Bringing it back to this thread topic relevant questions beg what is compassionate? And what do government and charity solutions accomplish? We see homeless encampments and people say we need more funding for shelter spaces and that it’s compassionate to leave them undisturbed. The homeless I talk to have opinions as diverse as the general population. Many of them are NOT on the street for lack of shelter spaces. They don’t want to live in a shelter, some because they don’t like the quality of the shelter experience , some because they don’t want to period. We could create 100k Luxurious spaces and there would still be homeless encampments. This is about more than money
I think this is entirely accurate.
There is a crisis, due to the scale of the problem, which is out of line w/historic norms.
Its quite right to say that some people will always be homeless, at least temporarily irrespective of how generous any assistance or outreach may be.
But that number ought to be far fewer than it is currently.
The is a problem with people declining shelter space exists in more normal times......for reasons I'll discuss below..........but is obviously amplified in the midst of our pandemic, where people being in close quarters is considered to be a health risk.
That the problem exists is a reflection of the normal problem in which we have a poorly designed shelter system that affords people every reason to decline its help if they feel they can; and one which is normally close to capacity and on which we over rely.
Shelter are and were always meant to be a stop-gap solution while we get someone back on their feet; and/or into a supportive situation (fully or partially institutional)
We now have upwards of 10,000 people reliant shelters/the street and that is not tenable.
Self-evidently, through a variety of actions, we need both more affordable housing; and better income/income supports for those in entry-level or low-wage jobs, such that they can afford housing.
That addresses one portion of the problem, but by no means the entirety.
We clearly need far more robust mental healthcare; and in particular far better and more quickly accessible addiction treatment programs, including those of an in-patient variety.
Beyond that, to the extent that 'shelters' will always be a portion of the solution; we need better shelters.
I have long-favoured the single-room-occupancy model.
Small spaces, single-bed, but your own room and toilet/sink.
The rationale is a simple one.
It affords greater security (shelters are known to have inordinate issues w/violence and theft) .
It affords privacy. It allows people to sleep in or sleep when they wish.
It can provide someone a fixed address of sorts, for purposes of ID and communication, if they are assigned a fixed room.
People decline shelters for reasons of safety, cleanliness, and freedom (to come and go as one pleases etc.)
Lets remove those reasons, so that people will be more likely to accept offers of help.
What to do with those who refuse said help is a different conversation; and I would suppose one that would vary based on how those people are coping, where they are sleeping, and whether pose a danger to others.
But that's not really the problem as it stands; its one of a mediocre and inadequate offer of help; both on the housing side; and on the mental health side (where wait times for addiction treatment can run into the many months) .