Live data from Hacker News

How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

npr.org

71–80 of 87 posts

Re: How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

#71
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I've seen, this feeling might be due to the fact that mentally ill people are overly "visible" because they make way more "disturbance" if I may say.

The seriously mentally ill are definitely a large proportion of homeless people. This is the National Coalition for the Homeless writing: "According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 20 to 25% of the homeless population in the United States suffers from some form of severe mental illness. In comparison, only 6% of Americans are severely mentally ill" A HUD Report has 26% of people in s…

Another study found that a large number of homeless people have suffered a traumatic brain injury at some point in their lives:

"Researchers at St. Michael’s Hospital in Toronto surveyed 111 homeless men and found that 45 percent of them had suffered at least one traumatic brain injury (or TBI) in their life, and 87 percent of those injuries occurred before they were homeless. Among the general population, TBI rates are estimated to be 12 percent, according to a 2013 meta-analysis of studies from developed countries."

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5227637

Re: How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

#72

Oh hey, I've been to that shelter. I live in (and grew up in) Utah. My Aunt is severely mentally ill and homeless and relies on the Road Home shelter, I've visited her there a few times. They are doing good work, although being homeless is still pretty shitty, obviously. The hardest part is that the state could take much better care of her if she would allow herself to be diagnosed as handicapped due to her mental il…

> And of course forcing treatment on her is unethical and probably counter-productive. Counter-productive is an empirical question, but why is forcing treatment always unethical? > ...She lit the apartment on fire and ended up in the hospital. ...for example. Do we need to wait for manslaughter charges before the government is responsible? Often people on the street are at least committing fraud (lying for food, bus…

> Counter-productive is an empirical question, but why is forcing treatment always unethical?

Ask most people who were diagnosed as mentally ill by east-german authorities before 1990.

Trust me, however nice they are today, you don't want an authority, a committee, or even "community standards" enforce any medical treatment on someone.

> ...for example. Do we need to wait for manslaughter charges before the government is responsible?

You need offenses to put charges forward. That's how justice works. You just don't jail people for things you suspect they will do.

Re: How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. Honestly it seems unethical to me to compel someone to do anything if they haven't done anything illegal, and being homeless / not showering / having sores isn't illegal. There's a fine line between 'helping the mentally ill through compulsory treatment' and 'rounding up the homeless so we don't have to see them all the time' and it seems like whenever we try to do the former we end up doing some of the…

As you point out, she doesn't know she is ill; you (and we as a society) have the clarity to recognize it and help. I have dealt with a similar situation involving a family member. I later regretted not being proactive in intervening before it was too late. Years went by, and plenty of situations arose that could have lead to a serious intervention. Instead, nothing happened. In one instance, criminal charges were pe…

In certain countries, society had the clarity to recognize that people who did not believe in the superiority of communism were mentally ill.

Re: How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always felt P.O. boxes should be free for those that are homeless. If said box goes unused it is put back into general use. Verification could be supplied by the county.

> I always felt P.O. boxes should be free for those that are homeless. If said box goes unused it is put back into general use. They (basically) already are. USPS provides free mailing service for people who don't have a fixed address, and you can use that as your street address (unlike PO boxes, which are invalid for use in circumstances that require a street address). They'll hold onto any mail addressed to you for…

> unlike PO boxes, which are invalid for use in circumstances that require a street address

If you, heaven forbid, ever become homeless:

If anybody ever insists that you provide a 'real address', lie. List your PO address as "123 Street Name, Apt #PONUMBER".

Nobody will ever be assed enough to check that it's not a real apartment. Nobody.

Re: How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

#75
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And of course forcing treatment on her is unethical and probably counter-productive. Counter-productive is an empirical question, but why is forcing treatment always unethical? > ...She lit the apartment on fire and ended up in the hospital. ...for example. Do we need to wait for manslaughter charges before the government is responsible? Often people on the street are at least committing fraud (lying for food, bus…

> Counter-productive is an empirical question, but why is forcing treatment always unethical? Ask most people who were diagnosed as mentally ill by east-german authorities before 1990. Trust me, however nice they are today, you don't want an authority, a committee, or even "community standards" enforce any medical treatment on someone. > ...for example. Do we need to wait for manslaughter charges before the governmen…

[deleted]

Re: How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

#76

I have several friends who are homeless or who have been homeless. It's really difficult to overstate how hard it is to get back out of homelessness, once you reach that point, without significant outside help. Think of all of the stuff most folks take for granted that are pretty much mandatory in most US cities in order to get and keep a job: 1. ID. So many of the homeless folks I know have had significant trouble o…

I currently live in Eugene and have noticed a few peculiarities (near campus and away from downtown, YMMV): * Homeless rarely have their things with them, suggesting perhaps that housing and storage are provided (at some level) to them. * Those who panhandle near campus ask strictly for cash, and seem to some extent disappointed when they are given food instead. * Homeless are never on campus, EVER. This seems strang…

"Every morning recycling bins are spilled with their contents spread out as if someone came during the night and rumaged through them."

This one I can explain. Oregon has a deposit/return program; several states have them. The basic premise is that every product in a can or bottle includes a deposit fee, which you only get back when you return the can or bottle for recycling. I think the deposit is .05 on most single serving sized bottles and cans. So, 20 cans collected is $1.00. 100 is enough to buy a pretty good meal. It's kind of a normal part of some homeless folks day to roam around collecting bottles and cans; it's not as profitable as flying a sign at a busy intersection or busking, or even just asking for money downtown, but it is maybe more comfortable for the folks who don't want to beg (I can understand that; I don't know if I could ask someone for money even if I were starving, with this damned American work ethic and foolish pride).

Since there is very little incentive to put the trash back in the bins after they've collected the items that are worth month, they just leave the trash on the ground. I guess there is even a disincentive to pick up the mess; that's time that could have been spent collecting more items worth money. It's annoying, but perfectly rational.

I've never asked any of the folks I know why they don't spend any time on campus; I've never been to the campus, myself, so it's not part of my Eugene experience, thus far. Downtown (and Whiteaker for bus and van dwellers) is clearly the preferred location in Eugene. Springfield's homeless are much more widely disbursed, not sure why, and seem to congregate in a few specific locations near the river. I haven't really made the acquaintance of any of them to ask, but I see them on my walk between the RV park where I'm staying and the co-working space I'm renting in Springfield. They tend to be older, and I suspect they want nothing to do with the kids in downtown Eugene, because of how much drama there is among that crowd.

Eugene is an interesting place, in terms of how visible the homeless population is. There seems to be somewhat less hostility in both directions (i.e. in a lot of places I've lived, homeless folks are treated very poorly, and they tend to be surly in response...that dynamic doesn't seem to play out here; there's maybe less fear in both directions). I dunno. I don't have solutions, really, but I do like to see people treated with basic human decency, no matter what their situation. I judge a city (and its inhabitants), to a significant degree, by how it treats those most at risk and most in need; and homeless folks are certainly among the most at risk and most in need.

Re: How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. Honestly it seems unethical to me to compel someone to do anything if they haven't done anything illegal, and being homeless / not showering / having sores isn't illegal. There's a fine line between 'helping the mentally ill through compulsory treatment' and 'rounding up the homeless so we don't have to see them all the time' and it seems like whenever we try to do the former we end up doing some of the…

As you point out, she doesn't know she is ill; you (and we as a society) have the clarity to recognize it and help. I have dealt with a similar situation involving a family member. I later regretted not being proactive in intervening before it was too late. Years went by, and plenty of situations arose that could have lead to a serious intervention. Instead, nothing happened. In one instance, criminal charges were pe…

You are describing a way for the government to punish people without due process. "Oh that guy, he's a loon, let's lock him up."

> we don't want to return to the bad old days when people were locked up for all sorts of unjustifiable reasons.

What makes you think this would no longer be the case?

Re: How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

#78

Oh hey, I've been to that shelter. I live in (and grew up in) Utah. My Aunt is severely mentally ill and homeless and relies on the Road Home shelter, I've visited her there a few times. They are doing good work, although being homeless is still pretty shitty, obviously. The hardest part is that the state could take much better care of her if she would allow herself to be diagnosed as handicapped due to her mental il…

> And of course forcing treatment on her is unethical and probably counter-productive. Counter-productive is an empirical question, but why is forcing treatment always unethical? > ...She lit the apartment on fire and ended up in the hospital. ...for example. Do we need to wait for manslaughter charges before the government is responsible? Often people on the street are at least committing fraud (lying for food, bus…

Although sometimes the lack of consent to be treated is the issue, I think the far bigger issue is underfunded/understaffed mental health services. I think the consent issue is a bit of a distraction from that.

Re: How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

#79

The article mentions that they tried this in NYC. Unfortunately, the same approach doesn't work as well in a city that's almost 100 times as large as SLC, and which has a much more competitive real estate market. The program has ended up being quite expensive to run, and it's not actually cost effective, to the point where homeless advocates actually criticize the program's in effectiveness. It's also caused negative…

Do you have a source for this? It was my understanding that the program was being undermined by landlords illegally refusing to accept the rental vouchers, banking on the city being lax in its enforcement. A pretty good calculation given how in bed with the real estate industry every mayoral administration has been, even an ostensibly liberal one like DeBlasio's (see the recent Rivington housing scandal). Seems to me…

> It was my understanding that the program was being undermined by landlords illegally refusing to accept the rental vouchers

If that is indeed the case, I really can't blame them. Who would want a likely mentally unstable homeless person living on their property? I'm sure the expected property damage is substantially higher than from a standard tenant. Forcing landlords to take "vouchers" for high-risk tenants is essentially forcing much of the cost of homelessness away from the city and onto the landlords.

Re: How Utah Reduced Chronic Homelessness (2015)

#80

Oh hey, I've been to that shelter. I live in (and grew up in) Utah. My Aunt is severely mentally ill and homeless and relies on the Road Home shelter, I've visited her there a few times. They are doing good work, although being homeless is still pretty shitty, obviously. The hardest part is that the state could take much better care of her if she would allow herself to be diagnosed as handicapped due to her mental il…

> And of course forcing treatment on her is unethical and probably counter-productive. Counter-productive is an empirical question, but why is forcing treatment always unethical? > ...She lit the apartment on fire and ended up in the hospital. ...for example. Do we need to wait for manslaughter charges before the government is responsible? Often people on the street are at least committing fraud (lying for food, bus…

In Pennsylvania, you can commit somebody involuntarily to have a psyche eval:

https://www.reference.com/government-politics/302-commitment...

"A 302 commitment in Pennsylvania is an involuntary commitment into a mental health institute for emergency psychiatric evaluation. The person who signs or calls for the 302 must have direct first hand knowledge of the person and the danger they pose to themselves or others."

Post reply on HN