taken away. Even so, the wardship is usually dismissed at the age of 18, even though there is a program for them until its 21. They are so happy to get out from under the thumb of a court order that they run like hell.
The next time they come on the radar is after they have commited another crime. Judicial does mean judge. Criminal offense is a detainable offense. Hence, the pick up off the street, medicate, stabilize and release. Somebody has to pay for it.
Of those that are addicted there is often a dual diagnosis. If you take away the drug, they still can't function in society. They are helping themselves. Sometimes it is because the drugs that they have to take make them feel like crap. Sometimes it is because they can't afford the medication. Sometimes it is because they just don't want to. Now, this is separate from those that just do it cause it feels good and want to run the streets. There is a difference. You are always going to have that pocket. Most of the time, it isn't just the one issue of addiction.
I am sure that many homeless are simply unfortuante people who did not get a far share at life. However, I heard that at least half spend their money (that was handed to them) on drugs and alcohol addictions. Is this figure accurate? What percentage of the homeless population is an addict that will spend your money on the addiction? If it is at least half, is it even ethical to give anything to them?
I think you (and everyone else) need to define what "homeless" is.
We have a definition for "unemployed." For example, a 78 year old man who doesn't work is not unemployed, because he's not seeking employment.
Legally, to be unemployed, you have to:
1) want to be employed; AND
2) be actively seeking employment; AND
3) be available to be employed.
I apply the same test to the "homeless."
In order to be "homeless" you have to want not to be homeless, you have to actively be seeking shelter and you have to be available to live in shelter of any kind.
I've been involved with "homeless" for several years, and very few, less than 1% are truly "homeless."
There are two men who come to mind. Both are veterans. One got a DUI in Kentucky and was jailed for 60 days. He lost his job, and he was evicted.
He was truly homeless. He went to Mount Airy Men's Shelter, got alcohol counseling at VAMC, went to the VA domicillary in Fort Thomas, Kentucky, got a job and now is employed and has an apartment.
Another's apartment building burned (through no fault of his own), and he ended up at Mount Airy Men's Shelter until he obtained housing through HUD-VASH.
The majority of the "homeless" are men who don't work, are alcoholics or drug users, and live with a woman, who eventually tosses them on the street, or people who allow their alcohol and drug addictions ruin their lives.
The hard-core "homeless," those that have been "homeless" for 2 -10 years or more, aren't really "homeless." They're doing exactly what they want to do. A certain percentage of people are attracted to that life-style. They live over in Washington Park (between Elm and Race Streets) and that's what they want to do. It's a thrill, to have to fumble your way through the day, at least for them.
I don't know how it is in other cities, but here in Cincinnasti, there's a real problem among older black men. They get involved with the crack whores, and then they don't have the money for the crack or the *****, then the dope boys take over their apartment and toss them out. What can they do? Tell the police they committed a crime by getting a prostitute, then committed another crime buying crack, then committed another crime using crack, then committed another crime because the crack ***** is usually 17 or under. Those men end up at the Drop Inn Center on 12th Street.
The alcohol and drug rehab programs don't work.
I know some idiot is going to post "statistics" but the statistics are misleading.
A lot of those programs boast an 80% - 90% success rate, but that's 90 days after the program.
What is the success rate 12 months later? It's 10% - 15%, not 80%-90%.
A successful drug or alcohol rehab program requires serious and intense behavior modification for 2-5 years, and that is not allowable under present laws, thanks to the ACLU.
Don't know how old you are, but to cut down on costs, in the 1980's under the Reagan administration a lot of non-violent hospitalized mental patients were released into the streets with the notion that all they had to do was take their medication and they'd be just dandy on their own.
Those of us who work and/or live in New York City noticed the increase in homeless people on the streets and in public places almost immediately. It has never gone down. There are schizophrenic people out there who cannot distinguish reality from their delusions, but there is no room (read no money to pay for it) in institutions for them.
I've talked to one man who works at a drop-in center downtown where they feed people, let them take a shower and give them clothing, and have a computer system tied into city and state agency services to try to help them. He said one man came in one day for a meal for the first time and they talked to him and checked him out. Turns out he was out of touch with reality, but was a Vietnam vet who had eight years worth of benefits coming to him. No one knew where he was for eight years to get him his checks or check up on his health--he'd run out of his medication, went back into his fantasy zone, and had just been wandering through the city.
Exactly, it is all about the cash.
Then we have cases where they have to kill someone or wind up killed and by that time it is too late.
Well, yeah, I work at a court, specifically, juveniles. And the only way we have that come through is if it is a ward of DCS that has been taken away. Even so, the wardship is usually dismissed at the age of 18, even though there is a program for them until its 21. They are so happy to get out from under the thumb of a court order that they run like hell.
The next time they come on the radar is after they have commited another crime. Judicial does mean judge. Criminal offense is a detainable offense. Hence, the pick up off the street, medicate, stabilize and release. Somebody has to pay for it.
Of those that are addicted there is often a dual diagnosis. If you take away the drug, they still can't function in society. They are helping themselves. Sometimes it is because the drugs that they have to take make them feel like crap. Sometimes it is because they can't afford the medication. Sometimes it is because they just don't want to. Now, this is separate from those that just do it cause it feels good and want to run the streets. There is a difference. You are always going to have that pocket. Most of the time, it isn't just the one issue of addiction.
So what I'm gathering from all your posts is that the salvation army can't help, the churches can't help and the judicial system can't help, and each and every individual is suppose to go out find a homeless person and give them cash?
well i think he means because they weren't blessed, but who knows, no bills and free room and board can be happiness, no designer clothes to keep current, no cell phone bills, no car in the shop, no house payment, no reports due friday at 5, no traffic jam to sit in,
Give money to organizations that help the homeless instead of giving it directly to them.
I agree. That way they get the food they need and not the drugs or alcohol. You would think with all this $$$ the feds are shoveling out, the homeless have not been mentioned once. We really should shelter the mentally ill and provide a working camp/ranch as Nixon once proposed, for the ones who need to dry out. I know, I know Reagan shut the gov run institutions down, but they were so deplorable and over budget and the ACLU at the time was screaming for the homeless people's rights to be out on the street, he did what I think was a bad for the future thing. Those unentended consequences.
I agree. That way they get the food they need and not the drugs or alcohol. You would think with all this $$$ the feds are shoveling out, the homeless have not been mentioned once. We really should shelter the mentally ill and provide a working camp/ranch as Nixon once proposed, for the ones who need to dry out. I know, I know Reagan shut the gov run institutions down, but they were so deplorable and over budget and the ACLU at the time was screaming for the homeless people's rights to be out on the street, he did what I think was a bad for the future thing. Those unentended consequences.
What's funny about this - in a really sad kind of way - is that it's NOT the government that is helping the homeless. Virtually all homeless shelters are built, staffed, run and financed by religious organizations.
I have a sneaking suspicion that politicians refuse to get involved because homeless people don't vote.
So what I'm gathering from all your posts is that the salvation army can't help, the churches can't help and the judicial system can't help, and each and every individual is suppose to go out find a homeless person and give them cash?
I don't know how you got there.
That's not what I said, not by a long shot.
The SA and the churches are inadequate. Facilities (psych and treatment) pick and choose whom it is that they treat and for how long and it is about cash. And some of those facilities are so about the money, so that when it gets too tough they have the person arrested and shift the weight back on the courts or to the jail and eventually that person will be back on the streets. So, for every one of those that does that they should automatically lose any funding. Period.
On top of this, they have McDonaldized the mental health care system to such an extent that in many little "homes" (and a couple of state run institutions, I might add) they pay minimum wage to those that are care takers. Meaning that it leads it wide open to abuses because your not getting quality staff in. This also means that you might need to install camera's so that tapes can be played back.
So, again, mental health care must become a priority in this nation.
Now, we need to open and fund state run institutions for long term care and not treat those there as crap. That means take back the money given to the churches and to SA and do it right. We need to take a real good look at PTSD and our Vets and our kids. We need to not have parents give their kids over to the state because they cannot get the kids the help they need. Cause, eventually, they won't be wards anymore. This means that we need other facilities in place because you can't just say a kid is suicidal or whatever so they can be taken to a lockdown facility because then they wind up with a stigma wrongly associated with them. Won't take the available help after 18 and wind up on the streets.
This means changing a few laws accordingly. Specifically, about lockdown facilities.
Now, when I walk out the door and I am on my time, if I feel like picking something up to eat and I know that I am going to run into so and so, then I pick up two and drop off one. Cigarettes. If I know where I am going to be and I am going to run into so and so, then I pick up a pack. If it is 110 and I have a cooler filled with water bottles then there you go.
Now, none of this even deals with the tent cities and the number of people who have become homeless recently that are not mentally ill. So, it might be real easy to say it is somebody elses problem because then you don't have to see it or hear it and you think somebody somewhere is getting the job done. It isn't. It is a failure.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
